My 0 Advanced Scouting shows a hitter having a projected vR of 85.  My HS Scouting of 15 the year he was drafted shows a projected vR of 73.

Obviously, the real projected vR is going to be closer to 73 than 85.

My question is this: can we infer from the 0 Advanced Scouting reading being on the high side that the REAL projected vR is BETWEEN 73 and 85?  Or is it just as likely that the real projected vR is actually LOWER than 73?

It sounds like you're assuming 15 in HS scouting provides something similar to 100% accuracy.   I'd argue that it doesn't.

I think what he's saying is that 15 is more accurate than 0.  But in answer to the question, I don't put any stock in advanced projections when I have 0 budgeted.  I wouldn't read anything into it.  It seems to me that projections are more often off by a higher number than lower (which makes sense, because projected ratings can never be below current ratings), so it makes sense that the worse the scouting, the higher the projection will tend to be.

No, I don't think it does, either.  But what I'm wondering is whether the real projected vR in the above example is more likely to be on the high side of 73, GIVEN that my Adv Scouting of 0 reading fell on the high side.

It may be that HS Scouting of 15 is off by, say, 4 points, in which case the real projected vR is either 69 or 77.  There's no good reason for 0 Advanced Scouting to give you any information about this, but it might.  Stranger things have happened in statistical simulations.

Actually, shobob, I've seen projected below current a couple of times...not sure what causes that, but the projected ratings don't always adjust immediately when the current surpasses.  But that's rare, and I think you're right - no reason to read anything into information obtained from 0 Adv Scouting.  It would be an interesting loophole if there was some info to get from that, though,

I've seen projected gbfb ratings be below current, but never with any other ratings.

I'm sure his true potential is less than 73.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/28/2011 1:47:00 PM (view original):
I'm sure his true potential is less than 73.

I suspect you're right but I'm wondering how you're sure.

Can't prove it for sure since I don't take a pre-season snapshot of projections, but I'm pretty positive I've got a player in my 0 adv system that started the year at 34 current/34 projected vR and is now 39/39, so I think it can be underrated.

I will admit I don't pay much mind to players with 34 splits so, on the low end, you might be correct.

So the assumption here is that guys don't ever reach projections, no matter how accurate or inaccurate they are?  I guess the only way to really verify that would be to start with 0 adv, save the projections on a bunch of 1st and 2nd-year pros, raise the Adv 4 a year for 5 years and then compare.

No, that's not my assumption.   I've had young players exceed what I see with 0 ADV.   I just haven't seen them do it with splits.

Al Beltre

It happens, but I think Mike is right that splits are generally on the high end with 0 AS.

Edit: You guys obviously can't see his projecteds, but he is projected as maxed out in both splits, which is wrong.

I was talking about hitting splits.