Average Contact?

[niles08]

I've wondered this year, and now that I think about it even into previous versions, when looking at different attributes, what is average?

For instance is a 50 contact vs RH's going to produce an avg. that is compared to the league average hitter against RH? Like a .260(I think that's average) average? Is a 50 HR vs RH's rating going to equal an average HR hitter?(10?) or is a 70 more of an average and a 50 is poor? Same with pitching...What's average?

I realize that a lot of players have contact ratings in the high 90's but those are clearly only the best of the best.

I'm sorry if I confused with my questions, I just have always neglected bringing up players from the minors who had a 50 or 60 contact/power rating.

[Ghost Of The Year]

I too have wondered what SDS uses as average. I mess around and create a lot of different teams from different years and I go with 65 as average.

[cardinalbird5]

Well isn't the average BA now around .245 to .250?

Yeah I checked and the MLB average is .251 this year. I really feel like 60 is the "average", but things like power, plate vision, plate discipline, and speed affect your hitting as well.

I know Chris Carter has 50-55 contact and he usually hits under .250, but in the game I can hit .260 to .270 since he has such good power. His PCI is small, but if you square it up then the ball is hit hard and further.

Here is my feel for it:
90-99 contact= .320 average and up
80-89= .300-.319 avg
70-79= .280-.299
60-69=.260-.279
50-59=.240-259
40-49=.220-.239
30-39=.200-.219 (This should be Dunn and Carter's contact IMO)
20-29= .180-.199
10-19= .160- .179
Below 10= .159 or lower (pitchers)

I don't think it is really that linear though. I wish their ratings were more widely distributed. A .250 BA is the MLB AVG, but that includes pitchers and poor hitting catchers and back ups. If you hit .250 as a regular every day starter then to me that is below average. You also rarely see guys that have 10-49 contact in the game. The average contact for every day starters is probably in that 60-69 range.

I also don't believe contact directly translates into BA. BA relies a lot on luck, your ability to time and hit the ball, and the opposing defense. The contact rating to me, means more of a LD pct if you get the ball near the center of the PCI.

I believe the power attribute is the most important to me. I can turn guys like Carter and Dunn into good average guys because they hit it so hard.

[JTommy67]

I'm in the process of working on my new ratings calculator, and I examined their assigned ratings in great detail. When comparing three-year weighted averages to default ratings through a scatter plot, the highest correlation coefficient can be achieved with a line that hits the following points for vs. RHP:


(These numbers were gleaned from looking at all MLB players on their roster, including FAs, and using the top 50% in terms of plate appearances over the three year period.)

99 - .336
87 - .309
75 - .281
63 - .253
50 - .223
37 - .192
25 - .165

It's no surprise, then to learn that the mean contact rating is 63. No position player is below 25, despite some having averages below .165, so that must be the lower limit.

The scale for vs. LHP is similar, but the ends are stretched out, presumably to compensate for fewer at-bats which means less regression towards the mean.

The correlation coefficient (vs. R) works out to about .945 ( a value of 1 is a perfect correlation). Understand that it appears they also take other factors into consideration, most notably the amount of MLB data they have for the guy. If he has fewer seasons from which to draw it looks like they use an expected batting average of some kind and/or minor league statistics, and possibly even some generic appearance scaling. Additionally, some selected players seem to have been modified even when they have three full seasons in the majors. Could be park factors or whatnot. I looked at all kinds of statistics for outliers but as of yet have found no consistency as to what statistic correlates with their deviation from the standard scale.

[RogueHominid]

I wish they would publish info on this. I look at 55 Contact as the cutoff for whether I can play a guy long-term, with the exception of that one player per lineup that I only care about having a good glove.

[Balla Da Le Playa]

Quote: Originally Posted by JTommy67

99 - .336 87 - .309 75 - .281 63 - .253 50 - .223 37 - .192 25 - .165 It's no surprise, then to learn that the mean contact rating is 63. No position player is below 25, despite some having averages below .165, so that must be the lower limit.

This mostly works for me because a rating of 0-24 should be for pitchers who hit under .165, though I would like to see the high of 99 be for hitters who hit above .350 but that's a small and minor wish.