[nomo17k]

Quote: Originally Posted by pistolpete

I heard the only athletes left on Earth who are judged by watching them play are offensive linemen. The rest are done with ratings extrapolated from statistics. Dude, it's 2013. Number ratings are where it is at. You can do a lot with number ratings. Divide an overall by an expected salary and there you have a value. 17 99s could also be meaningless because it's a number derived from an algorithm. It may mean nothing to how the games are played on the field.

No, it's not quite the same thing to say that a player can be rated numerically and that a player's true skill can be rated at all. As anyone who deals with statistics in life knows, all such activities come up with *estimates* of what the numbers should represent.

I have no issues with MLB scout using 20 - 80 scale to rate players.

But I have an issue with exposing player ratings in a game like this, only because that's actually the true skill of the player. A Contact = 66 player should hit .255 on average, since the game is actually tuned precisely to produce such a player.

Unless I'm doing editing, I really don't want to know that much detail about a player. It takes fun away from me.