New player attributes that you'd like to see

[Keirik]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

How about an age unlocked attribute? We'll call it "desire" or something that is hidden until the age of like 36-37 or so. Something that could coincide or enhance the clutch rating and give you a reason to hang on to or obtain an aging veteran? Its like the reverse of a potential rating but works much in the same unknown and really could help you in a playoff or postseason push.

[Bobhead]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

...Brandon Belt doesn't swing the same against a lefty as he does against a righty. Front shoulder flies open. Uses torque built from the lower body. Gives you less power...

You're right. This is the case for many hitters. I guess this comes down to a philosophical difference. Do you think Brandon Belt changes his swing on purpose? I don't. I think he has inferior abilities reading pitches, which results in getting fooled more often, which in turn breaks down his swing. If you believe he changes his swing intentionally, then I concede there is no real way to account for that without splitting Power.

Incidentally, he has 17 HRs against LHP, in 486 ABs... he has 46 HRs against RHP in 1327 ABs. His HR-to-At-Bat ratios are actually almost identical: 3.5% of his at-bats end in a home run, regardless of the pitcher. It's only the fact that he has 3x as many ABs against righties that lead to the skewed stats.

EDIT: Probably should have read more of your post, as I see you placed it in the Plate Vision attribute. I would agree that that's what has the greatest effect, but now we're allowing a player to simply just be worse on one side of the plate than the other.

Isn't that exactly what is going on? John Olerud also batted .030 (.300 vs .270) points lower and hit far fewer doubles and triples against LHP. This is true even after you account for the difference in at-bats vs each. Olerud is "worse" by every definition, and in every metric.

And it's also worth noting that the Contact-split (which already exists in The Show) would remain, and rightfully so. I'm not against a split in Contact. So that's two ratings: Contact and PV, that account for platoon differences.

I'm not saying my idea is perfect by any means - There's certainly better ideas out there... my main concern is that splitting power does far more harm than good when it comes to producing realistic stats. The Brandon Belt example is a great one. Who knows how many hitters in The Show have a 10 or 20-point power difference between sides because someone glanced at their stats (no offense) and assumed he was worse from one side, when in reality, he just had far fewer opportunities?

Maybe there are a small number of "anomalies" over the years - hitters that literally do have better power against one side (though I have yet to see one, again, excluding switch hitters). But there is a far greater number of hitters who are "normal," and it bothers me that a random hitter, or even the auto-generated hitters, have such drastically split power ratings.

I guess what I really want is a change in the way power ratings for new/made-up players are auto-generated, as well as a change in the way they are assigned to real-life players.

Like 95% of the time, Power vs LHP and Power vs RHP should be exactly the same, if not locked together.

[tessl]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

How about an age unlocked attribute? We'll call it "desire" or something that is hidden until the age of like 36-37 or so. Something that could coincide or enhance the clutch rating and give you a reason to hang on to or obtain an aging veteran? Its like the reverse of a potential rating but works much in the same unknown and really could help you in a playoff or postseason push.

The potential problem with an "attitude" attribute is the game has to be approved by MLB and the player union. If you were a player would you want someone to accuse you of having a poor attitude?

[Blzer]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

Then I'll definitely give you the time of day to say your piece for sure, because I think there is validity in your suggestion.

I acknowledge that many hitters are worse against one pitcher's hand than the other, I was referring to switch-hitters in that scenario, though. Didn't want somebody who is just more power on one side and more contact on the other side to end up just being significantly weaker in all facets. On another note entirely, some people are switch-hitters simply because they're better off batting lefty against righties than righty against righties, even if they aren't better when the splits are shown. Absolutely valid, and is the main reason I stuck to righty (can't do lefty on lefty, period).

As for your concern with developers looking at numbers and making assumptions, I sure hope that's not what they're doing. I hope they know better than that. There was a Triple Play baseball game that came out after Bonds was injured for like half the season, and because of his naturally lower HR numbers in 162 games (though he played like 90 games instead), his rating went to crap. I was livid, because I don't think you could edit players either. I think most games now take into account their most recent season, then three-year splits thereafter are also taken into account... and I'd hope they also consider ratios.

I don't disagree with what you said at all, I was just initially concerned that you assumed all players are always the same all the time. If Plate Vision does what it's meant to without adverse effects, then your suggestion works.

[Blzer]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

The potential problem with an "attitude" attribute is the game has to be approved by MLB and the player union. If you were a player would you want someone to accuse you of having a poor attitude?

On the flip side, I wish more players got put in their place for their poor attitudes and there was something like this that would do just that.

[cardinalbird5]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

The current attributes cover everything. I suspect some people don't understand what all the attributes do.

They definitely don't. They cover the basics, but not every player is molded the same from base attributes. They need more individuality...

Examples: A lot of guys change their approach vs lefties/righties. Some pitchers also have reverse splits. Neither are in the game.

Some guys are good at robbing homeruns and making spectacular plays but are average defensive like Trout. Some guys have amazing range but also make less spectacular plays. How do you accumulate Trouts' fielding in the game to represent his real life counter...the answer is you simply cannot.

Then you have guys that are great turning double plays, throwing on the run, making back hands and some guys are poor to mediocre in those categories.

Also for pitchers ....they all have the same pick off moves. Is Lester as good as Kershaw at picking guys off? Heck its nearly impossible to pick guys off with catchers and Molina has done his fair share.

I could go on and on...the game definitely needs more attributes and/or badges to add more individuality to players. NBA 2k and Madden expanded their attributes...MLB needs to do so eventually too IMO.


The base attributes are not bad and they get the job done, but they are very limited when you want to mold certain styles of MLB players.

[HypoLuxa13]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

Then you have guys that are great turning double plays, throwing on the run, making back hands and some guys are poor to mediocre in those categories.

Starlin Castro is a prime example of what you are talking about here: he has incredible range, makes spectacular plays on a weekly basis. But then also flubs routine plays with regularity. Very difficult to account for his overall fielding in the game when, IRL, his very high error rate says one thing, but his overall fielding metrics look different.

[Keirik]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

The potential problem with an "attitude" attribute is the game has to be approved by MLB and the player union. If you were a player would you want someone to accuse you of having a poor attitude?

Well, desire to win one more time does not equal a poor or good attitude. Also, negative player ratings get approved every year. I think you are making it into a bigger deal than it is. Each individual player doesnt have to agree so the handful of negative hidden attributes wouldnt be a problem.

[Blzer]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

Well, desire to win one more time does not equal a poor or good attitude. Also, negative player ratings get approved every year. I think you are making it into a bigger deal than it is. Each individual player doesnt have to agree so the handful of negative hidden attributes wouldnt be a problem.

One player had a fuss over his Madden rating once...

[Scott]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

One player had a fuss over his Madden rating once...

Not happy if they aren't a 99...

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

Just a few thoughts.....

On clutch....you can't really count the "clutch" rating in the Show as some sort of magical "you get lucky" attribute as it is talked about IRL.
It's just a modifier for certain situational hitting that is/can be tracked.
As any other real life stat or attribute in the game....past performance is not necessarily indicative of future performance, but...

But this is precisely why there doesn't need to be a CLUTCH rating. Players don't sustain any long term performance in the clutch; their performance regresses to their normal performance level with a large enough sample. Basically, the CLUTCH attribute just interferes with the normal skill that should play out in those situations. There doesn't need to be any modifier for situational hitting. Not to mention that since CLUTCH doesn't really exist, there's no way to accurately represent the rating for it. It's basically a guessing game where you give Jack Morris and David Ortiz a 99 and toss a 99-sided coin for everyone else.

The current attributes cover everything. I suspect some people don't understand what all the attributes do.

Yep. Too true. I'm sure there are many people on this planet who do not have a Ph.D. in MLB The Show.

On the batting side I have a few small wishes:

One, that the left/right split for the "Power" attribute be removed (except for on switch hitters). The arm a pitcher uses to throw does not affect the muscular composition of a hitter. He still has the same power.

Two, that the "Plate Vision" rating be split by left/right handedness, since that's the real and only reason any real-life splits exist. It's the hitter's ability to read the pitch and make contact on it that varies by pitcher, and leads to the dramatic splits we see in many hitters.

Three, that bunting be fleshed out into attributes for drag bunting and sac bunting, as many have already requested.

The plate vision I already mentioned in the OP...I agree.

But aren't there already drag bunt and regular bunt ratings separated from each other?

You're right. This is the case for many hitters. I guess this comes down to a philosophical difference. Do you think Brandon Belt changes his swing on purpose? I don't. I think he has inferior abilities reading pitches, which results in getting fooled more often, which in turn breaks down his swing. If you believe he changes his swing intentionally, then I concede there is no real way to account for that without splitting Power.

Incidentally, he has 17 HRs against LHP, in 486 ABs... he has 46 HRs against RHP in 1327 ABs. His HR-to-At-Bat ratios are actually almost identical: 3.5% of his at-bats end in a home run, regardless of the pitcher. It's only the fact that he has 3x as many ABs against righties that lead to the skewed stats.




Isn't that exactly what is going on? John Olerud also batted .030 (.300 vs .270) points lower and hit far fewer doubles and triples against LHP. This is true even after you account for the difference in at-bats vs each. Olerud is "worse" by every definition, and in every metric.

And it's also worth noting that the Contact-split (which already exists in The Show) would remain, and rightfully so. I'm not against a split in Contact. So that's two ratings: Contact and PV, that account for platoon differences.

I'm not saying my idea is perfect by any means - There's certainly better ideas out there... my main concern is that splitting power does far more harm than good when it comes to producing realistic stats. The Brandon Belt example is a great one. Who knows how many hitters in The Show have a 10 or 20-point power difference between sides because someone glanced at their stats (no offense) and assumed he was worse from one side, when in reality, he just had far fewer opportunities?

Maybe there are a small number of "anomalies" over the years - hitters that literally do have better power against one side (though I have yet to see one, again, excluding switch hitters). But there is a far greater number of hitters who are "normal," and it bothers me that a random hitter, or even the auto-generated hitters, have such drastically split power ratings.

I guess what I really want is a change in the way power ratings for new/made-up players are auto-generated, as well as a change in the way they are assigned to real-life players.

Like 95% of the time, Power vs LHP and Power vs RHP should be exactly the same, if not locked together.

LOL. I can't speak for other rosters, but I break things down into rates (HR%, BB%, K%) to compare everyone equally. Taking gross stats and not accounting for opportunities would result in a very poor roster. I would hope no decent roster maker would make this mistake.

[Keirik]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

One player had a fuss over his Madden rating once...

lol Madden and their players union is a very bad comparison to MLB and theirs. Maybe a steroid attribute can be implemented come to think of it...

[Jolly Roger]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

Maybe some manager attributes (more like tendency sliders, really) for things like:

- How often he shuffles the lineup/gives guys days off
- Tendency to pull pitchers sooner or later
- Hit and run frequency, bunt, small ball frequency

On the other hand, I don't know to what degree there's an appreciable difference between managers on these strategies, so maybe it would be hard to quantify.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

Maybe some manager attributes (more like tendency sliders, really) for things like:

- How often he shuffles the lineup/gives guys days off
- Tendency to pull pitchers sooner or later
- Hit and run frequency, bunt, small ball frequency

On the other hand, I don't know to what degree there's an appreciable difference between managers on these strategies, so maybe it would be hard to quantify.

How about this idea that would never happen...invite the managers in (since they are the real life counterparts mostly and fair game for SCEA to rate) and have them rate themselves in each of these areas. On a scale of 1-10, how often do you like to....[insert baseball decision here]? That would really add depth and make the managers a factor. Right now the little global +2, +1, -2 stuff you get with managers is kinda lame, imo. I mean having a specific manager doesn't actually make a player more talented!

[Sip_16]

Re: New player attributes that you'd like to see

I mean having a specific manager doesn't actually make a player more talented!

I believe in real life managers don't really make players better or more talented they just put them in the best situation to succeed.