Do you agree or disagree that 22 year olds are generally more developed than 19 year olds?

Do you agree that said development is already factored in to the projections?

The development is factored into the current ratings, not the projections.

Agree or disagree?

Both.  A projection of 73 isn't going to have a current of 84.

Agree or disagree?

Of course.

Back to my question from 1:12pm.  Do you agree or disagree that 22 year olds are generally more developed than 19 year olds?

I would think that they are.   Seems this game starts the development process at age 18(now that they've fixed the 13 y/o IFA bug).    Stands to reason that a 22 y/o has 3 seasons of development on a 19 y/o.

But the projections for both are what they are since they're coming from the same budget.    Agree?

Agree.

Now on to my next question: do you agree or disagree that some owners are better than others for developing young prospects?  In particular, by the way they budget for medical/training, hiring coaches, and managing/mismanaging playing time for young prospects?

I don't think the OP was asking how to develop players.    Did I miss something?

Dedelman said, at 10:40am "Age matters among college players.  Age is only meaningless if you invest only in HS.".

You responded at 10:45am "So, no, the age of the college player is meaningless to me.    And probably should be to everyone."

My response at 11:04am that you were "basically right".  For the most part, it doesn't matter.

You took exception to "basically" and put your "I'm 100% right" stake in the ground at 11:08am.

So now I'm giving you an example of where age MIGHT matter if an HBD owner is particularly inept at developing players.

What part of this discussion is difficult for you to follow?

A great "developer" is more likely to get his 19 year old to surpass its ratings than his 22 year old.  If the 19 year old is projected to improve by 20 points, you could get him to 25 points, whereas if the 22 year old is projected to improve by 15 points, you may only get to 18, because there's slightly less development time and less development potential.  If that's what you're saying, that makes sense.

Posted by burnsy483 on 3/11/2014 2:33:00 PM (view original):
A great "developer" is more likely to get his 19 year old to surpass its ratings than his 22 year old.  If the 19 year old is projected to improve by 20 points, you could get him to 25 points, whereas if the 22 year old is projected to improve by 15 points, you may only get to 18, because there's slightly less development time and less development potential.  If that's what you're saying, that makes sense.

That's pretty much what I'm saying.  Along with the converse.

A crappy "developer" will fall much shorter with a 19 year old than he would with a 22 year old, for similar reasons.

So if you're good with development, you might be better off with 19 year olds, and if you're crappy with development you might be better off with 22 year olds.

I misunderstood what Mike was saying-- but I still disagree with him.

I was making the (¿too?) simple point that 22 year-olds improve less from the time you draft them than 19 year-olds.  Mike agrees with that, but says that's folded into projections, so age, independent of projected ratings, is irrelevant.

My now-subtle disagreement with Mike is that I think that projected ratings more often "miss" high as compared to low.  That may be intentional misdirection programmed in, or it may be that the optimistic gains often seen even with $20M scouting are a "best-case" scenarios where the player has unrealistically exceptional coaching, plays every day down to a fatigue of 62 but doesn't get hurt, etc.  But I think that even with $20M in scouting you are more likely to have overly optimistic projections than overly pessimistic projections. 

When I see something overly optimistic, I often feel a need to guesstimate some more reasonable projection for a particular key rating.  And my guesstimation is age-dependent.  Example-- if a 19-year-old hitter is projected to gain 30 points in VsR I'll adjust that down to the low 20s; for a 22 year old I'll adjust it to the mid-teens. 

So, because I don't fully trust all projections even at $20M, age matters to me.

Thank you guys.....

"but I hate being wordy" says the guy with 30,620 posts. So concise, yet 100% correct. What a guy, you're scoutmaster should be glowing.

Your grammar teacher should be sad.    Did I **** in your cornflakes once?  I certainly don't remember it.