MLB 10 News Post

MLB '10: The Show Official Team Ratings and Explanation

02:57 PM - February 18, 2010 by Russell_SCEA

Overall, Defense, Pitching, Batting

Yankees--------1st, 6th, 1st, 1st
Red Sox--------2nd, 1st, 3rd, 2nd
Phillies---------3rd, 5th, 7th, 3rd
Dodgers-------4th, 4th, 2nd, 10th
Rays----------5th, 8th, 12th, 5th
Braves--------6th, 22nd, 4th, 9th
Angels-------7th, 16th, 10th, 7th
Rockies------8th, 24th, 16th, 6th
Cubs----------9th, 26th, 9th, 8th
Rangers-----10th, 11th, 23rd, 4th
D�Backs-----11th, 27th, 5th, 13th
Twins------12th, 23rd, 11th, 11th
W.Sox--------13th, 7th, 6th, 18th
Giants-----14th, 21st, 13th, 16th
B.Jays-----15th, 10th, 25th, 12th
Cardinals--16th, 13th, 15th, 20th
Mets--------17th, 2nd, 22nd, 15th
Brewers----18th, 28th, 17th, 19th
Reds-------19th, 19th, 21st, 17th
Orioles----20th, 12th, 29th, 14th
Mariners----21st, 3rd, 19th, 22nd
Astros------22nd, 9th, 24th, 24th
Athletics---23rd, 17th, 8th, 30th
Tigers-----24th, 14th, 14th, 29th
Padres-----25th, 30th, 18th, 26th
Marlins----26th, 29th, 30th, 21st
Royals-----27th, 15th, 20th, 27th
Nationals--28th, 18th, 26th, 23rd
Pirates----29th, 20th, 27th, 25th
Indians----30th, 25th, 28th, 28th

These are some of my favorite threads every year because we all get to debate on why so and so is rated this and that. It's all arbitrary and opinions when you think about it though (which is why I enjoy these threads so much), but for the sake of understanding I'm game lets dig a little deeper.

The Cardinals batting being ranked 20th in the game, but before I talk about their rating let me shed some light on how the game determines this.

1. It's an avg. of your starters and your bench and that's for your starting pitching and lineup. Kolbe gave me a number around 60% to 40% with your starters making up 60% of that rating.

2. Player ratings are not done by human hands its all done by a program that looks at the players past three years with the most recent year weighing in the highest.

Now that we have that out the way back to the Cardinals and this 20th batting ranking which made me scratch my head a little when I first saw it. As most of you and I'm guilty of this myself I think Pujols and Holliday that has to at least make them better than 20th. Not so fast

The Mets are ranked 15th a good 5 spots ahead of them I've uploaded some images to help make this easier.

Image #1

Image #2

If you notice the Cardinals bench is relatively weak compared to the Mets. This is a very important factor in the Cardinals current 20th batting rating. For the sake of science I swaped F.Tatis for S.Robinson on these two teams and their batting rankings changed. This one player swap propelled the Cardinals to 13th overall in batting and dropped the Mets to 21st in batting. What you have to remember is your starting lineup is only half of the story (about 60% give or take) you have to take into consideration your bench and your bullpen for pitching. Hope this helps.

Discuss.

MLB '10: The Show screenshot gallery - Click to view

Game: MLB '10: The ShowReader Score: 9/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3Votes for game: 66 - View All

MLB '10: The Show Videos

Member Comments

# 201 ltw0303cavs @ 02/19/10 10:10 AM

Remember the old addage, it why we play the game. Dont get too caught up in the ratings. Great discussion but dont take it as a insult.Besides half you guys are going to trade for Mauer or somebody in your franchise , which will change the ratings again anyway

# 202 Rickeysue @ 02/19/10 10:25 AM

It's going to be a great year to be a Rockies fan both on the field in real life and in The Show. The players are saying there is a special feeling going into the season this year that hasn't been there in the past. Rockies fans, get pumped!

# 203 Tyused @ 02/19/10 10:28 AM

Found the team stats for defense...I find it interesting how the team who was 13th in Errors is #2 on defense, and 19th in Fielding %. How is this physically possible?! I understand they use a different system, but maybe it needs to be changed.

Pittsburgh actually lead the league in fewest errors and highest fielding %, Phillies 2nd fewest errors and 3rd best fielding %. So why is it that the Mets rate 18 spots higher then the pirates on defense, and 3 spots higher then the phillies?

This is like saying Shaq is a better free throw shooter than Mark Price! The numbers don't lie!

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/team/_/...ors/order/true

# 204 Tyused @ 02/19/10 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BKBond007


	Wouldnt you freak out if the came out and said.."we might do something we may not..but whatever"...lol A lot of teams say that before spring training starts

I find it shocking when I turn on the TV and hear things like David Wright is stirring up the NL East because he says its their goal to win the NL East and World Series. Isn't the point of playing to win the World Series? Isn't that every team goal? I'm a Phillies fan, but christ, they turn EVERYTHING into something much larger than it is. I'd be pissed if I were a Mets fan and I heard Wright say, well I dont feel to great about this year, maybe wild card?!

# 205 Ovie @ 02/19/10 10:51 AM

Twins at 23rd Defense BOGGLES my mind, but other than that looks good for my Twins

# 206 Pared @ 02/19/10 11:08 AM

Fellas, keep the posts on topic. You have an issue with the ratings, find a way to express yourself appropriately, not like a 5 year old.

# 207 MelMan1486 @ 02/19/10 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tommyjesus


	i don't understand why they even do a three year analysis. it makes no sense. logically, a game should be representative of how a player plays most recently; if a player gets injured and never pitches the same, why should he be better in the game because of the weights from his previous two years? i'm sure it's to lessen the impact of an "uncharacteristically" good or bad year, but then the game fails to accurately capture how the player is performing most recently. but anyway, the ratings will be adjusted when the season updates anyway... as for the ratings themselves, they look...terrible. sorry, that's just my opinion.

I think the 3 year analysis is great. It measures the overall ability of a player. I mean even the great players go through HUGE slumps where they hit like .100, does that mean they should see a huge ratings drop? As for injured players I think they should be given the benefit of a doubt that they can still produce unless they prove otherwise.

The last thing I want is this game to turn into a Madden type game where people come on here and argue that their players rating should be bumped up because they've had a couple good consecutive games.

# 208 roolz @ 02/19/10 12:07 PM

Reds probably living about right, the NL Central holds 4 of the bottom 12 rated teams.

Things always get shaked up a bit once Knight brings out his superb rosters with updates etc

# 209 JaSnake16 @ 02/19/10 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MelMan1486


	I think the 3 year analysis is great. It measures the overall ability of a player. I mean even the great players go through HUGE slumps where they hit like .100, does that mean they should see a huge ratings drop? As for injured players I think they should be given the benefit of a doubt that they can still produce unless they prove otherwise. The last thing I want is this game to turn into a Madden type game where people come on here and argue that their players rating should be bumped up because they've had a couple good consecutive games.

Just to chime in on this,
I am a big proponent of the three year average however there needs to be a more accurate way to gauge age / injury in the system. The weighted system which SCEA uses has flaws because players in obvious decline (Papi, Vlad) were still getting too much of the benefit of the doubt and their individual ratings would be way too inflated. Im sure with these two players that I cited as examples that will change in this years version because their '09 was down in the end but as the year plays out there will be other examples from other players where the same scenario will play out (Posada?). I know this is tough to gauge especially upon release but in updates as the season wears on there should be drastic changes to certain players to reiterate such.

SCEA also had a knack for inflating power ratings, someone with 99 power for example could sim out with close to 65 - 70 bombs in a majority of simmed seasons. I hope its safe to say those days are over in real life (

) and a 99 should equal say 45 - 50 homers with the rare 55 during sim seasons.. Just a hope

# 210 Copernico @ 02/19/10 01:24 PM

That's the beauty of editing. Making the game the most editable possible would make of an epic video game a much better and adaptable to everyone�s taste.

Take it easy with the rankings! These people at SD are paid to make a game, we buy it and we do ours with all adjustments available.>>
>>>>
Copernico>>>>
PTY>>
>>

# 211 EnigmaNemesis @ 02/19/10 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by metsman8669


	Amen pal. As much as I love the non-stop sports coverage nowadays, it's also a detriment compared to the pre-Internet era. Everyone needs to get some type of "scoop" As you said...it's a story when a player says it's his goal to win the World Series? Or yesterday, in Johan Santana's case, some idiot (seriously, how do these reporters get their jobs?) asks him point blank who the best pitcher in the NL East is. He says "Johan Santana." Wow...he's really stirring it up there. What's he supposed to say?

That is our media for us, sensationalism. It is a whole around the world. They play on peoples emotions that they know will get them glued to a story.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MelMan1486


	I think the 3 year analysis is great. It measures the overall ability of a player. I mean even the great players go through HUGE slumps where they hit like .100, does that mean they should see a huge ratings drop? As for injured players I think they should be given the benefit of a doubt that they can still produce unless they prove otherwise. The last thing I want is this game to turn into a Madden type game where people come on here and argue that their players rating should be bumped up because they've had a couple good consecutive games.

Exactly!

# 212 VitaminKG21 @ 02/19/10 01:45 PM

No chance the Giants pitching staff should be ranked behind the Twins.

# 213 Yehhhhhhhh @ 02/19/10 02:33 PM

Thank you very much for posting the rankings. Thank you even more for allowing us to edit and fix them in the game.

# 214 ltw0303cavs @ 02/19/10 03:55 PM

yeah i can see it both ways, maybe its cause the Twins have two ex Giants Nathan and Liriano lol. If Liriano is back then he is as good as the Cain or Lincecum. Bumgarner will be the key for the Giants and Liriano the key for the Twins. Twins bullpen is deeper than the Giants, pitching wise it really is close when you look at the staffs as a whole.

# 215 MeanMrMustard @ 02/19/10 04:41 PM

While 10th overall is probably about right, the Rangers ratings by category don't make a whole lot of sense... 11th in defense, 23rd in pitching and 4th in hitting are probably what average Joe would blindly assign the Rangers based on stereotypes, but defense and pitching are their biggest strengths heading into the season. And if the Rangers lineup really had the talent for 4th best hitting squad in the league, they would've made the playoffs easy last year. Unless Vlad Guerrero is expected to change all of that, 4th probably isn't too realistic.

# 216 The Police @ 02/19/10 06:42 PM

Tigers 24th? I guess they weigh a lot of the overrall on defense . . . the Tigers are definitely a top 15 team.

# 217 The Police @ 02/19/10 06:47 PM

Tigers and Jays should switch spots, the Tigers have a top 10 pitching staff, if Damon signs then their offense will prob be top 10 too and their defense is bad but that shouldn't weigh too heavily on the overrall.

# 218 The Police @ 02/19/10 06:49 PM

nvm they probly don't have Austin Jackson and Scott Sizemore added to the rosters yet, probly have Wilkin Ramirez and Ramon Santiago starting lol...with updated rosters they should be higher.

# 219 Mekias @ 02/19/10 07:48 PM

I'm not going to worry about some of the strange ratings for my Mariners. Bedard wasn't on the team yet and they probably put our worst pitchers on the 25-man roster. The M's have a stockpile of mediocre AAAA pitchers and in spite of the fact that they'll comprise very few innings for the Mariners this year, they'll count just as much as Felix and Lee in this type of rating. If this team rating was weighted with projected innings pitched, the pitching could be in the top 10. Our bullpen is definitely above average. Aardsma, League, Lowe, Kelley, and White are a pretty nice group. League had the most unhittable pitch in the majors last year (some kind of splitter/change - a splange). When hitters swung at that pitch, they missed 35% of the time. Next closest pitch to that was Ryan Madson's changeup at 30%.

Not sure what stat system they're using to project defense but guys like Griffey and Garko might be bringing the average down even though they aren't going to be playing the field too much (or at all in Griffey's case).

Regardless, we can always edit if something is terribly screwed up. Overall, the Mariners could be anywhere from 75-93 wins I think. They could end up winning the AL West or finish in last place. But it's certainly nice to have some hope again.

# 220 tommyjesus @ 02/19/10 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATLNYankee


	Giants have a better 1 and 2 starting pitchers. Twins pitchers have more depth, better bullpen, play in a tougher division than the NL West, a better league and face the dh. Get over it. Plus none of us know what the difference outside of rank is. Twins can be an 82/100 grade while the Giants are an 81.79/100.

how do the twins have better depth and a better bullpen?

zito is solid starter and looks to be shaping back into form, sanchez has very high breakout potential and bumgarner was one of the best pitching prospects in the minors with ace potential. also their bullpen is getting dismissed for some reason so quickly. wilson is an all star closer, affeldt was setman of the year last year, and they have romo and runzler, two great arms in the pen. i don't see how it makes any sense the giants are ranked so low other than the system used (weight on the last three years) really hurt zito (he was terrible in 2008), sanchez (up and down last few years), and well bumgarner (has no baseline to work off of).

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112 Next »

More Links

MLB '10: The Show Official Team Ratings and Explanation