 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Sim Forums » Baseball Game & Site Questions » Can't work out what determines speed of decline after 34: is it just random?
allenciox
The average hitter will lose about 20 points total (or about 3 pts. in overall rating) in each year of his decline: 2.9 pts. in each of his contact hitting stats, 3.5 pts. in each of his power hitting stats, 1.85 pts. in his defense stats, and 3.6 pts. in spd.
The average pitcher will lose about 9 points total (or about 3.5 pts. in overall rating) in each year of his decline: 4 1/3 pts. in vel, 2 2/3 pts. in ctrl, 2 pts in endurance).
In each case, a player is losing a little less than a full level for every two years past his prime.
Following is a table of the averages and the min and max difference in each of the stats over this sample. The sample size is 85 hitters and 63 pitchers. Does anybody have any other input on how this process works? Note that there ARE a couple of players in the sample that do have very slight improvements for most of the stats.
stat_name success_Mean success_Min success_Max
CvL -2.96 -6 1
CvR -2.82 -6 0
PvL -3.52 -7 0
PvR -3.47 -7 0
arm -1.84 -4 1
ctl -2.68 -7 1
end -2.04 -4 1
rng -1.89 -4 1
spd -3.65 -9 0
vel -4.33 -9 2
Can't work out what determines speed of decline after 34: is it just random?
July 24, 2015 at 08:49PM View BBCode
Using 3 years of trial league data for offseason development (I use this because my non-trial league uses variable improvement), I am unable to make heads or tails of what determines the amount that a player is likely to decline in his stats. Performing various regressions, there appears to be no relationship between the size of the decline in stats and either: number of chances, age (as long as 34 or higher), or rating in that stat's bundle. This is what I can say:The average hitter will lose about 20 points total (or about 3 pts. in overall rating) in each year of his decline: 2.9 pts. in each of his contact hitting stats, 3.5 pts. in each of his power hitting stats, 1.85 pts. in his defense stats, and 3.6 pts. in spd.
The average pitcher will lose about 9 points total (or about 3.5 pts. in overall rating) in each year of his decline: 4 1/3 pts. in vel, 2 2/3 pts. in ctrl, 2 pts in endurance).
In each case, a player is losing a little less than a full level for every two years past his prime.
Following is a table of the averages and the min and max difference in each of the stats over this sample. The sample size is 85 hitters and 63 pitchers. Does anybody have any other input on how this process works? Note that there ARE a couple of players in the sample that do have very slight improvements for most of the stats.
stat_name success_Mean success_Min success_Max
CvL -2.96 -6 1
CvR -2.82 -6 0
PvL -3.52 -7 0
PvR -3.47 -7 0
arm -1.84 -4 1
ctl -2.68 -7 1
end -2.04 -4 1
rng -1.89 -4 1
spd -3.65 -9 0
vel -4.33 -9 2
tm4559
July 24, 2015 at 10:37PM View BBCode
Allen at one time it was totally fixed, but they built some randomness into it some years ago. There are still some definite patterns to it but there are some surprises in it sometime.
tm4559
The number of chances are shown on the card but they are not used in the decline. A player that gets zero playing time can decline as much as one that plays every game or pitches regularly.
And lastly I will say this. 85 hitters and 63 pitchers is a small sample.
July 25, 2015 at 03:55AM View BBCode
I reread your post. When the decline was totally predictable folks complained. So Tyson made it more variable.The number of chances are shown on the card but they are not used in the decline. A player that gets zero playing time can decline as much as one that plays every game or pitches regularly.
And lastly I will say this. 85 hitters and 63 pitchers is a small sample.
paulcaraccio
July 25, 2015 at 04:23AM View BBCode
what we really need is for the age that declines begin to become variable.
tm4559
July 25, 2015 at 04:29AM View BBCode
Shrug. It wouldn't matter, some folks would complain if they were hung with a new rope.
allenciox
Yes, I know, but it is large enough that some patterns can still be seen. And it makes sense that Power and speed would decline more rapidly than contact hitting and defense.
I will increase the size of my sample once I get more trial seasons that I can analyze. If you have any data, I would love to get it in.
July 26, 2015 at 09:29PM View BBCode
Originally posted by tm4559
I reread your post. When the decline was totally predictable folks complained. So Tyson made it more variable.
The number of chances are shown on the card but they are not used in the decline. A player that gets zero playing time can decline as much as one that plays every game or pitches regularly.
And lastly I will say this. 85 hitters and 63 pitchers is a small sample.
Yes, I know, but it is large enough that some patterns can still be seen. And it makes sense that Power and speed would decline more rapidly than contact hitting and defense.
I will increase the size of my sample once I get more trial seasons that I can analyze. If you have any data, I would love to get it in.
paulcaraccio
To get team id's for teams in other leagues, go to their Standings page from the message board and click on any team.
Pick a standard development league that's in like the year 2250 and go nuts!
July 26, 2015 at 10:14PM View BBCode
you can see other leagues' data. Just go to your Player Improvements screen and edit the teamid=XXXXXX bit in the URL.To get team id's for teams in other leagues, go to their Standings page from the message board and click on any team.
Pick a standard development league that's in like the year 2250 and go nuts!
tm4559
yes, those patterns are there and they are well known. the point is, there are some exceptions, there is variability built into the decline. in all leagues.
(the worst thing about the decline is they show it now, exactly. it was much better when the decline was a mystery. the showing of the decline is too much information, it makes it too simple to handicap.)
July 27, 2015 at 01:00PM View BBCode
Originally posted by allenciox
Originally posted by tm4559
I reread your post. When the decline was totally predictable folks complained. So Tyson made it more variable.
The number of chances are shown on the card but they are not used in the decline. A player that gets zero playing time can decline as much as one that plays every game or pitches regularly.
And lastly I will say this. 85 hitters and 63 pitchers is a small sample.
Yes, I know, but it is large enough that some patterns can still be seen. And it makes sense that Power and speed would decline more rapidly than contact hitting and defense.
I will increase the size of my sample once I get more trial seasons that I can analyze. If you have any data, I would love to get it in.
yes, those patterns are there and they are well known. the point is, there are some exceptions, there is variability built into the decline. in all leagues.
(the worst thing about the decline is they show it now, exactly. it was much better when the decline was a mystery. the showing of the decline is too much information, it makes it too simple to handicap.)
Pages: 1