MLB 13 The Show Player Ratings For Every Team

[Cavicchi]

Quote: Originally Posted by nomo17k

Well how do you know SCEA only used one year stats for Harper? I don't think they did... Clutch is a terrible attribute which shouldn't be in a simulation game to begin with..... in real life there's little evidence that clutch ability actually exists (even if it did, it's small enough not to be observed by us, which makes it irrelevant in evaluating players).... My guess as to why Freese got a 99 rating for Clutch is purely for an entertainment purpose. This is a game, and seeing the phenomenal performance in that World Series, everyone (except sabermetrics type) expects Freese to be *the* Clutch guy. SCEA just catered to that crowd by giving him what people expect. (In 2011 he did hit well in RISP, but then in 2012, Freese IRL went on to hit .275 in RISP, hitting .293 overall for the year.... is that clutch? I don't think so....) .... and Trout having 72 for Power isn't totally unreasonable. If I go by the green line in the plot that I had earlier for HR/H for Power rating, he would've been rated at 67 Power for RHP (assuming 16.1% of his hits were HRs). So SCEA seemed to rate him higher than his 2012 stats against RHB suggests.....

They cater to the crowd? Well, that is not a reasonable approach to rating a player.

I am not interested in what major league players do in the minors when they have a full year in the majors. Trout has shown more power against RHP in the majors based on comparing both Harper and Trout in their full rookie seasons in the majors, and to me that is end of story.

[nomo17k]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cavicchi

They cater to the crowd? Well, that is not a reasonable approach to rating a player. I am not interested in what major league players do in the minors when they have a full year in the majors. Trout has shown more power against RHP in the majors based on comparing both Harper and Trout in their full rookie seasons in the majors, and to me that is end of story.

Well I have been just trying to provide a perspective as to why player raters may use more stats than just one year... If you don't agree, then all we can is just to agree to disagree... hahaha...

But just insisting on using the stats from the limited service time in majors won't change anything though. I find it unfortunate that you didn't find my Cecil Fielder post any useful (since I spend quite a few minutes digging info and writing it, hahaha...), but there's a reason why some people try hard to come up with player evaluation scheme using minor league stats as well (i.e., major-league equivalent stats and so forth.....)... that's because when a player has been playing the game of baseball *somewhere* (in minors, in Japan, in Taiwan, in DR, etc...), his performance and stats do reflect some aspect of his abilities.... the quality of baseball might be different, but it's still baseball, so for those who want to evaluate talent better, those data points are relevant.

... and after all, that's partly why MLB clubs keep players at the minor league level... to evaluate them to see how they perform at the MLB level.

[Cavicchi]

Quote: Originally Posted by nomo17k

Well I have been just trying to provide a perspective as to why player raters may use more stats than just one year... If you don't agree, then all we can is just to agree to disagree... hahaha... But just insisting on using the stats from the limited service time in majors won't change anything though. I find it unfortunate that you didn't find my Cecil Fielder post any useful (since I spend quite a few minutes digging info and writing it, hahaha...), but there's a reason why some people try hard to come up with player evaluation scheme using minor league stats as well (i.e., major-league equivalent stats and so forth.....)... that's because when a player has been playing the game of baseball *somewhere* (in minors, in Japan, in Taiwan, in DR, etc...), his performance and stats do reflect some aspect of his abilities.... the quality of baseball might be different, but it's still baseball, so for those who want to evaluate talent better, those data points are relevant. ... and after all, that's partly why MLB clubs keep players at the minor league level... to evaluate them to see how they perform at the MLB level.

I am fairly certain they used limited first year rookie stats to rate Harper, and they did not to the same for Trout.

Chapman being a 99 is another example of failed rating, not even based on limited, but rather based on assumption.

Freese is another example of rating based on limited work.

The defense rests.

[Woodcutta]

I agree that some players overall ratings are a tad off. That being said the way they play when simmed doesn't always go by their overall. Chapman is a 99 to start the season yet in my franchise he has a ERA over 5.00 and won't sniff 200 K's. Also, the problem posed by trying to rate Chapman is that when he is on he makes hitters look silly but he can have command issues at times. Looking at his individual breakdown, the ratings for Chapman aren't crazy. His velocity isn't even maxed out. Trout has been in the MVP race the entire year and will most likely win the Silver Slugger for his position. Harper is also having a good year and has hit more HR but Harper is supposed to have more power. In high school Harper had "extreme" power and has always been seen as having plus to plus-plus power while it has taken time for Trout to develop his power. 2011 was the first time Trout showed any signs he would hit more home runs than projected. Still, the ratings may need to be adjusted but you have that ability. Also, if there needs to be an adjustment made during the season (for online play) the roster update *should* take care of it.

[Cavicchi]

Quote: Originally Posted by Woodcutta

I agree that some players overall ratings are a tad off. That being said the way they play when simmed doesn't always go by their overall. Chapman is a 99 to start the season yet in my franchise he has a ERA over 5.00 and won't sniff 200 K's. Also, the problem posed by trying to rate Chapman is that when he is on he makes hitters look silly but he can have command issues at times. Looking at his individual breakdown, the ratings for Chapman aren't crazy. His velocity isn't even maxed out. Trout has been in the MVP race the entire year and will most likely win the Silver Slugger for his position. Harper is also having a good year and has hit more HR but Harper is supposed to have more power. In high school Harper had "extreme" power and has always been seen as having plus to plus-plus power while it has taken time for Trout to develop his power. 2011 was the first time Trout showed any signs he would hit more home runs than projected. Still, the ratings may need to be adjusted but you have that ability. Also, if there needs to be an adjustment made during the season (for online play) the roster update *should* take care of it.

I don't see why one needs to bring up high school stats when major league stats are available, and Trout has the advantage at this time in major league stats for home runs and slugging. So, no, I don't agree that Harper should be rated higher for power, at least not until I see him prove it at the major league level.

[Woodcutta]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cavicchi

I don't see why one needs to bring up high school stats when major league stats are available, and Trout has the advantage at this time in major league stats for home runs and slugging. So, no, I don't agree that Harper should be rated higher for power, at least not until I see him prove it at the major league level.

I didn't "bring up" any high school stats. My point was Harper has always been seen by both scouts and the lay baseball fan as having at least plus power while Trout hasn't. Not only that but Harper got more extra base hits per at bat versus RHP last year (power isn't just home hitting ability). I would expect Harper to eventually hit more home runs and doubles than Trout per year as he continues to adjust to the major league level.

[Cavicchi]

Quote: Originally Posted by Woodcutta

I didn't "bring up" any high school stats. My point was Harper has always been seen by both scouts and the lay baseball fan as having at least plus power while Trout hasn't. Not only that but Harper got more extra base hits per at bat versus RHP last year (power isn't just home hitting ability). I would expect Harper to eventually hit more home runs and doubles than Trout per year as he continues to adjust to the major league level.

Well, to me, home runs is more pertinent to power than doubles.