MLB 10 News Post

MLB '10: The Show - Player Potential Fix Coming in Next Roster Update

03:04 PM - March 2, 2010 by Russell_SCEA

If you think someone in the game has a less than desirable player potential post their name and current potential in the game here, thanks.

P.S. Just post their name, potential, and what you think it should be. That is all, please don't clutter the thread.

*Update: It's a bug and it will be fixed in the next roster update.

MLB '10: The Show screenshot gallery - Click to view

Game: MLB '10: The ShowReader Score: 9/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3Votes for game: 66 - View All

MLB '10: The Show Videos

Member Comments

# 1 GoBucs09 @ 03/02/10 03:07 PM

Ryan Church, D, C
Garrett Jones, B, B

Comment - Sorry if this would be considered cluttering the thread but a couple quick observations. Most people have different opinions of what players potential should be and I for one don't fully understand how potential works with MLB players.

I assume the goal of this thread is to just throw out our opinions on players without arguing about others opinions and the team over at SCEA will make the best judgment towards a roster update?

# 2 bk7987 @ 03/02/10 03:10 PM

I'll post and edit in more.

I'm basing these being "wrong" based on the fact that almost all of these players would have had "A" potential ratings in '09.

Also, it may be worth noting that pretty much all ratings aren't displayed right. People who should have A contact or power based on the little bar are coming in 1-2 letter grades lower than they should. Example: Pujols has "B" power. Utley has "C" for both contact and power. Both of these are a full letter off from last year.

Well, it would be impossible to list every player that probably has the wrong potential. It seems like almost everyone has the wrong potential. If I had to pick out a pattern, I'd say that established players like Mike Lowell, Chipper Jones, Bobby Abreu, Jorge Posada, Gary Sheffield, etc all seem to have the correct A potential rating, but middle-of-the-pack league average players seem to be about a letter lower than they should.

Tim Lincecum - B
Cover Boy Joe Mauer - C
Hanley Ramirez - C
Jose Reyes - F
Jonathan Broxton - D
Prince Fielder - B
Miguel Cabrera - D
Troy Tulowitzki - B
Evan Longoria - C
King Felix - C
Zack Greinke - C
Huston Street - D
Ian Kinsler - D
J.Verlander - D
Andrew Bailey - C
Josh Johnson - B
Mark Reynolds - D
Adrian Gonzalez - D
Grady Sizemore - D
David Wright - F
Kendry Morales - C
Dustin Pedroia - C
Ryan Zimmerman - D
Carlos Marmol - D
Matt Cain - C
Brian McCann - D
Joakim Soria - B
Brian Wilson - C
Cole Hamels - C
Shin-Soo Choo - D
Garrett Jones - B
Adam Lind - C
Ryan Dempster - B
Jered Weaver - D
Aaron Hill - D
Hunter Pence - C
James Shields - B
Pablo Sandoval - B
John Lackey - B
Adam Dunn - B
Brian Roberts - B
Brad Lidge - B
Yadier Molina - D
Chone Figgins - B
Scott Rolen - B
Jason Bartlett - B
Billy Butler - C
Ryan Madson - B
Mike Adams - B
Orlando Hudson - B
Asdrubal Cabrera - C
Andre Ethier - B
Nick Markakis - B
Zach Duke - D
Jon Lester - C
Jair Jurrjens - C
Ricky Nolasco - B
Adrian Beltre - B
Carlos Quentin - D
Scott Kazmir - D
Justin Duchscherer - B
Matt Garza - C
Franklin Gutierrez - D
Robbie Cano - D
Michael Cuddyer - B
Daniel Bard - C

Pretty much all of these players should be "A" if we are basing it on last year's game. If not, MOST of these should still be "A" players.

# 3 sink4ever @ 03/02/10 03:18 PM

Robinson Cano - currently D, should be B?

# 4 ThirdDegree5803 @ 03/02/10 03:27 PM

Reds players i noticed...
Chris Dickerson - D, should be a B at least
Paul Janish - F, should be a C at least...
Matt Maloney D, should be a B at least
Wilkin Castillo D, should be a C (was last year)
Justin Lehr D, should be a C
Carlos Fisher D, should be a B or a C at least
Danny Herrara D i think (game isn't in front of me) should be a A or B at least

# 5 VitaminKG21 @ 03/02/10 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hypostatic


	Is the lower grade potential of already established players given to indicate that they have already peaked in their playing career. Not that they will severly decline, but that they are in the middle of their career and have already reached their full MLB potential. I do heavily disagree with some major discrepancies with certain all star's. That is my two cents .... thanks and have a good time

I'm wondering the same thing. Lincecum in particular, if you think about it, has very little room left to get better so a 'B' potential rating actually kind of makes sense.

Cain at 'C' though...

# 6 stormshadow1 @ 03/02/10 03:32 PM

I think though someone stated that players like Reyes, rated F for potential, are losing 10 points/yr. going for forward.

While he may have peaked, hence no room for potential meaning F, he probably should not be on the downside of 10 points/yr.

# 7 VitaminKG21 @ 03/02/10 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stormshadow1


	I think though someone stated that players like Reyes, rated F for potential, are losing 10 points/yr. going for forward. While he may have peaked, hence no room for potential meaning F, he probably should not be on the downside of 10 points/yr.

Agreed

# 8 jvalverde88 @ 03/02/10 03:40 PM

These are some of the Potentials that should be higher IMO.
Name- Current Potential/Deserved Potential
Dustin Pedroia- C/A
Jon Lester- C/A
Robinson Cano- D/A
Evan Longoria- C/A
Matt Garza- C/B
Aaron Hill- D/B
Adam Lind- C/B
Grady Sizemore- D/A
Shin Soo Choo- D/B
Miguel Cabrera- D/A
Justin Verlander- D/A
Billy Butler- C/A
Joe Mauer- C/A
Kendry Morales- C/B
Jered Weaver- D/B
Andrew Bailey- C/A
Felix Hernandez- C/A
Franklin Gutierrez- D/B
Ian Kinsler- D/B
Brian McCann- D/A or B
Jair Jurrjens- C/A
Hanley Ramirez- C/A
Ryan Zimmerman- D/A
Jose Reyes- F/A
David Wright- F/A
Cole Hamels- C/B
JA Happ- C/A
Carlos Marmol- D/B
Hunter Pence- C/B
Zach Duke- D/B
Yadier Molina- D/B
Mark Reynolds- D/A
Huston Street- D/B
Jonathan Broxton- D/B
Adrian Gonzalez- D/A
Matt Cain- C/A
Tim Lincecum- B/A
Adam Jones- C/A

# 9 bk7987 @ 03/02/10 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hypostatic


	Is the lower grade potential of already established players given to indicate that they have already peaked in their playing career. Not that they will severly decline, but that they are in the middle of their career and have already reached their full MLB potential. I do heavily disagree with some major discrepancies with certain all star's. That is my two cents .... thanks and have a good time

Well, I can see the logic behind that, but I have simmed 3 seasons with various teams and when guys like...

Cole Hamels
David Wright
Zack Greinke

...and more are declining by 6-10 overall ratings points per year--obviously not supposed to happen.

You also have to look at potential rating a little differently than simply a player's ceiling. Giving Lincecum a "B" even though he may never improve would actually, within the game, cause him to regress to a "B" player.

At least I think that's how it works.

# 10 ThirdDegree5803 @ 03/02/10 03:41 PM

some more odd-balls

Jermaine Dye A potential
Matt Stairs A potential

Joe Mauer C potential

# 11 bengtc @ 03/02/10 03:52 PM

I am seeing too that the star players are going down in rating every year, if only potential was editable.

# 12 mhagf4 @ 03/02/10 04:02 PM

Royals of note:
Greinke currently: B, Should be: A
Butler B, A
Soria B, A

On the other side
Alex Gordon A, should be a B

# 13 bk7987 @ 03/02/10 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaperWork


	Players\ performance is very dynamic. It is not totally uncommon for a star player who has hit his ceiling to fall off a cliff and regress significantly in proceeding years. I want a game that closely mirrors this unpredictability. Please don't change this.

The problem is, it IS predictable when potential ratings are this low.

You WILL see significant decline in almost every one of the players I posted in that list. That's not realistic.

# 14 bengtc @ 03/02/10 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaperWork


	Players\ performance is very dynamic. It is not totally uncommon for a star player who has hit his ceiling to fall off a cliff and regress significantly in proceeding years. I want a game that closely mirrors this unpredictability. Please don't change this.

That usually doesn't happen to players in their mid 20's

# 15 Mr. Franchise @ 03/02/10 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaperWork


	Players\ performance is very dynamic. It is not totally uncommon for a star player who has hit his ceiling to fall off a cliff and regress significantly in proceeding years. I want a game that closely mirrors this unpredictability. Please don't change this.

This. I don't like seeing Prince Fielder hitting 50 homers a year until he has 900+.

# 16 VitaminKG21 @ 03/02/10 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Franchise


	This. I don't like seeing Prince Fielder hitting 50 homers a year until he has 900+.

For me, much like in the NCAA series, this needs to be even more dynamic and tied a little closer to performance. It's fine for Mauer to have a 'C' rating if all that means is he can only get so much better, because that's probably the case. But if he has another MVP season he should never come down in rating. Conversely if he has a so-so year past the age of 28 or 29, sure, he probably should drop a point or two.

The problem I have is when players who are both young and talented AND have good seasons drop in the ratings for no apparently good reason.

# 17 xbravetoaster @ 03/02/10 04:28 PM

I cant believe how bad they messed up the potential! Its serioulsy a big issue! especially since this game is suppose to be the most "realistic baseball game ever" right... I cant even start a franchise because of this. I simmed a season to see how what happenend to 100's of the players affected by the tards and scea....Justin verlander for instance lost 7 mph of his fastball at 28 yrs old....Please fix this issue fast, this game is worseless to me and lots of others until you do...

# 18 callmetaternuts @ 03/02/10 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VitaminKG21


	For me, much like in the NCAA series, this needs to be even more dynamic and tied a little closer to performance. It's fine for Mauer to have a 'C' rating if all that means is he can only get so much better, because that's probably the case. But if he has another MVP season he should never come down in rating. Conversely if he has a so-so year past the age of 28 or 29, sure, he probably should drop a point or two. The problem I have is when players who are both young and talented AND have good seasons drop in the ratings for no apparently good reason.

The key is to only drop a point or two in your example. I dont want Longo (Evan Longoria) to put up good numbers and drop 5 points. Can he improve 5-6 points every year? No way, he should be at the top of rankings already (close to it at least). He shouldnt start dropping off at his young age just because his potential is low (as the game says).

# 19 bk7987 @ 03/02/10 04:36 PM

I'll try to put it as simply as possible:

"A" quality players need an "A" potential rating to maintain that "A" talent.

If an "A" quality player like David Wright has an "F" potential rating, he will decline RAPIDLY until he becomes an "F" quality player.

That's how the game works. "A" players will still decline in their mid-30s just like last year.

# 20 VitaminKG21 @ 03/02/10 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaperWork


	You're putting the cart before the horse though. I never understood why people want to see stats dictate a player's overall rating. A player is rated based on his 'talent'; if he under performs, it doesn't mean he lost his 'talent', if he over-performs it doesn't mean he's more talented. It just means he had a better year than his talent would suggest, or a worse year than his talent would suggest. This happens all the time. I think players should progress/regress based on the well established age curve. Players peak at ages 26-29 and then decline after that. Stats/performance should never dictate a player's core ratings, unless he's very young, and his talent is improving as he matures in the league.

I'm not saying stats should dictate a players ratings, but they should have some effect. Whether it's in the form of a "confidence" rating or some other type of measure that keeps players in the 26-29 range from having great seasons then dropping multiple points, the stats should mean something in terms of development. At the very least a player who falls in a certain age range and had a good season should stay exactly the same.

Quote:

Originally Posted by callmetaternuts


	The key is to only drop a point or two in your example. I dont want Longo (Evan Longoria) to put up good numbers and drop 5 points. Can he improve 5-6 points every year? No way, he should be at the top of rankings already (close to it at least). He shouldnt start dropping off at his young age just because his potential is low (as the game says).

Exactly. I understand that with Longoria or a guy like Lincecum that has won 2 Cy Young Awards already, there is little room to move up and who they are as players (ability-wise) is who they will most likely be for several more years given their ages and relative health.

But no way should either of those guys or players in their class start to see their abilities erode before they hit 30.

« Previous12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next »

More Links

MLB '10: The Show - Player Potential Fix Coming in Next Roster Update