MLB 10 News Post

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

02:04 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

# 61 ocho cuatro @ 03/02/10 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russell_SCEA


	This and someone said something about a high number of A potential players?

Hey Russell-

That was me - I was referring to the high number of A potential generic players in the default roster.

The number was 142 generic A potential players, with 123 of them being pitchers. Only 19 position players.

# 62 apearson19 @ 03/02/10 05:51 PM

I wonder if part of the problem is that some of the real players like Wright and Reyes that have F potential are supposed to have the A potential of the fake players and vice versa since he said there are only a certain number of A,B... potential players.

# 63 wahoo138 @ 03/02/10 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ocho cuatro


	Hey Russell- That was me - I was referring to the high number of A potential generic players in the default roster. The number was 142 generic A potential players, with 123 of them being pitchers. Only 19 position players.

Going by what he's said in this thread - that this is a glitch and that there are a finite number of "A" (and all other letters) rated players in a given year - I'm thinking the two issues are related.

# 64 VitaminKG21 @ 03/02/10 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rpm123


	In order to get this right, could someone please post on page 1 exactly how this potential rating works? Some have guessed that an F makes the player decline by 10 points per year, but I don't see how you can take user input in the form of letter grades if we don't even know how the letter grades affect the players' progress (on the upswing or downswing of their careers). Sorry if this was already addressed, but I only read the first few pages. Thanks!

Don't bother asking this and expecting and answer. I asked a similar question last year and got in trouble for being persistent about it.

Seem to be a highly guarded formula or magic dust they use to get it to work.

# 65 theotherguy619 @ 03/02/10 06:06 PM

I wonder if the star players on the waiver wire have something to do with the potentials...

Because it seems like all of the star players have low potential and expensive contracts, so many the cpu is trying to dump them because they cost to much.

Just a thought

# 66 pistolpete @ 03/02/10 06:06 PM

Ha, I bet they got them reversed.

Old guys who have obviously peaked are all As. That's kind of funny. I look forward to the update.

# 67 Bat @ 03/02/10 06:17 PM

They guys need a rating makeover.

Adam Jones (should be an A)
Jon Lester (should be an A)
Robinson Cano
Evan Longoria
Matt Garza (A)
Aaron Hill (A)
Adam Lind
Miguel Cabrera
Justin Verlander
Zack Greinke (A)
Billy Butler
Joe Mauer
JJ Hardy
Kendy Morales (A)
Andrew Bailey (A)
Felix Hernandez (A)
Franklin Gutierrez
Mark Lowe
Ryan Rowland-Smith
Doug Fister
Ian Kinsler
Elvis Andrus
Martin Prado
Jair Jurrjens
Hanley Ramirez (A)
Ryan Zimmerman (A)
John Lannan
Jose Reyes
David Wright
Cole Hamels
JA Happ
Carlos Marmol
Yadier Molina
Mark Reynolds(A)
Stephen Drew
Huston Street
Johathan Broxton
Andre Ethier
Russell Martin
Adrian Gonzalez
Tim Lincecum (A)
Matt Cain
Pablo Sandoval (A)
Jonathan Sanchez

There are some obvious ones that deserve A ratings thatI didn't put an 'A' next too..

# 68 vegaas @ 03/02/10 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theotherguy619


	I wonder if the star players on the waiver wire have something to do with the potentials... Because it seems like all of the star players have low potential and expensive contracts, so many the cpu is trying to dump them because they cost to much. Just a thought

I was thinking the same thing.

# 69 B_rad13 @ 03/02/10 06:48 PM

I posted this in the bug topic and I pm'ed one of the devs by mistake but can this be fixed as well

"Not sure if this is a bug but why can't we move players over from free agents with out getting rid of the roster player. Like for example moving Felipe Lopez over to St Louis from the free agent list and you have to remove someone from St.Louis to complete the transaction. I thought people said this was fixed."

# 70 drustrk3 @ 03/02/10 06:50 PM

"I wonder if the star players on the waiver wire have something to do with the potentials...

Because it seems like all of the star players have low potential and expensive contracts, so many the cpu is trying to dump them because they cost to much.

Just a thought"

Kolbe,
You think this is related? I keep seeing Jose Reyes' name as one of the players often put on waivers, and his potential I believe is an F. Maybe one roster update is a fix for a few issues. That would be nice.

# 71 pistolpete @ 03/02/10 06:51 PM

Also something worth considering (if potential is dynamic) is how any fix would be affected by progression programming.

# 72 theotherguy619 @ 03/02/10 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drustrk3


	"I wonder if the star players on the waiver wire have something to do with the potentials... Because it seems like all of the star players have low potential and expensive contracts, so many the cpu is trying to dump them because they cost to much. Just a thought" Kolbe, You think this is related? I keep seeing Jose Reyes' name as one of the players often put on waivers, and his potential I believe is an F. Maybe one roster update is a fix for a few issues. That would be nice.

Maybe the potential being messed up now is why nobody at Community Day noticed the waiver wire madness, because the potential grades weren't all out of wack.

# 73 JermaineDye05 @ 03/02/10 08:27 PM

Carlos Quentin- D Potential
Gavin Floyd- D Potential

---

I'm not sure if this one counts as well but Gordon Beckham is an A potential which is accurate however he's a D in everything and a C overall.

# 74 Knight165 @ 03/02/10 09:21 PM

Guys...I'm at work and have limited time and access to the game and a PC right now....but you have the devs giving YOU a golden opportunity to do exactly what you are wishing for....EDIT potential!
Stop the friggin' back and forth B.S. and come up with a comprehensive and LOGICAL....UNBIASED list of potentials for the players you KNOW are wrong!
Remember....all those 150+ A minor leaguers are going to wind up getting deducted from that list when the new potentials are added to the MLB players....as well as the B's and such...so if you want to have a fair and balanced MLB AND minor leaguers...keep it as "real" as possible.
Take off the fan glasses and be truthful.

Thanks to the guys at SCEA for responding to this and the frachise issues so quickly.

M.K.
Knight165

# 75 mjh91 @ 03/02/10 09:40 PM

What a relief. Seeing many of the superstars of the MLB having bad potentials frustrated me when I first saw it. I looked at my Cubs and saw Marmol as a D, and thought, "hmmm, maybe it's cause of his wildness." Then I looked around and saw Prince Fielder at a B, Tim Lincecum at a B, Hanley Ramirez at an F, and Mr. Cover Boy himself a C!

Glad to hear it's a bug and the amazing SCEA staff already working on it. Great game, other than this issue and the waiver mishalf.

# 76 MR.RANDOM @ 03/02/10 11:05 PM

john bowker D should be B
travis ishikawa D should be C (his defence should be up with derrek lee)
brian wilson should have A potential based off two straight all-star potential years

# 77 MR.RANDOM @ 03/02/10 11:19 PM

since this is a roster update bowker should be moved to RF as he is an OF his potential there should be B and at 1st a C

jeremy acccardo should be a B potential

# 78 Goose26 @ 03/02/10 11:23 PM

Not sure if this is supposed to go here, because it's not "potential" related, but my thread on this was locked with this thread as a link, so here goes:

Just going through and looking at everyone's roster when I noticed that several teams have pitchers inserted either on the benches or into the starting lineups at the AA and AAA levels, while those same teams have catchers as RP's at the same level.

I've been able to fix it just by sending the pitcher and catcher down a level and then calling them up, but just wanted to make somebody aware if they weren't already.

Teams I've seen this happen with:

Baltimore

New York Yankees -AAA Edwar Ramirez as a position player

Detroit - AAA pitcher on the bench, AA catcher as RP

Seattle - AAA P Steven Shell on the bench, AA catcher as RP

Florida - AAA P Tim Wood - bench, AA catcher -RP

Washington - AAA P Ron Villone, AAA catcher

Cincinnati - AAA P Pedro Viola, AA catcher

Los Angeles - AAA P Rondell Putnam as Starting C, no other players affected

San Diego - AA P, no other players affected

San Fransisco - AAA P Tony Pena Jr, AA catcher

Again, just trying to bring this to someone's attention, not a major deal by any means.

# 79 brinks @ 03/02/10 11:29 PM

Will potential decrease with age? Trends show that most player peak around 30. So, I would hope we don't see everyone that is an A potential at 28, still be an A potential at 33. That would make no sense for progression.

This is one of the issues that kills Madden franchise.

# 80 Fetrey @ 03/02/10 11:40 PM

I hope SCEA doens't play into the fanboys wanting their home teams guys to have great ratings.

« Previous 1 2 345 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next »

More Links

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