MLB 13 The Show News Post

MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99

02:48 PM - February 12, 2013 by Russell_SCEA

There will be a post with images about this later, but I figured a little teaser never hurt anyone.

If you didn't know, we changed the way we rate players and every position weigh different attributes differently. Before the change the game had 44 players rated 99 or higher. After the change there are 17, here is a little taste.

In no particular order.

T.Tulowitzki 99
A.Pujols 99
R.Braun 99
J.Hamilton 99
M.Cabrera 99
C.Kimbrel 99
C.Kershaw 99
A.Chapman 99
S.Strasburg 99
F.Hernandez 99
J.Verlander 99
B.Posey 99
M.Kemp 99
R.Cano 99
A.McCutchen 99
M.Trout 99
C.Gonzalez 99

J.Votto just missed the cut at a 98.

Second Baseman Top 5

Robinson Cano 99
Dustin Pedroia 98
Ian Kinsler 95
Brandon Phillips 93
Jose Altuve 90

Game: MLB 13 The ShowReader Score: 9/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS Vita / PS3Votes for game: 36 - View All

MLB 13 The Show Videos

Member Comments

# 141 timmuh1515 @ 02/13/13 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bp4baseball


	I don't think that's how it works. A 99 speed (or some other rating) is a set speed. Theoretically everyone could be 99 if you edited them that way.

You might be right.

I guess my thought is. If Pujols is 99 overall and another 1B comes along with the same exact skill set but with 90+ speed (crazy i know)...to me that would mean Albert isn't a 99 overall player anymore. Maybe 98...but now there is someone better at everything he does.

# 142 Knight165 @ 02/13/13 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlennN


	Valid point, but doesn't that argue just as much against having a maximum rating as having an overall rating? In OOTP, a rating can exceed a 100 point scale. Wouldn't that counter your issue? I understand some folks would prefer no overall rating (like in the Front Page Sports series) and that's cool - make it optional to have it hidden. I like the shorthand of it.

Yes....it would.

I am one of those in the camp to keep it hidden.

I also prefer something like a scouting report with the 20-80 scale.

Could ANYONE argue that Babe Ruth and Barry Bonds.....Ralph Kiner or Ted Williams are 80's on the 20-80 scale in power?

My thoughts are not to use definitive #'s to represent a player.

That of course is just my humble opinion.

Edit for addition:
I would also like to point out again...that thankfully....SCEA used a formula that in essence does not use the same 0-99 scale as other games as MANY things will go into making a "99" player and it does not mean..."this is the best"....it does mean that the game considers him in the upper echelon of players at that position at that time in the game universe.

M.K.
Knight165

# 143 3fiddy @ 02/13/13 04:43 PM

More 99 overalls wouldn't lower Altuve. Algorithm not a bell curve. The algorithm will pick from certain points to give the overall. Pujols has fielding, contact , and power No arm (doesn't have chance to showcase in defense) or wheels. 3 of 5 tools but a great fit for 1st base. This also leaves holes for players rated 99 overall, they may not be the best player for your team.

Baseball is all about situations. How you decide to handle those situations is how your team is formed. Not just picking the higher overall ...

# 144 timmuh1515 @ 02/13/13 04:46 PM

one other quick question...and my guess is no if my other thought was wrong.

could a player in the minors be ranked 99...only to be ranked lower once moved up to the majors?

# 145 Knight165 @ 02/13/13 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmuh1515


	one other quick question...and my guess is no if my other thought was wrong. could a player in the minors be ranked 99...only to be ranked lower once moved up to the majors?

I don't think so.

I don't think it compares it to the MLB-AAA-AA-A ...but to the entire Show "universe".

That would be a good thing to add though.
Good thinking.

M.K.
Knight165

# 146 Knight165 @ 02/13/13 05:11 PM

I would like to add one thing concerning my comments.

I am of course speaking about REPRESENTING ratings in the show.....(ON SCREEN)
I fully understand that under the hood there must be a number to drive the game engines.

M.K.
Knight165

# 147 HustlinOwl @ 02/13/13 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knight165


	I would like to add one thing concerning my comments. I am of course speaking about REPRESENTING ratings in the show.....(ON SCREEN) I fully understand that under the hood there must be a number to drive the game engines. M.K. Knight165

show/hide option like OSDK OOTP

# 148 cardinalbird5 @ 02/13/13 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrOldboy


	I have to agree that it takes a lot away from the game when you think about it too hard, which a lot of people on here do. A thing I and I think a lot of others want is more variability. More differentiation between players. SCEA is going in this direction with the push/pull system. I hope it goes further in the future. I don't want the ratings to be so binary, I want something than can differentiate two hitters with 65 contact. Because they are not exactly the same. About the park factors in the game, the altitude, etc. How dramatic are the park factors in the game? Does it affect simmed games at all? That is what I would want it to affect really, more so than played games so that the stats would end up replicating what actual ballparks play like.

They are definitely there. This doesn't mean playing at Coors will turn your hitting up .50 points either, but you can notice it. One thing you also can notice is pitch speeds. In DD I have 99 maxed out fastball velocity. At Coors when I pitch high in the zone I can hit 100 MPH. If I pitch at SD low in the zone it is only about 96-97 mph. Of course how tired your pitcher is and how much you put into your meter all affects this. Also breaking balls don't break as much at coors either.

# 149 thekingofKC @ 02/13/13 05:32 PM

Is there any possibility in the future for a setting to switch the ratings to a 20-80 scouting scale? Perhaps that is too niche to be in the game.

# 150 iCebErgSLiM369 @ 02/13/13 05:44 PM

I dont think the problem is in the numbers themselves. I DO have a problem when an overall rating is given to me and there is no explanation to EXACTLY why or how that number came about. Its kinda confusing to be told there is going to be a new overall ratings system but to not pay too much attention to that overall number. You dont often get rating arguments with games like fifa and nba 2k because for some time now they have been graded on a wide scale to show that no one is perfect. That is their choice and but at least the consumer knows exactly how the system works. My problem here is I dont know whats going on under the hood. In the franchise blog we were told teams will be evaluating players based on what individual franchises value per position. Unless there is going to be another blog explaining how the cpu will evaluate trades, free agents and prospects using this new ratings system, im somewhat dissapointed by the response from developers regarding exactly how the new system works. Maybe im jumping the gun a bit tho. There are just soo many questions that immediately arise with this and I just love this game soo much I want to know everything lol. Oh well...

# 151 HustlinOwl @ 02/13/13 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russell_SCEA


	We've just re-calibrated our player overall's algorithm today. There were 44 players rated at 99 or above before the change, now there are only 14. Expect to see a larger range or numbers and more variance in general.

so who were final 3 to get to 99?

# 152 Jays20593 @ 02/13/13 06:01 PM

Josh Hamilton is a 99?

pfffffffffffffffffffffffttt

# 153 authentic @ 02/13/13 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmuh1515


	one other quick question...and my guess is no if my other thought was wrong. could a player in the minors be ranked 99...only to be ranked lower once moved up to the majors?

I brought this point up last year and there was a thread on it. My system was rating the player on the level he's at. So a 90 overall AA player may be a 72 at the MLB level, but the only way to find out is scouting, but it would depend on the quality of scouting you have.

# 154 MLB Bob @ 02/13/13 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cardinalbird7


	They are definitely there. This doesn't mean playing at Coors will turn your hitting up .50 points either, but you can notice it. One thing you also can notice is pitch speeds. In DD I have 99 maxed out fastball velocity. At Coors when I pitch high in the zone I can hit 100 MPH. If I pitch at SD low in the zone it is only about 96-97 mph. Of course how tired your pitcher is and how much you put into your meter all affects this. Also breaking balls don't break as much at coors either.

Why wouldnt you compare throwing high in the zone in COL and High in the zone in SD as a comparison? In the game pitches high in the zone are generally faster and low pitches generally show slower speeds...

# 155 slickkill77 @ 02/13/13 08:30 PM

Still way too many 99's. Hamilton has no business being a 99. Tulo has no business being a 99. If anyone deserves a 99 its Votto. He's one of the 3 best hitters in the game.

Strasburg is a 99 as well?

He's a good pitcher but aye carumba. He hasn't even pitched a full season yet. David Price has been much better than Strasburg and he's ranked lower? Trout also being a 99....No.
This is why I don't get too caught up in rankings before the game ships. They're whacky

Ratings people at SCEA are way too generous. The ratings need to be more spread out like they did with Madden.

# 156 JJT @ 02/13/13 08:44 PM

No they should be like fifa where even messi and ronaldo dont go past a 96. No one is a 99, ever!!!

But you can edit the ratings so nothing to complain about.

# 157 mmorg @ 02/13/13 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slickkill77


	Still way too many 99's. Hamilton has no business being a 99. Tulo has no business being a 99. If anyone deserves a 99 its Votto. He's one of the 3 best hitters in the game. Strasburg is a 99 as well? He's a good pitcher but aye carumba. He hasn't even pitched a full season yet. David Price has been much better than Strasburg and he's ranked lower? Trout also being a 99....No. This is why I don't get too caught up in rankings before the game ships. They're whacky Ratings people at SCEA are way too generous. The ratings need to be more spread out like they did with Madden.

The ratings are plenty spread out. Just because someone has a 99 overall doesn't mean they have 99s all across the board. This game is great at differentiating the difference between plays in regards to ratings and accurately rates players who are bad at things and who are good at things.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJT


	No they should be like fifa where even messi and ronaldo dont go past a 96. No one is a 99, ever!!! But you can edit the ratings so nothing to complain about.

The 99 overall literally means nothing. It's the result of an algebraic formula. They aren't going to artificially lower the specific ratings of elite level players just to be more like Fifa.

# 158 slickkill77 @ 02/13/13 08:54 PM

Then that means something in the formula isn't being weighed enough. What has Strasburg done to deserve a 99? Yes he is a very good pitcher but he's already suffered a major injury so his stamina/durability should be pretty low. What has he done that David Price hasn't already matched? Same thing with Tulo. Great player no doubt, but he can't stay healthy at all. Same thing with Hamilton. Also Hamilton strikes out a lot. That should be a factor.

99 ratings, regardless of what they represent, should only be for elite guys. Tulo, Hamilton, Strasburg...They are great players but they have faults that keep them from being elite. That's my problem with the ratings.

Plus this game struggles to show the difference between elite defenders and mediocre defenders. They either play like they are in little league (minors) or they all play pretty much the same (majors). I still think that is one of the major things holding the game back.

# 159 Russell_SCEA @ 02/13/13 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thaSLAB


	I don't think Ramone's a 'stros fan, so you are alone in the world LOL. Oh wait, Lorne_SCEA is an Astros fan so OK, there are 2 of you. I'm actually impartial to the Astros, and go to a good handful of their games, I accidentally rooted for them at least two times. My wife works for the Astros organization too, so they get some sympathy cheers. All jokes aside, the 'stros are OK with me too. As for Altuve (and ratings in general) I wouldn't get too caught up in the OVR ratings, because of the way the algorithm is calculated. I can tell you that even not all the 99s play the same. Trout's 99 plays way differently than Posey's 99 or even Pujols' 99... actually Trout plays like he's at least a 115 rating!

While your joking that's not that far off from where he's rated. I think he was in the 110 118 range or something. When we looked at the spread sheet.

Also for the people who haven't jumped off the bridge already ( I think there are about 10 of you left :-) It's just a number and there are maybe 3 players in the game with almost maxed out ratings. For instance A.McCutchen ratings are

Con R 74
Con L 97
PWR R 68
PWR L 76

Visn 44
Disc 78
Clt 80
Dur 98

FLD 88
Arm str 75
Arm Acc 54
Reac 88

Spd 83
Br a 60
Br ag 56

Doesn't look crazy now does it. (I'm joking I know someone will have an issue with it I'll wait

# 160 JJT @ 02/13/13 09:10 PM

Not complaining, but how does cutchs ratings then result in a 99?

Still dont understand how that adds up.

Once again can edit so not a problem.

« Previous 1 2…5 6 789 10 11…14 15 Next »

More Links

MLB 13 The Show - The Player Ratings Algorithm Has Changed, 17 Players Rated 99