So, I'm not really doing too much with this. I used up most of my points balance to buy a "peak" Johnny Bench, which in my worldview should be a monstrous advantage against most anyone else at the position.
Instead, I'm continuously frustrated to see the way that the game evaluates players from different eras, when juxtaposed. Okay, PEAK Johnny Bench is a 100, great. But then I see other guys, who don't seem like "legends" to me... who have nearly-as-good ratings as the very top guys. Especially the fleet of players from the 2019 season... it seems like lots of players are being assessed on a scale relative to that year alone. So, the 5th best C in 2019 gets a rating set more or less equivalent to... the 5th best catcher of all time? Frealz?
So... available in the market now, I see (relative to a 100 for Bench), Yasmani Grandal, who seems to be a pretty nice low-contact good-power catcher these days. Okay, fine. Where should he be rated if PEAK Johnny Bench and Josh Gibson are at 100, and, let's say, a PEAK Buck Ewing is a 93, and... (trying to find a comparable here) Brian McCann from 2010, who is graded as an 83.
I would think relative to all time greats like that, maybe Grandal deserves to be an 80 or so. Maybe with some investigation into his detailed ratings, maybe he should be an 85-90 guy? But nobody is mistaking him for a HOFer based on hitting a few dingers in 2019, right?
Grandal is a 98 in the game. Ninety-fucking-eight.
I don't know what they are trying to accomplish with this, but I don't like it.