Two my of my top pitching prospects both pitched the entire season in HiA and when that team didn't make the playoffs I promoted these guys to AA to pitch in the playoffs and get more experience. It was at that time that I noticed one of them progressed quite a bit and the other one hardly at all. I really wish I had caught it earlier in the season to try and figure out the cause back then, but I want to know why this happened...

Belliard and Flores.

As you can see, Belliard pitched more innings and has the higher makeup. They both had the same HiA pitching coach the entire season. Why did Belliard hardly gain any ratings points and Flores flourished across the board?

1) We can't see any ratings except their currents if we're not in your world.
2) Stuff happens.
3) It is my experience that at the age of 20, stuff happens more often to internationals than draftees. Belliard is from the Dominican, Flores from Oklahoma.

I don't think there was anything you could have done about it; every now and then I see a 20 year old international that's basically done developing. That's what I think happened here.

That is a great team name.

We can see all of the current season's progression, which shows the difference in development effectively enough. Patience and Temper might have something to do with it, and their influence could have been part of the unspecified development changes made in the last update. Because their OVRs went up almost the same amount, it's possible that Flores' growth is exaggerated a bit and Belliard's downplayed a bit by rounding (Flores' 78-85 development in Control might actually be 78.9-85.0, while Belliard's 75-80 could be 75.0-80.9; I don't think anyone has ever nailed down how they round off numbers, but what appears to be a 7:5 development difference might actually be 6.1:5.9). I'd also guess that as a 1-3 pick Flores' projections were indicative of big development, particularly if you had high scouting when he was drafted.

In the last Developer Chat they said appearances matter, not innings. There's a lot of doubt whether that's accurate, but if it is their difference in Games (30-28; 6.7%) is much smaller than in Innings (180-140; 22%). If the answer was accurate, Belliard's significant Innings advantage becomes an insignificant games difference.

And as dedelman said, stuff happens. A season is a small sample size.

WifS has stated repeatedly that development patterns vary. I've had more than one who just didn't develop. Mostly IFA. It's almost like they lie about their age.

WiS should really put a "show more" button or something like that on the player card that I could click on to see those ratings... oh, wait...

Sorry about that. I can see the ratings for this season now. My answer doesn't change.

Posted by tecwrg on 11/21/2016 11:37:00 PM (view original):
That is a great team name.

Nothin will beat sergie91's 'Blazing Anus II' team name.

Thanks guys. I never noticed the IFA thing where they don't develop. I'll have to keep an eye out for that. You probably got the reference, but just in cased you didn't... did you realize my team name was a movie reference?

Obvious answer seems to be Belliard has a lower ceiling. What were your IFA and HS scouting budgets? What did your IFA and HS scouting project as their ceilings?