MLB 13 The Show - Overall Team Ratings, Including Batting, Pitching and Defense

[cardinalbird5]

Quote: Originally Posted by bdubz91

You are obviously upset the Cardinals lost to the Giants, that aside, people are going to be more likely to not play as them due to the low rankings, and there is no way they are the worst team in the NL West...

Good reasoning. I guess the same reasoning the Giants fans are upset they are ranked low and not the best team in the game. Stop being biased. They rate players on an individual basis. They aren't going to give Posey, Sandoval, Crawford, etc. boosted ratings just so their overall team ranking can be higher.

Look at the players' stats from the past 3 years then look at their individual attributes this year and you'll see SCEA doesn't look to give attributes based to compensate for low team rankings. They give them out based off algorithms, data, and statistics of how the players actually played.

Clearly you giants fans know more though with the type of convincing posts you all made, so I'll just stop. Giants should be number 1 because they won the WS. Cards should have been number 1 for MLB 2007 since they won it in 2006 too right?

[Cavicchi]

If you look at the players potentials, the Giants have quite a few, including Lincecum at A potential. So even though the team is rated low, they have lots of players with A and some B potentials that should mean they will be very competitive.

[MrOldboy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cavicchi

If you look at the players potentials, the Giants have quite a few, including Lincecum at A potential. So even though the team is rated low, they have lots of players with A and some B potentials that should mean they will be very competitive.

Over time you mean right? I never thought of that actually. Makes sense if a team has more high potential players it could sustain itself longer.

[cardinalbird5]

All I know is the Cards will have one of the best lineups followed by a balanced rotation and a good bullpen. That is all that matter's to me. I could care less if they are ranked 29th, 17th, or 1st. I am going to be using them a lot.

12 in 13!

[Majingir]

After seeing each players rating, it's easy to see how each team is rated
where they are in fielding rating.

Almost entire Yankees fielders are 80+. Red Sox have a few like that too.

David Ortiz is supposedly a better fielder than Edwin Encarnacion.

Ratings bit strange though.

Jeter:
79 arm strength
64 arm accuracy
71 reaction
82 fielding rating

Reyes:
82 arm strength
63 arm accuracy
81 reaction
74 fielding


How does that make sense? Both are SS......

Fielding is a separate rating too,but if it was just the average of the only 3 fielding categories in the game then Reyes would be 75 fielding and Jeter at 71

[Cavicchi]

Quote: Originally Posted by Majingir

After seeing each players rating, it's easy to see how each team is rated where they are in fielding rating. Almost entire Yankees fielders are 80+. Red Sox have a few like that too. David Ortiz is supposedly a better fielder than Edwin Encarnacion. Ratings bit strange though. Jeter: 79 arm strength 64 arm accuracy 71 reaction 82 fielding rating Reyes: 82 arm strength 63 arm accuracy 81 reaction 74 fielding How does that make sense? Both are SS...... Fielding is a separate rating too,but if it was just the average of the only 3 fielding categories in the game then Reyes would be 75 fielding and Jeter at 71

David Ortiz made just one single error at 1B from 2009 through 2012. Well, it was a total of 19 games at first base. He really is a DH.

I would like to know where the range factor rating is shown in attributes, Reaction?

[bkrich83]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cavicchi

David Ortiz made just one single error at 1B from 2009 through 2012. Well, it was a total of 19 games at first base. He really is a DH. I would like to know where the range factor rating is shown in attributes, Reaction?

I would assume range would be a combination of reaction and speed, wouldn't it? Reaction is how well they get a jump of the bat, and speed would be how much ground they cover. I imagine "fielding" factors in to how good of a path they take to the ball and also how reliable they are at avoiding errors.

Just assumptions.

[Cavicchi]

Quote: Originally Posted by bkrich83

I would assume range would be a combination of reaction and speed, wouldn't it? Reaction is how well they get a jump of the bat, and speed would be how much ground they cover. I imagine "fielding" factors in to how good of a path they take to the ball and also how reliable they are at avoiding errors. Just assumptions.

I think you're right, range being a combination of reaction and speed. I also think you're explanation for fielding is correct, sure seems logical.