Ratings are off - not sliders per se

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • NEOPARADIGM
    Banned
    • Jul 2009
    • 2788

    #1

    Ratings are off - not sliders per se

    Working theory, so take it with a grain of salt, but I'm noticing more and more that ratings are way off for tons and tons of guys.

    Now, granted, you don't want to have to re-rate the entire freaking game, but in terms of your own players, doing a proper scouting report can have an amazing effect on both your perception of an in-game player and their performance.

    I can only use my team as an example, but a guy like Jose Eglesias is an extremely suspect hitter. My roster (one of the OSFMs) had his contact ratings way the hell up in the high 70s, maybe even 80s. Moreover, it had his vision rating at 92 (!!!). Just the other day, Dan & Jim (Tigers radio guys) were saying how he LACKED plate vison. This causes cognitive dissonance. In turn, opppsed to adjusting the contact slider, I gave Jose 58 contact vs righties, 66 contact vs lefties, and 60 vision.

    Now his skill set, however arbitrary, fits my perception of him; he's perfect. Now I can relax and let him play out as he will, opposed to thinking my sliders are off.

    Point being, do this with every player you can. Give zero cares about where the game or OSFM rated a guy and rate him according YOUR understanding of his skill set.

    Again, no one's gonna want to do this the league over, but to just get your team nailed down, ratings-wise, in accordance with how YOU understand each player should be performing, trumps slider-tweaks.

    * * *

    Slider-tweaks are easy. Stuff like fielder run speed at 2 and starter-stamina to 6 or 7 are face-value changes. But getting the players' ratings in-line with how YOU understand them is way more important.
  • JBMillz14
    Rookie
    • Jan 2017
    • 141

    #2
    Re: Ratings are off - not sliders per se

    Just use OSFM Hybrid rosters.


    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    MLB: St. Louis Cardinals
    NCAA D1: Notre Dame Fighting Irish , Dayton Flyers
    NCAA D3: Amherst College Mammoths
    PSN: JBMILLZ14
    Twitter: @JBMillz14

    Comment

    • NEOPARADIGM
      Banned
      • Jul 2009
      • 2788

      #3
      Re: Ratings are off - not sliders per se

      Originally posted by JBMillz14
      Just use OSFM Hybrid rosters.
      was making a point about the psychological relation between sliders and ratings; the roster you're using is immaterial.

      Comment

      • No.27
        Pro
        • Dec 2015
        • 543

        #4
        Re: Ratings are off - not sliders per se

        Originally posted by NEOPARADIGM
        was making a point about the psychological relation between sliders and ratings; the roster you're using is immaterial.
        Very interesting concept. I tried this with my MLB 15 Fictional Red Sox but ended up making them unbeatable! How do you moderate your new ratings against the rest of the League?

        Comment

        • squashbuggie
          Banned
          • Dec 2016
          • 371

          #5
          download the edits I made to OSFM, V-2.75 and all is well.

          Comment

          • loso_34
            MVP
            • Jul 2010
            • 1346

            #6
            Re: Ratings are off - not sliders per se

            when the tigers played toronto about a week ago the commentators mentioned iglesias was like top 3 in the league in terms of putting the ball in play. he had a very high contact rate.

            Comment

            • Cycloniac
              Man, myth, legend.
              • May 2009
              • 6505

              #7
              Re: Ratings are off - not sliders per se

              Originally posted by NEOPARADIGM
              Working theory, so take it with a grain of salt, but I'm noticing more and more that ratings are way off for tons and tons of guys.

              Now, granted, you don't want to have to re-rate the entire freaking game, but in terms of your own players, doing a proper scouting report can have an amazing effect on both your perception of an in-game player and their performance.

              I can only use my team as an example, but a guy like Jose Eglesias is an extremely suspect hitter. My roster (one of the OSFMs) had his contact ratings way the hell up in the high 70s, maybe even 80s. Moreover, it had his vision rating at 92 (!!!). Just the other day, Dan & Jim (Tigers radio guys) were saying how he LACKED plate vison. This causes cognitive dissonance. In turn, opppsed to adjusting the contact slider, I gave Jose 58 contact vs righties, 66 contact vs lefties, and 60 vision.

              Now his skill set, however arbitrary, fits my perception of him; he's perfect. Now I can relax and let him play out as he will, opposed to thinking my sliders are off.

              Point being, do this with every player you can. Give zero cares about where the game or OSFM rated a guy and rate him according YOUR understanding of his skill set.

              Again, no one's gonna want to do this the league over, but to just get your team nailed down, ratings-wise, in accordance with how YOU understand each player should be performing, trumps slider-tweaks.

              * * *

              Slider-tweaks are easy. Stuff like fielder run speed at 2 and starter-stamina to 6 or 7 are face-value changes. But getting the players' ratings in-line with how YOU understand them is way more important.
              My response to this is that your interpretations of the ratings and the players are different from those who rated them.

              As one person noted, Iglesias has a high contact rate. He puts the ball in play a lot. However, not necessarily for great average.

              Another part of this is that "vision" means something else in-game than what I expected to mean, which is a good example. I would expect vision to mean eye, which is how well a batter can read pitches/see the strike zone i.e. vision would correlate with walk rate, rather than swings and misses. However, MLBTS uses discipline for that.

              So, if you wanted to look at Iglesias and saw his contact rating high, I would just think that the persons who rated him used say contact percentage, rather than batting average.

              Whether you agree with the stats used is up for debate
              THE TrueSim PROJECTS



              Comment

              Working...