UZR and Fielding Metrics

[nemesis04]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

I'm not sure how The Show can incorporate Defensive skills. The problem with defense is that it is 90% anticipation and instinct. How can you put that in a video game? Good luck to developers! I really hope their ideas work out and this game takes a huge leap forward.

Good discussion.

Each position has to be broken down in a more finite matter. An overall rating is too general as each position has certain criteria so to speak. So for instance let say for a shortstop, there needs to be an individual rating for his range breaking it down separately for his ability to go left or right. Ability to turn a double play, ability to catch a flyball in the infield, ability to catch a flyball over his head in shallow part of the outfield, ground ball catch rating, etc. If you start to get ratings for each little job function of the position the actual fielder will start to take shape giving you diversity on the playing field.

[sink4ever]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

As far as replicating outfielders taking a bad read or poor route on a flyball, I wonder if a moving catch position indicator would help. For instance, when a ball is first hit you get that little baseball symbol that indicates where the ball is going to land. Maybe for someone who isn't good at catching flyballs, that indicator would move a bit from its original position as you move toward it. You would then have to adjust to the new target. With a really poor fielder it might move so much that they'll actually miss the catch.

[HFX007]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

maybe they can fine tune the option of getting rid of the little ball and just go with the oversized shadow..like if the players def rating is high its smaller and more precise and if the have a low def rating its much larger like it is now..because we do have the option of turning off ball indicator.

[AJColossal]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

Kind of in line with what we're talking about is the fact that the AI always takes perfect routes. Think of a ball hit down the line or a gapper that rattles around the OF wall. The AI *knows* exactly where the ball will go, goes to that perfect spot, and throws the ball in.

Right now, the defense is more or less perfect, with speed limitations on certain players, along with random errors thrown in.

But think of all the things that need to be modeled correctly to convey defensive ability: speed, range (in every direction), "awareness", route assessment, arm strength, hands, etc.

[Qb]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

As sink and HFX metioned, I think there is some merit to manipulating the catch indicators to account for defensive skills. Maybe the indicator takes a second or two longer to appear for a poor fielder and doesn't shrink as quickly -- I don't believe it's like this now, is it?

On the subject of fielding ratings, hopefully they will be expanded. Maybe something like range/reaction/routes/glove would better represent fielding strengths & weaknesses. Also, playing out of position should have a greater impact. 2K had individual position familiarity ratings, but if SCEA doesn't want to go that route, maybe have a "utility" rating that could be a universal modifier in conjunction with primary/secondary positions.

[CMH]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

What if every defensive rating in the game was torn out the game and re-written from scratch?

That sounds amazing.

I realize you can't comment on this, but I personally think defense would improve if somehow everyone was weighted against the same factors rather than by position.

By that I mean: instead of saying that this guy is a great defender because he's a 1B, rate him by his agility, speed, ability to scoop a pitch, reaction time to balls to his left/balls to his right, etc.

Because a guy like Mark Teixeira might be great as a 1B, very athletic, but his athletic ratings should be lower than your standard SS.

Then users can actually field guys by their abilities rather than a standard position.

[Knight165]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

As sink and HFX metioned, I think there is some merit to manipulating the catch indicators to account for defensive skills. Maybe the indicator takes a second or two longer to appear for a poor fielder and is doesn't shrink as quickly -- I don't believe it's like this now, is it?

On the subject of fielding ratings, hopefully they will be expanded. Maybe something like range/reaction/routes/glove would better represent fielding strengths & weaknesses. Also, playing out of position should have a greater impact. 2K had individual position familiarity ratings, but if SCEA doesn't want to go that route, maybe have a "utility" rating that could be a universal modifier in conjunction with primary/secondary positions.

That's not a bad idea.
Dunn if in LF would have his indicator go to the wrong place some of the time on certain hit balls and then re-adjust to the correct spot(maybe a couple of times!) after the player moves towards the first location. It would make for some funny YouTube vids! and Highlights!

M.K.
Knight165

[CMH]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

On the subject of fielding ratings, hopefully they will be expanded. Maybe something like range/reaction/routes/glove would better represent fielding strengths & weaknesses.

I didn't read your post before posting and this is pretty much what I'm hoping for in this change.

I think saying a guy is a SS or CF should be removed from the game. Everyone can play everywhere. But not everyone has the range or reaction or other factors needed to perform well at those positions.

I'd support more of a position recommendation based on those factors. So a guy isn't a SS, but he is recommended to play SS, 3B, 2B (in that order).

That's not a bad idea.
Dunn if in LF would have his indicator go to the wrong place some of the time on certain hit balls and then re-adjust to the correct spot(maybe a couple of times!) after the player moves towards the first location. It would make for some funny YouTube vids! and Highlights!

M.K.
Knight165

That seems a bit dramatic. I get it, though, but Dunn isn't going to misplay a ball that badly.

He's just a poor defender mostly because he's slow and can't get to balls as quickly as faster defenders.

[Qb]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

That's not a bad idea.

Thanks, I'm sure I'm not the first to post something like that. It could add a lot of depth to defensive strategy... someone like Dunn may not be able to recover after getting a bad jump due to a slow indicator, but a more athletic outfielder may get away with it (McCutchen comes to mind).

I didn't read your post before posting and this is pretty much what I'm hoping for in this change.

I like the idea of having the defensive ratings not be position specific... guys play positions (mostly) because of how their skills translate on the field. Rating players on a universal scale could create more separation and need to think about where you put someone.

However, I think eliminating positions could cause a lot of problems with CPU lineup/position logic. Think about the batting order rants on here... if a system is looking at skill-sets to determine a fielding position, some will flip out when someone gets moved to a position they don't play IRL because the logic determines is a better fit (and others would probably like it).

[CMH]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

However, I think eliminating positions could cause a lot of problems with CPU lineup/position logic. Think about the batting order rants on here... if a system is looking at skill-sets to determine a fielding position, some will flip out when someone gets moved to a position they don't play IRL because the logic determines is a better fit (and others would probably like it).

That's an excellent point.

Perhaps it should lock in, grandfathered for those already in the game. If you play Franchise then it would take into account the suggested positions for any newly drafted player.

I can easily see an Alex Rodriguez being shifted to shortstop and Jeter moving to 3B in a franchise that did not incorporate set positions for players. That would cause an uproar for the realism crowd (everyone?).

[nemesis04]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

I like the idea of having the defensive ratings not be position specific... guys play positions (mostly) because of how their skills translate on the field. Rating players on a universal scale could create more separation and need to think about where you put someone.

Maybe I am not reading this correctly but I would think rating everyone on a universal scale would lump everyone together causing the problem we have now where players could get away with playing other positions without much penalty. NO? I would think if each position had criteria ratings plugging a player into a position he did not belong would make him fail miserably.

[AtlBraves09]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

Maybe I am not reading this correctly but I would think rating everyone on a universal scale would lump everyone together causing the problem we have now where players could get away with playing other positions without much penalty. NO? I would think if each position had criteria ratings plugging a player into a position he did not belong would make him fail miserably.

- I think you are correct, because a corener infielder does not have the same skill sets a middle infielder does. Also, most corner outfielders do not have the same skill sets that center fielders have. When you say that Derrick Lee has a great glove, that statement is true at first base, but not so much at shortstop...

[EnigmaNemesis]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

- I think you are correct, because a corener infielder does not have the same skill sets a middle infielder does. Also, most corner outfielders do not have the same skill sets that center fielders have. When you say that Derrick Lee has a great glove, that statement is true at first base, but not so much at shortstop...

Exactly ... the game as we know it right now, did have penalties for secondary positions and out of position play.

I believe it was a 20% reduction for secondary and 60% reduction on top of that for out of position play (my numbers could be wrong) ... the only problem was, either it was not working properly, or the scale was not drastic enough to seem inappropriate for that position of play.

Thus why I see Ramone commented on a whole new system. And this sounds very exciting.

[Qb]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

Maybe I am not reading this correctly but I would think rating everyone on a universal scale would lump everyone together causing the problem we have now where players could get away with playing other positions without much penalty. NO? I would think if each position had criteria ratings plugging a player into a position he did not belong would make him fail miserably.

I see your point, but I was not advocating for "position-less" players. I think the current primary/secondary position system needs to improved (eg, greater penalties for unfamiliar positions) or something like 2K's system where every position has its own familiarity rating. This would be even more important if the primary fielding ratings where more universal.

What I was attempting to say was the individual defensive ratings should be rated on more of a universal scale as opposed to a position-relative one. For example, a poor-fielding SS should probably still have a higher range rating than a gold glove 1B and most likely quicker reactions & arm strength -- that's why those guys got put at SS to begin with. However, fielding in baseball is about more than just having the physical skills for a given position, with situational familiarity and awareness playing a large part (eg, reading the ball of the bat from different angles in the field, taking good routes to be in position to make the next play, etc). This is why I fully support individual position familiarity like I said above and would also like to see some position-specific ratings for some of the more unique fielding skills -- blocking pitches, scooping throws, double-play pivot, etc.

Sorry for the rambling, but trying to explain myself as thoroughly as possible.

[CMH]

Re: UZR and Fielding Metrics

Maybe I am not reading this correctly but I would think rating everyone on a universal scale would lump everyone together causing the problem we have now where players could get away with playing other positions without much penalty. NO? I would think if each position had criteria ratings plugging a player into a position he did not belong would make him fail miserably.

- I think you are correct, because a corener infielder does not have the same skill sets a middle infielder does. Also, most corner outfielders do not have the same skill sets that center fielders have. When you say that Derrick Lee has a great glove, that statement is true at first base, but not so much at shortstop...

Glove would be a horrible rating to begin with and I think that's part of the issue with fielding attributes - they are way too generic.

A universal scale, at least one that I'm talking about, would weigh everyone on close to a hundred, maybe more, factors in fielding.

We're talking about: agility to the left/right, reach to the left/right, reaction time to left/right, reaction time to ball in front, back peddling, arm strength when moving away from first base, arm strength momentum moving forward, arm strength on quick throw, and on the list goes.

From that list alone you can start seeing which guys should play short, which third, second or even first (though first will need another set of factors as well).

I think we forget that guys aren't just 3B. They are infielders that play 3B better than somewhere else.

The penalty should be in how that player's individual skill sets lend to the other positions. You need certain skills to play 3B at a Gold Glove caliber level. Those skills are somewhat similar to SS, but there are more factors that come into play when playing short that a slow, immobile 3B may not be able to handle. Why are guys 2B and not SS? Sometimes it's arm strength. A lot of the times we're talking arm strength from deep in the hole in short.