View Single Post
Old 02-13-2013, 02:08 AM   #121
BBallcoach
MVP
 
BBallcoach's Arena
 
OVR: 7
Join Date: Dec 2012
Blog Entries: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomo17k
No, it's not quite the same thing to say that a player can be rated numerically and that a player's true skill can be rated at all. As anyone who deals with statistics in life knows, all such activities come up with *estimates* of what the numbers should represent.

I have no issues with MLB scout using 20 - 80 scale to rate players.

But I have an issue with exposing player ratings in a game like this, only because that's actually the true skill of the player. A Contact = 66 player should hit .255 on average, since the game is actually tuned precisely to produce such a player.

Unless I'm doing editing, I really don't want to know that much detail about a player. It takes fun away from me.
Not sure you understand the concept of ratings. If a guy is a 66 in contact that doesn't mean he'll hit .255 no matter what... Especially in baseball games. Ratings factor in a ton like is it R or L contact for a R or L pitcher who has a dominate FB but a bad changeup, how often does he throw it for strikes and how many balls in play does the batter have vs the change up? there are tons of variables. You see a 66 and expect a .255 hitter I see a 66 and see the possibility of a .270 and up pending on who's around him and who he faces... ratings aren't singular things, they are very fluid in the whole scheme of the game. No to mention if he is a 66 R contact, whats his vision and discipline? If they are high he will bat higher than .255
BBallcoach is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove