Just wondering if anyone remembers this being mentioned this year. It seems that they are keeping Inside Edge, but one of the problems was that it would go off of the last 3 year's stats for veterans and young guys would be underrated. For instance, Shawn Green, Lo Duca, and Delgado all had ratings in the 80's or 90's. Delgado I understand, he has been really good til the past year. But the other two were not expected to produce better than average at their positions, but since they had had good years earlier they were given high ratings. So the Mets were way better than they actually were in real life. Do you think this has been addressed, and young players have a better chance to improve during the year while older guys start to decline?
-
-
Re: Player ratings
I think whatever system they use there is going to be backlash.
Using three years at least gives them an explanation of why a player is overrated instead of well, we just pulled it out of a hat. Write or wrong, at least there is some sort of statistcal reasoning for a rating.
And the errors are going to work both ways. There are players who are going to have breakout seasons that the game isn't going to take into account and other players whose peaks are behind them that are going to perform better than they're real life counterpart.
Look at Frank Thomas when he signed with Oakland, most people had written him off and he had a solid year. Last year, look at Dontrelle Willis, he went the other way. How could the game have predicted either of these based on 3 years? So there is obviously some flaws to the system.
There is just no way for the game to predict how players are going to progress or digress in real life and they are always going to make some errors.
The bottom line is you could line up 10 people and have them rate a guy like Pujols and probably see ratings differ by 10 points. -
Re: Player ratings
this is the biggest issue with video game baseball
in real life the game is full of RANDOMNESS & STREAKINESS
the video games will always struggle with those two facets of the game
i always laugh when the slider discussions have a guy play 1 GAME & get all pissy that so - & so didn't do this or that "like they do in real life"
slider testing should include a minimum of 10 games before judging their effectivness (that's how i do mine)Bummed that you're not on my ignore list yet?.....Don't worry, I'm sure you will be very soon.Comment
-
Re: Player ratings
It's not that I want them to pull ratings out of their butt. But if you have a guy like Ryan Church, you want to take into account the last two years, not before that, because he's fairly young and should produce the same or better through the rest of his prime. If you have a guy like Shawn Green, you want to take into account the last year, because he's clearly declining in skills and since he's 35 that should be accounted for. I would prefer the young players be bumped a little higher than their stats, and the older players be bumped down a little.
Frank Thomas was rated pretty highly in the game. Willis was rated what I would expect, he had a bad year this year but the guy is still capable of being really good.Comment
-
Re: Player ratings
I wish there were no ratings at all.
Instead they need to go to a skill-set or tools system, ala All Pro Football.
Every player should have certain skills that are better than their counterparts...such as making contact, or power. Maybe defensively a guy can turn an excellent double play, or run-down flyballs really well.
Hide these ratings, but maybe give the players an scouting report in their player card for what they are really good at.
This will make developing minor leaguers more fun, and it will make trades more risky/realistic.Comment
-
Re: Player ratings
OP you suck (j/k)...I thought this was a thread showing all the player ratings for MLB 2K8.Originally posted by Edmund BurkeComment
-
Re: Player ratings
The more I think about this, the more I wonder if it would work from baseball. Initally, there are only a few actual measurable statistics (really just runner speed and pitching velocity) .But I think what seperates baseball from football is in football with only a 16 game season, one or two bad games can be the difference between 1500 rushing yards and 1200 yards. In baeball, 2 bad games may be the difference between 145 RBI's abd 148 RBI's, not a huge jump. With baseball you have the law of averages on your side.
Also, in football you have 11 completely different positions on offense in which there are maybe a handful of traits that seperate players (for a WR, you have the ability to catch the ball, to jump high, to run fast and a few other things First, in baseball, everyone plays the same offensive position (hitter/batter/runner). This makes things easier and trickier at the same time.
It's easier because every hitter would have the same set of abilities to draw from, but trickier because the abilities that belong to offense are very diverse and there are so many different levels that would coincide with each.
Because of this you need more attributes, but you definitely need many more levels. In baseball there is a huge difference between a .350 hitter, a .320 hitter, a .300 hitter, a .280 hitter, a .250 hitter and a .220 hitter. You could argue that every 7-10 HR's is another level of power. 50 is much different from 40 from 30, from 20. etc., etc.
Also, with baseball, you could argue that even if a player is injured for 1/2 or even 2/3 of a season, you would still have a decent enough sample size to project a full year (200-300 AB's).
I guess my concern is how do you define the difference between the .250 hitter and the .280 hitter? It seems neither would be deserving of a hitting ability? What about a pitcher who walks 2 guys a game and another who walks 3 times a game. What about a guy who throws 90 and 93? Or a weak curveball vs. an average curveball?
Off the top of my head, it seems that there are so many hitters that wouldn't deserve any "attributes", but what would make them stand out from one another?
It'd be fun to discuss and hear what you had in mind. I'm just brainstorming with what comes to my mind.
I just think with baseball, you have enough stats available to make a pretty good numerical assessment/comparison of a player.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Last edited by Trevytrev11; 01-29-2008, 05:01 PM.Comment
-
Kansas City Royals | FC Barcelona | New Orleans Pelicans
PSN ID: cma1093 | Xbox Gamertag: Cabke
Comment
-
Re: Player ratings
The system needs to be two fold, ala the old Tony La Russa PC baseball games of yesteryear.
In TLR the premise was that a players acual on field production was based on both on Satistical results & a skill set of ratings.
For instance, you could have a young up & commer who hit .250-4-12 in 100 AB's his rookie season, but has a POWER RATING of 9 (TLR used a 1-12 scale, IIRC). In game this would translate into a raw, but potentially dangerous hitter.
TLR also was awesome in the sense that it suppored a Hot/Cold streak system, so a player could have GREAT skills & stats, but be marked as a extremely streaky player, which would make him less predictable game to game during a season. Streaks/consistency/randomness is such a crucial component of a baseball video game, I can't believe that 2K hasn't made a system to replicate the total & complete game-to-game randomness that occurs in real life baseball.
Basically, it incorporated a SKILL SET of ratings (ala Hattrick.org for sim football management) and traditional satistical analysis.
2K really needs to get familiar with the work of Bill James (Baseball Prospectus), he has a proven method to predict the likelyhood of improvement or decline (i.e. Shawn Green) by taking into account age, skills, stats, environment etc.Comment
-
Re: Player ratings
I really hope this was 1 of the things they worked on. The over/under rating of players is slowly killing this seriesComment
-
Re: Player ratings
http://forums.operationsports.com/vB...d.php?t=227028
I'm not posting that so much because I'm looking for help in actually rerating the rosters - I think I'll end up doing it by myself - but more because I hope to generate more interest.
Just something to look at
.
Would love any input!Comment
-
Re: Player ratings
the main stat thing that gets me is how all the rookies, even ones that have hit 30-40 homeruns in a minor league season, seem to have F power. the young teams are even worse then they are in real life, and when you are a fan of a not great young team its frustrating to see them turned even worse.
i follow the rangers, and at the end of 2k7 they had like 1 star across the board as if they were some 120 loss team instead of the mediocre mid 70s wins team they are.Comment
Comment