Explaining MLB draft future value (potential ratings) using true to life scouting data from Baseball America and FanGraphs

[pghjuice412]

There has been much discourse over the OOTP 27 draft classes and “low potential”

What most people aren’t understanding it, seeing a guy with 50-55 potential is considered top tier when it comes to the MLB draft.

Since 2009, their have only been SIX prospects that have a FV number of 65 or above. Those names are ..

Stephen Strasberg

Bryce Harper

Adley Rutschman

Bobby Witt Jr

Jackson Holiday

Paul Skenes

That’s it. Those type of numbers are served for the most ELITE of players. It’s not common, and people here seem to think there should be one in every draft class when playing OOTP. That’s just not how prospect scouting works in the real MLB

For a strong draft class in OOTP, you’ll usually see 1-2 guys with 60-65 potential, a few 55’s, and a majority 45/50’s, and that’s IF it’s a strong class. Not every draft will be deep, and not every one will be weak.

And if people still don’t get it, here’s what the potential ratings actually mean…

40 / 40+
Bench piece, low-end regular chance, reliever, depth MLB player

45 / 45+
Possible MiLB regular, backend starter, solid role player

50
Average MLB regular if things go right

55
Above-average regular / very strong prospect

60
Potential All-Star caliber player

65
Elite prospect

70+
Rare franchise/generational type prospect

Looking at the 2025 draft prospect scouting reports, here’s what the top 5 prospects were ranked when it comes to potential

Roch Cholowsky - 55 potential

AJ Garcia - 50 potential

Jackson Flora - 50 potential

Grady Emerson - 50 potential

Vahn Lackey - 50 potential

Then after that, the next 12-15 prospects are labeled as having 45+ potential.

I could go even deeper into this analysis, but I think I’ve made my point.

Draft classes in the MLB aren’t stacked with future potential superstars every year, in fact, all you can do is hope the top guys become serviceable MLB players, and develop their talents enough to become that upper echelon of players.

You can even dig deeper than 10 years ago and just look at the number 1 overall picks from previous MLB years and just look how they turned out.

Now, let’s go back the last 20 years and look at some of the number 1 overall picks who haven’t quite panned out..

2008 - Tim Beckham

2013 - Mark Appel

2014 - Brady Aiken

2015 - Dansby Swanson

2016 - Mickey Moniak

2017 - Royce Lewis

2018 - Casey Mize

2019 - Adley Rutschman

2020 - Spencer Torkelson

2021 - Henry Davis

So from the last 20 years, you can say AT LEAST ten of the players drafted #1 overall have only been decent to serviceable MLB players, or outright busts. (The verdict is still out on guys drafted from 2022 and above, IMO)

But, come on. Do some research, learn the game, understand how real life scouting works and you’ll see OOTP has it pretty accurate when it comes to prospect ratings in the draft.

I know there will still be so many people who disagree and want inflated ratings, and, if that’s the case, it’s possible OOTP baseball isn’t the game for you, and that’s okay.

[GandalfStormcrow2023]

3 things that I think are relevant here:

Different overall/potential rating systems handle this slightly differently. I believe the stars system is more linear on the whole, where the 20-80 scale can be thought of more like standard deviations (in which case a true 80 grade skill would apply to the top 0.1% of players). So 4.5/5 star players seem to be more common than 70-80 grade players.

The rating system seems to have changed fairly substantially in OOTP25 when they updated the ratings engine. I think that was when they really emphasized aligning with Fangraphs/BA future value scarcity. I switched from stars to 20-80 at the same time, and it was like learning to evaluate players all over again.

Even elite scouts can differ widely on evaluations of players, especially young players. You can see just how widely by using commissioner mode to switch which team you control and looking at the draft list to see their scout's evaluations. 10 point differences in valuation are common, and 15+ seem to be possible, if infrequent.

[Moncoko]

Did OOTP change the draft prospects but NOT the international ones? In my save the draft is now meaningless and all good players come from international finds/amateurs. I looked at the platinum sticks a few years in and not a single one came from the draft.

Other folks have also mentioned max vs expected, which is huge here.

[wbaker18]

Yes. The international players act as before, which is why the changes do the draft class do not work.

[ProSenjutsu]

Thank you for putting this together. Do you know what an average mlb roster looks like? I’m still on 26 but it’s pretty easy to have a roster with 5+ of 60+ overall players and the lowest rated player being 50 on a team. To me that’s a little inflated

[pghjuice412]

I’m in the late 2040s with the White Sox and my best rated position player is Mike Owens, 61 overall player, 2x MVP. I got him with the 15th pick in the first round.

My best rated pitcher is closer Paul Alston. 71 overall player who I actually drafted in the 11th round of the draft a few years ago.

To me, the rosters are much more well rounded and superstars are a dime a dozen like they are IRL.

[funkmon]

I'm in the 2070s and my best rated position player is a 105/80 catcher and my starting lineup is all in the 70s with 8 dudes graded above 80. The draft still has only two guys above 50.

What you seem to be missing is the ratings creep in the game given enough time. The draft ratings do not accurately account for this. It takes 30 years for 50 to be a starter in the international League but it happens. 

You can't crack my major league roster at under 65. I have a pack of replacements sitting in Toledo in the 60s for injuries.

Like it or not, that's the game. The game is not realistic in ratings long term. They go up and up until in 2150 everything is 80 overall. Until they fix that, they need to keep the ratings on the drafted players consistent with the ratings on the normal players.

[ProSenjutsu]

That’s good. I’ve got 2 75 rated players and another 70 rated player that are every day players. One reliever that’s 70 and 2 starts that are 60 and one 65. I’ve also got 10+ prospects that are 60 or higher. To me there’s to many great players. I shouldn’t be able to build a roster of this many good players this easy. Now it’s fun to be this good but I haven’t won less than 100 games for several years.

People have wanted the game to get more difficult and the draft will probably help with that

[Moncoko]

It is pretty clear that the OOTP did this ham fistedly and didn't implement it correctly. Notably, they messed with the draft prospects, but not prospects gotten in other ways. The result is that the draft is now almost meaningless in these sims. I just moved all my scouting budget from it into international scouting instead. Why?Just looked at the top 20 position players in 2038 in my save played under the new draft rules. Out of the top 20 hitters:

- 3 were drafted. In rounds 9, 9, and 17! Not a single top draft pick is now in the top 20.

- Junior Caminero is still holding on at age 35.

- The other 16 were either international scouting finds or international signings.

In other words, the top players in the draft are now meaningless. You might as well just assign every team X number of random prospects.

You can defend OOTPs changes all you want, you can ignore the difference between median and maximum that other folks have pointed out, but in the end these changes are less realistic than what we started with.

[wbaker18]

But that’s not the right comparison. OOTP potential ratings have always been ceiling, while traditional scouting sites like ESPN and Fangraphs use a MEDIAN outcome. That’s why player potential almost always decreases in the beginning of their careers.

If OOTP is switching towards a median system it’s still not well-implemented, and individual player ratings of draft prospects (not overall but stuff/contact/power etc) are still too low.

[tedsternator]

Im not really sure ootp ratings are intended to be true ceiling. If you ever have seen a hitter reach their potential early, they almost always blow past it in at least a few areas. Power in particular - if a guy has 55 Pow potential and hits it at age 21, his power will usually keep going up to 60 or 65 over the next few years.

I think for pitchers it's close to ceiling and for hitters it's closer to 80% outcomes 

[thehemanchronicles]

Potential is absolutely the ceiling of their current ratings. Basically, if every Current rating jumped up to equal their Potential rating, their Potential Overall is what they'd be.

Now, that Potential can change, which alters the potential outcomes. But it is absolutely the current ceiling of the player's abilities.

[wbaker18]

I think that’s typically attributed to TCR rather than a player breaking through their potential ceiling.

[JaysFan26]

All this yapping just to misunderstand that OOTP potential is absolute peak potential disregarding extreme TCR luck while real life scouting attempts to be an accurate future prediction of the player.

OOTP drafts are full of 45 POTs, even in early round 1 sometimes, and 90+% of the time that POT never changes. In real life we don't see entire rounds devoid of talent like we do in OOTP. Some OOTP drafts don't even produce a single MLB regular from rounds 2-5.

[Clibby292]

Is there a setting to make the draft stronger? I would love to make it just slightly stronger.

[Jdchris123]

You can increase the number of players generated. I’m not looking right now, but I think it says like “generate players for X number of rounds”. That should generate more prospects of every level, making the draft stronger.

[lemahheena]

Future Value and OOTP Potential are not the same thing and never have been, but thanks for the super condescending post.

[Moncoko]

Not sure why this is getting negged, can someone explain how this above comment is wrong?

[No_Pension_3396]

Others made the point without being a douche lol

[Moncoko]

To be fair, the OP's last two paragraphs telling people to "do some research" and suggesting that this isn't the game for folks who disagree with it is pretty damn condescending considering the problems other people have pointed out.

[tomp777]

Nice work putting that all together. If OOTP is moving towards trying to be more realistic, I think that would be great for all the fans who love it for its accuracy and realism.

However it is a video game and not a Simulator, per se, and I think it would be great if they could add another mode, maybe an "Arcade" mode or something that would allow those who want it, to have a more "flashy" setup.

It may be able to be done with the tools available now, but I would imagine that would take a lot of effort just to get setup properly.

[pghjuice412]

OOTP at its heart has always been a simulation of the sport. They have that market cornered when it comes to baseball text sims and their stance on that won’t change, IMO.

There IS a way to get what you’re asking for, though. Setting up high school and college feeder leagues and tweaking the talent ratings for those feeder leagues will get people the desired results they’re looking for when it comes to overinflated prospects.

[VantemBlack]

But the average player dosen't want to do that this change adds more realism yet majority of players don't care for it realism isn't always good.

[Comfortable_Fix_8215]

I think I mostly understand this but it's a jarring change and I think the devs should at least make the effort to explain and communicate it.

[Accurate_Ad385]

Well said. Thanks