Rating question.

[RAW]

This is not a rant, nor a rave, just a question about player ratings and development about which I am curious. I'll use the example of two players who are personal favorites of mine; David Dellucci and Bobby Abreu.

In my game, I started with the 1990 season, playing in Manager mode from the beginning and have upgraded with each Official version (now on 9.45). Am using only historical rookies.

Both Dellucci and Abreu entered the league in 1992. Both were first round draft picks, both are now 27 years old (in 2001 season). Dellucci developed rapidly is rated 97/97, has lead the league in homers (61) and RBIs (161), has been named league MVP and won several awards in championship series. He has a career BA of .328.

Abreu, on the other had is mired in the minors with a rating of 75/75 and his scouting report says he probably should never be an everyday player, while Dullucci has MVP caliber talent.

Now, I know the game is not always historically accurate, but it just seems, in these two players cases, its bass-ackwards.

Is this suppose to be common in the game? Is the player rating programmer (Clay I suppose) just a big Dullucci fan, or is this just a quirk and if I start a new game in the same year, it might turn out completely different?

If any of you have the time and care to comment on this, I'd love to hear from you. Thanks.

[TheNamelessPoet]

First thing to lok at is draft predictability in the league editor. IT effects EVERYONE, even the guys who are stars now. Thats why i use +70% or highter.

[HoustonGM]

It's not intentional that Delluci becomes a star. It's random, and it happens. (And yes, as long as your not in simulation mode, it might turn out completely different if you do it again)

[RAW]

When I see David in a few weeks, I'll ask him how he likes making $19M on a 3 year Free Agent contract he just signed with the Rangers. Maybe I'll hit him up for a few bucks.

By the way, I left Draft Predictably at +/- 0, from the beginning. Didn't know any different at the time. When I start a new game, I'll adjust this and some other areas that you guys have suggested.

[ohms_law]

The thing is that the philosophy behind Mogul has always leaned more twords "game" and less twords "simulation", which is why the game is designed like this. In a game like Diamond Mind Baseball or Strat-O-Matic, you always get the same players. Games like Mogul and it's direct competetors are different though, in that they give you a player similar to the named players. Barry Bonds and Babe Ruth will always be good players in Mogul, but some games they'll be only marginally better while in other games they'll be extremely dominating. Even using simulation mode, you still don't get players that perform exactly as they did in real life. Simulation mode simply standardises every player in the game so that their career parameters are exactly the same.

[RAW]

Excellent explanation ohms, thanks. That blows my method of drafting and trading for guys I know (or thought) would become stars. Guess that's why Manny at 28 years old is just 77/77. Probably shouldn't have traded a star player for him and picked up his $2M contract (really not that high a salary, but high for a player rated like that who can't break into my major league roster).

[ohms_law]

Yea, it'll definately change your outlook on the "correct" moves to make. Simply put, you can't assume that the same players will always be superstars. It is good game design though, since it increases replayability. Playing any time period in the past could become rather boring if you know exactly who to go after and who to avoid, you know?