Change to Variable development for next term?

Discussions for the Frank Robinson League.

Moderator: WillyD

Post Reply
WillyD
Posts: 5099
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:29 pm
Location: New England

Change to Variable development for next term?

Post by WillyD »

I mentioned this in the renewal thread, but figured the question should have its own dedicated thread.

What does everyone think about switching over to variable development?


Variable Improvement
Some leagues offer Variable Improvement. In general, player development is fairly predictable because any two players with the same age and attributes have the same chance of improving. In leagues that offer variable improvement, this may not be the case.

When players are created, they will be randomly assigned 1 of 14 possible development curves. On the League Rules page, if the Development Curve System is anything except 0, the league is using Variable Improvement. Each league may decide on a different distribution among these curves, check your league message board for your league's distribution.

Here is a description of each curve. Please keep in mind that these curves only modify the chances of converting an IC in the majors or minors, nothing else.

Regular: This is how players typically develop.

Young Major Leaguer: Player develops the same as Regular for minor league improvements, but his major league improvements will improve at a higher rate in his early 20s. On the flip side, he won't improve quite as well as compared to Regular when he hits his mid-20s.

Late Bloomer Peak: improvement years are skewed a few years older for both major and minor league improvement chances.

Enigma 1, Enigma 2, Enigma 3: Peak improvement years come randomly. Some years will be better than Regular, some are worse. There are 3 varieties of this one to keep people guessing.

Ageless Wonder: Will be on the Regular path until he enters his mid-30s, at which point his conversion percentage increases dramatically to the point of offsetting declines or even improving a bit.

Bust: Improvement conversion percentages are down across the board.

Gem: Improvement conversion percentages are up across the board.

Bust in Minors/Gem in Majors: Player follows the Bust curve while in the minors, but the Gem curve when in the majors.

Gem in Minors/Bust in Majors: Player follows the Gem curve when in the minors, but the Bust curve when in the majors.

Eureka 1, Eureka 2, Eureka 3: A player improves below average for most years in his career, but in 1-2 seasons in the majors or minors he converts a much higher percentage of chances. There are 3 variations on this with different "eureka" ages.


The default distribution for these development curves is:

Regular: 38%
Young Major Leaguer, Late Bloomer, Bust: 10% each
Ageless Wonder, Gem, Bust in Minors Gem in Majors, Gem in Minors Bust in Majors: 5% each
Eureka, Enigma: 6% each
phishingtrip
Posts: 435
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 11:12 am

Re: Change to Variable development for next term?

Post by phishingtrip »

Foghorns are for it. I like how it plays out in the Babe Ruth League. Gives the game more variability.
phen0m
Posts: 389
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2017 11:45 am

Re: Change to Variable development for next term?

Post by phen0m »

id be ok with it, but i could probably see a situation where someones maybe struggling in the league, they finally get their top pick stud and it turns out to be a bust, and it puts them over the edge and makes them leave. Theres already a lot of variance with the wheel draft, i think adding even more might not be good for the health of the league.

Id rather change to system 3 minors (all 15 guys get fully developed). It adds a little more skill to the draft as late 1sts, 2nds and even 3rds are much more valuable, whereas 2nds and 3rds are almost worthless now. Also could amp up trading a little as owners are much more likely to deal their aging vets for 2nd and 3rd rounders, whereas now its hard to make deals with like 34-36 year olds who are still good but aren't worth a 1st rounder or early 2nd, which are pretty much the only picks of any value right now. I think system 3 would work well with the wheel draft, since theres no tanking and you will always have at least decent players to try to remain competitive. Just look at lineups of teams are rebuilding(like willy's, mine and others), some of these guys should not ever be on a field.

Both changes would be cool too, but im not sure variable development by itself would be good for the league.
WillyD
Posts: 5099
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:29 pm
Location: New England

Re: Change to Variable development for next term?

Post by WillyD »

I don't disagree with anything you said, but the one thing about system 3 is that it changes the stats once it's in full effect. Players become less special as A- because pretty average, and A overall is just above average. There won't be any more flirting with a .400 BA, or 60 homers, or 30 wins. The wheel draft has already brought stats back to a more normal level, and adding system 3 on top of that will only add to that trend. The wheel has already rid of us of the crappy old mentors and green letter players people were using while rebuilding.

The other thing about system 5 minors I like is that prospects with 14 and 15 CPs actually get more ICs (on average) than they would in system 3.

If we were to go with system 3 minors, I'd want a higher injury system to go with it.
chance4103
Posts: 528
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 5:51 am
Location: Athens Ohio

Re: Change to Variable development for next term?

Post by chance4103 »

I agree with WillyD that there should be increase in injuries with system 3.I am for variable development either system.I think we are doing the wheel draft i would like a little unknown/variable in players.
Post Reply

Return to “Frank Robinson League”