How should players be rated in next gen?

[KBLover]

Re: How should players be rated in next gen?

That's why I still hope we'll be seeing hidden true ratings and (subjective) apparent ratings at some point, though it doesn't look like that's where things are going.

As long as the "subjective" ratings are based around a scouting system (like in OOTP), I'd be cool with that. Add another slot in the scout team for the current players in the league (i.e. not just scouting undiscovered talent), and it sounds like the same sort of thing. The value arrive at for a player is based on the scout and your own observation, just like the stock market (analysts, company reports, your own instincts and trading personality).

Just showing me randomly "wrong" ratings so I can make mistakes or leaving me with zero information on a player - that I wouldn't find realistic just like knowing exactly what a player is isn't realistic.

If I have Evan Longoria, I know what he is or isn't. So do the Rays. Putting him as a "blank page" wouldn't be realistic. For someone like Wil Myers - more "estimation" based on what the scout thinks the player will be given the scout's own tendencies, abilities, and biases.

Something like that I would find realistic. There's not a whole lot of mystery around guys who have been around (who doesn't know Rivera was a top closer?), done things, etc. Around prospects, minors players and guys that haven't been in the majors long, definitely.

[nomo17k]

Re: How should players be rated in next gen?

As long as the "subjective" ratings are based around a scouting system (like in OOTP), I'd be cool with that. Add another slot in the scout team for the current players in the league (i.e. not just scouting undiscovered talent), and it sounds like the same sort of thing. The value arrive at for a player is based on the scout and your own observation, just like the stock market (analysts, company reports, your own instincts and trading personality).

Just showing me randomly "wrong" ratings so I can make mistakes or leaving me with zero information on a player - that I wouldn't find realistic just like knowing exactly what a player is isn't realistic.

If I have Evan Longoria, I know what he is or isn't. So do the Rays. Putting him as a "blank page" wouldn't be realistic. For someone like Wil Myers - more "estimation" based on what the scout thinks the player will be given the scout's own tendencies, abilities, and biases.

Something like that I would find realistic. There's not a whole lot of mystery around guys who have been around (who doesn't know Rivera was a top closer?), done things, etc. Around prospects, minors players and guys that haven't been in the majors long, definitely.

Yeah, I don't necessarily want "random" uncertainties around true player attribute ratings. What you are saying is basically along the line of what I would like to see as well.

I just want some realistic "layer" between what we see and the true ratings that the game uses. IRL, that layer can take several forms...

-- stats from his past performance
-- scouts' observations
-- your own eyes looking at how the player performs on the field
-- reputation... what others (fans, other baseball people) think of the player

Each of these things is biased in one way or another, but that's basically what life is all about when evaluating something.

For very reputable players, all these evidence converge to indicate his greatness. Some other players' greatness only come out looking at some obscure stats. Or you could rely on one of your scouts who always seem to have a knack for finding a hidden gem.... etc., etc.

I think that kind of obscurity adds to a fun factor. Of course there are limitations because the game has limited resource to work with (like, in order to separate very good SS from a truly excellent SS via your own eyes looking both players play... the game needs to have a variation in fielding animations that makes the difference stand out.... that sorta thing.)

[nicxios]

Re: How should players be rated in next gen?

I remember the old Winning Eleven (soccer) games had special characteristics or abilities augmenting the player ratings, and implemented well (unlike ham-handed attempts I've seen on Madden).

I think that would be such a cool addition to The Show. For instance it can flesh out detailed or nuanced differences on defense, baserunning, practically everywhere.

[NDiLeo25]

Re: How should players be rated in next gen?

Looking at even just this off season alone you can see teams making deals for players in positions they need. These trades would never go down in the show because of player overall numbers being so ridiculously specific. Broad overalls can have the cpu trade and acquire players based more, but not entirely, off stats and team needs.

[MrFatMark]

Re: How should players be rated in next gen?

THIS CAN BE FOR OVERALLS AND OR INDIVIDUAL SKILLS (just a discussions about any type of ratings)

Video games seem to always use the 100-0 rating scale. I have never been a fan of this as it is to precise. Why should one persons rating be an 89 and another a 90 overall or on a specific skill. Baseball uses a 2-8 rating scale which is simple and broad.. or the 20-80 scale usually counted by fives. Letter grades were once used in the show in the player cards so why not actually rate by letters to simplify the rating process.

Which sounds more reasonable? CC Sabathia Overall of 94? CC Sabathia Overall A-? CC Sabathia Overall 7/8? CC Sabathia Overall 75/80?

David Wright Power vs RHP 76? David Wright Power vs RHP B? .. you get the idea

To me the overall numbers, and player ratings should be slightly more broad to help create more uncertainty for everything from trades to how to set the lineup. This would help performance stats mean more to a team in the show than ever.

Hear me out.
This is something I always thought of. Imagine and really think about if there was no "rating system" that you could view (at least from the franchise mode).

Yes, somehow players would have to be rated. However, when you are playing your franchise mode and someone gets hurt. How do you call someone up? Do you look at there stats, or look at there "ratings". I can not justify calling up a 49 rated player, even though there stats are better than the 69 rated player. Now, if the ratings were hidden in some way, you would have to look at stats.

I don't know how you could make this happen. Obviously Miguel Cabrera would somehow have to have "Superman" ratings, over say anyone.

Just food for thought.

[NDiLeo25]

Re: How should players be rated in next gen?

It seems like most people believe overalls should pretty much be thrown out all together. My idea is to open up the overalls where there would be bigger tiers that players would fall into instead of this nonsensical hes a 77 overall and my guys a 75 they wont make the trade. The removal of overall would definitely make this game more interesting but id like to suggest a nother idea. Instead of viewing player ratings on the player card it should be a scouting report which goes over the different skills and has some type of broad rating or saying about the players skill so we get an idea of what your teams scouts think but dont get a 86 number to show up. I hate 100 - 0 ratings so much for anything in a sports game i think they are so ridiculous.

[KBLover]

Re: How should players be rated in next gen?

Yes, somehow players would have to be rated. However, when you are playing your franchise mode and someone gets hurt. How do you call someone up? Do you look at there stats, or look at there "ratings". I can not justify calling up a 49 rated player, even though there stats are better than the 69 rated player. Now, if the ratings were hidden in some way, you would have to look at stats.

If the 49 rated player is hot and I need help now, I'll bring him up. If he has a skill that I need or am trying to replace at the big club, I'll bring him up, regardless of his OVR.

For example, if I have a kid named Lou Encarnacion with 70+ Power but 30-ish contact and a 68 or so OVR. If Duncan got hurt (50/80 vs RHP), I'd bring him up over Podsednik or another contact-first hitter, who is the exact opposite of a player and I need power in the lineup.

Same for if a pitcher goes down, say Price. I'm not looking at OVR, I'm looking at pitch arsenal (both in number of pitches and likely ability to change speeds), and their control/velocity/movement ratings mostly and then H/9, K/9.

I don't look at OVR for anything, just individual skills, which is where the player's actual performance is going to come from and makes up the skill profile of the player.

For me, that's how I "justify" a lower OVR player over a higher one.

Hiding player ratings completely would take away a realistic piece of information. Stats alone do not tell you the type of player, especially early in the year (and especially if the sim engine doesn't produce very realistic stats like some have said as franchise goes on).

The removal of overall would definitely make this game more interesting but id like to suggest a nother idea. Instead of viewing player ratings on the player card it should be a scouting report which goes over the different skills and has some type of broad rating or saying about the players skill so we get an idea of what your teams scouts think but dont get a 86 number to show up. I hate 100 - 0 ratings so much for anything in a sports game i think they are so ridiculous.

A scouting report, assuming it's relatively accurate to the player would be cool. If it's just words vs numbers - no opinion here, as long as there's some information about player skills and if I have to hire a good scout to give it a high chance of being accurate, that's cool.

(i.e. don't make it like OOTP6's scouting blurb that often called players great or whatnot when they are average or with no consideration for the environment of the league - you're in a pitching league and "60" might be one of the highest HR power ratings, but the scout is still calling him "average power")

[tessl]

Re: How should players be rated in next gen?

A bigger issue for me is how each category impacts hitting and pitching. For example I see a rating for control and another one for bb/9. They would seem to be the same but they must serve different functions or they wouldn't exist separately.

I'd like to see a detailed explanation of what each category does.

If I know a guy has an 80 bb/9 and a 70 control or an 80 contact and a 60 vision but I don't know what those categories mean then I still don't know much.

[MrOldboy]

Re: How should players be rated in next gen?

I feel the issue isn't with the current 100-0 scale, its how the overall rating for that player is calculated and then scaled against other players. I'd like to see a lot less 99 players and the whole scale being used instead of only the top half of it.

But for prospects and scouting I'd love to only see the 20-80 scale early in their careers. There can be the 100-0 point scale for their individual skill ratings, but I'd much rather only the 20-80 scout scale be presented to the player during scouting/drafting and the early part of the player's minor league career. As you get to know your prospects better (and other team's prospects) then more of the ratings can be presented. But early on I'd much rather just see a few categories (Speed, Power, Contact, Fielding, Arm) on the 20-80 scale.

I actually prefer there to be some sort of overall rating for players, but I do wish that they would scale dynamically based on the highest and lowest rated players in MLB and even for players at each MiLB level. I'd love to go into manage players and see all the AA players scaled to eachother with the top rated player at 99 and everyone else below them. Of course people would always disagree on how SCEA came up with the formula for the overall ratings, but I prefer there to be some value to differentiate players easily at a glance.

[saturn2187]

Re: How should players be rated in next gen?

i say they take out the "overall" rating but leave the component ratings as is. This way if you're a player that values contact and power, but dont need speed with your style of play, you can draft or trade with those pieces in mind. Likewise, a slow slugger wouldn't have an "Overall" number dragged down due to being leadfooted.

It would make drafting more interesting as you'd have to really focus more on building a team identity rather than just grabbing the next highest rated guy.
Likewise, when drafting now if you look at overall , you could miss a guy who rakes vs LHP but is poor vs RHP. His overall ratings wouldn't be very good, but he could actually be an important player.

[MrFatMark]

Re: How should players be rated in next gen?

i say they take out the "overall" rating but leave the component ratings as is. This way if you're a player that values contact and power, but dont need speed with your style of play, you can draft or trade with those pieces in mind. Likewise, a slow slugger wouldn't have an "Overall" number dragged down due to being leadfooted.

It would make drafting more interesting as you'd have to really focus more on building a team identity rather than just grabbing the next highest rated guy.
Likewise, when drafting now if you look at overall , you could miss a guy who rakes vs LHP but is poor vs RHP. His overall ratings wouldn't be very good, but he could actually be an important player.

I could definately be on board with this.