O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

[sink4ever]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

We are hoping the OSFM will be based off the Hybrid ratings. The prospect ratings come from Steamer and Oliver and give a very accurate base to start from or just plain use

Ah, that's good to hear. I think I misread your original post when you linked to the spreadsheet, for some reason I thought you meant we were just to use those exact ratings with no latitude at all. I appreciate the heck out of Teeds' work and definitely plan to rely heavily on it, but I'm glad to hear that there's a little room for us to adjust slightly based on our own evaluations.

It is really good that we have a base to work from so the whole project can be a little more unified in our approach to rating players. Thanks again to you guys for all your work.

[Willard76]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

Ah, that's good to hear. I think I misread your original post when you linked to the spreadsheet, for some reason I thought you meant we were just to use those exact ratings with no latitude at all. I appreciate the heck out of Teeds' work and definitely plan to rely heavily on it, but I'm glad to hear that there's a little room for us to adjust slightly based on our own evaluations.



It is really good that we have a base to work from so the whole project can be a little more unified in our approach to rating players. Thanks again to you guys for all your work.

I think wiggle room is probably the best way to put it because the ratings Teeds has researched are probably close but I found they are off in some cases when it comes to raw skills because they basically translate what a player would do with his current league numbers applied to the bigs. With higher level players the ratings get more accurate. So keep this in mind.

[teeds]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

Ah, that's good to hear. I think I misread your original post when you linked to the spreadsheet, for some reason I thought you meant we were just to use those exact ratings with no latitude at all. I appreciate the heck out of Teeds' work and definitely plan to rely heavily on it, but I'm glad to hear that there's a little room for us to adjust slightly based on our own evaluations.

It is really good that we have a base to work from so the whole project can be a little more unified in our approach to rating players. Thanks again to you guys for all your work.

Keep in mind that the purpose of the spreadsheet is to create a community discussion on player ratings so we can come to some sort of unified consensus. I did not rate every single minor leaguer on here. Much of this is carry over from last years osfm contributions. Granted there are instances where myself, Willard, or WTNY rerated a guy that we felt was misrepresented. I'm hoping to have more of a discussion on player ratings and will always lend an ear to anyone whose input is reasonable and supported by research and analysis.

Here's to hoping we can begin having these discussions for any player from any organization.

[Ivanhoe]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

Keep in mind that the purpose of the spreadsheet is to create a community discussion on player ratings so we can come to some sort of unified consensus. I did not rate every single minor leaguer on here. Much of this is carry over from last years osfm contributions. Granted there are instances where myself, Willard, or WTNY rerated a guy that we felt was misrepresented. I'm hoping to have more of a discussion on player ratings and will always lend an ear to anyone whose input is reasonable and supported by research and analysis.

Here's to hoping we can begin having these discussions for any player from any organization.

Should we post our comment, concerns, questions and praise in this thread or should we PM you directly?

[seanjeezy]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

I'm currently working on some ratings related stuff, in the meantime here's one I worked on last year:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwsJ...VjNldUU1U/edit

These are both pitching btw

So a quick example: Kershaw had a weighted 6.49 H/9 from 2011-2013 - plug that in and you get 84, which isn't too far off his default rating of 87. Conversely, that would be well above a 99 on Knight's charts, modified or otherwise.

Plug in 8.20 for Felix and you get ~68.56 vs 68 stock.

AVG has a slightly higher correlation and is therefore slightly more accurate. -420(.198)+169 = 85.84 for Kershaw vs 87 stock. -420(.241)+169 = 67.78 vs 68 stock for Felix.

[redsox4evur]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

Keep in mind that the purpose of the spreadsheet is to create a community discussion on player ratings so we can come to some sort of unified consensus. I did not rate every single minor leaguer on here. Much of this is carry over from last years osfm contributions. Granted there are instances where myself, Willard, or WTNY rerated a guy that we felt was misrepresented. I'm hoping to have more of a discussion on player ratings and will always lend an ear to anyone whose input is reasonable and supported by research and analysis.

Here's to hoping we can begin having these discussions for any player from any organization.

I didn't use the hybrid last year. But going based off of the regular set, Mookie Betts was underrated. He may have changed as the year went on. I think he was around a 56 or so. I am probably off with that rating.

[teeds]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

Should we post our comment, concerns, questions and praise in this thread or should we PM you directly?

Good question, I don't know. There are a couple things we could consider: 1) New thread for ratings discussion, 2) PM, but that would limit input from others, 3) Use google chat through the spreadsheet.

I'm currently working on some ratings related stuff, in the meantime here's one I worked on last year:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwsJ...VjNldUU1U/edit

These are both pitching btw

So a quick example: Kershaw had a weighted 6.49 H/9 from 2011-2013 - plug that in and you get 84, which isn't too far off his default rating of 87. Conversely, that would be well above a 99 on Knight's charts, modified or otherwise.

Plug in 8.20 for Felix and you get ~68.56 vs 68 stock.

AVG has a slightly higher correlation and is therefore slightly more accurate. -420(.198)+169 = 85.84 for Kershaw vs 87 stock. -420(.241)+169 = 67.78 vs 68 stock for Felix.

This looks promising. What sort of stats were you getting with these H/9. If I recall correctly we had to -10 the /9 zips projections last year to raise the offensive stats. Have you done numbers from 2011-2014 or 2012-2014 yet?

I didn't use the hybrid last year. But going based off of the regular set, Mookie Betts was underrated. He may have changed as the year went on. I think he was around a 56 or so. I am probably off with that rating.

I don't remember our overall (as if it matters much) but we had Betts higher. We also have new speed and fielding ratings for Betts this year and still have to take a look at his projected offense.

[seanjeezy]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

This looks promising. What sort of stats were you getting with these H/9. If I recall correctly we had to -10 the /9 zips projections last year to raise the offensive stats. Have you done numbers from 2011-2014 or 2012-2014 yet?

Basically I'm just trying to get a better understanding of The Show's rating methodology, I haven't really applied them to anything yet outside of my own players.

Relievers also seem to have a different scale for certain ratings, I'm planning to investigate that as well.

[Willard76]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

Thought this was pretty cool. Tomas being rendered today for the game, not sure if it's for this year or next

[RyanLaFalce]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

Thought this was pretty cool. Tomas being rendered today for the game, not sure if it's for this year or next

It better be for this year. Lol

Sent From My Galaxy S7

[Willard76]

O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

It better be for this year. Lol

Sent From My Galaxy S7

I am doubtful, but I can promise the one we have created for our set thanks to Motown looks as good if not better than the real thing

[RyanLaFalce]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

Madden and NBA Live have added in scans as the year went on.

Sent From My Galaxy S7

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

Keep in mind that the purpose of the spreadsheet is to create a community discussion on player ratings so we can come to some sort of unified consensus. I did not rate every single minor leaguer on here. Much of this is carry over from last years osfm contributions. Granted there are instances where myself, Willard, or WTNY rerated a guy that we felt was misrepresented. I'm hoping to have more of a discussion on player ratings and will always lend an ear to anyone whose input is reasonable and supported by research and analysis.

Here's to hoping we can begin having these discussions for any player from any organization.

Definitely. Teeds, Willard, and I have made a hobby of chewing the fat about ratings. One of the Hybrid roster's greatest strengths is the discussion that precedes ratings adjustments.

Should we post our comment, concerns, questions and praise in this thread or should we PM you directly?

I can't speak for teeds, but I would say it depends on the scale of the comments, concerns, questions, and praise. If it's all praise, then definitely need a thread for that....

But, seriously, if it's a quick one off thing, then a PM is probably a better idea. If it's a series of things, then a thread might be called for.

I'm currently working on some ratings related stuff, in the meantime here's one I worked on last year:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BwsJ...VjNldUU1U/edit

These are both pitching btw

So a quick example: Kershaw had a weighted 6.49 H/9 from 2011-2013 - plug that in and you get 84, which isn't too far off his default rating of 87. Conversely, that would be well above a 99 on Knight's charts, modified or otherwise.

Plug in 8.20 for Felix and you get ~68.56 vs 68 stock.

AVG has a slightly higher correlation and is therefore slightly more accurate. -420(.198)+169 = 85.84 for Kershaw vs 87 stock. -420(.241)+169 = 67.78 vs 68 stock for Felix.

In theory, I like the idea of linear correlation here, but one of the great strengths of Knight's scales is that the ratings generated in that way give sim stats that made sense for the player. There's a good chance that if you make a completely new linear scale, you will need to normalize it to the game's sim engine so that players perform properly. Last season, I redid the pitching /9 spreadsheets so that the sim stats were better for league averages (3.74 ERA in the NL and 3.93 ERA in the AL among many, many other variables I was looking for).

I didn't use the hybrid last year. But going based off of the regular set, Mookie Betts was underrated. He may have changed as the year went on. I think he was around a 56 or so. I am probably off with that rating.

Mookie is a 73 OVR as a primary CF in the latest hybrid edition.

Madden and NBA Live have added in scans as the year went on.

Sent From My Galaxy S7

Apples and oranges are 2 of my favorite fruits!

[ShowTyme15]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

Thought this was pretty cool. Tomas being rendered today for the game, not sure if it's for this year or next

It'll be for next year. He won't even be in an SCEA roster update until after the 1st week and SCEA doesn't add facial scans during the year. The Tomas Motown did was killer.

I uploaded a roster today that has Roberto Baldoquin and Dian Toscano (also has Tomas) that were created by fairplayleagues if you want to check them out.

[seanjeezy]

Re: O.S.F.M. 2015 Recruiting(joint ops with Hybrid Set)

In theory, I like the idea of linear correlation here, but one of the great strengths of Knight's scales is that the ratings generated in that way give sim stats that made sense for the player. There's a good chance that if you make a completely new linear scale, you will need to normalize it to the game's sim engine so that players perform properly. Last season, I redid the pitching /9 spreadsheets so that the sim stats were better for league averages (3.74 ERA in the NL and 3.93 ERA in the AL among many, many other variables I was looking for).

Knight's charts are supposed to based off of the default ratings though, its just that they haven't been updated to reflect any changes to the ratings formulas in a long time. That's what I'm trying to do - find out what the exact changes are and update the charts to better reflect the default MLB ratings.

teeds even mentioned that a global edit was necessary to bring up the offense - that's alone says that Knight's charts need to be updated. Just taking a cursory look at the chart vs the default ratings, I can see contact, power, vision, and discipline potentially shifting to the right 1 standard deviation. Using Castro as an example, He has a 42/39 power rating which would equate to 11-12 HR's on Knight's chart, when his true weighted numbers put him in the 9-10 range (one standard deviation below). Same thing happens with Cano (default ratings) and numerous others across all hitting ratings, so there is some clout to my hypothesis. I just need to analyze the data and fit a line, and if it isn't that strong then a hotfix (like moving every category 1 to the right) will suffice.