Quote:
Originally Posted by Mets Man
So in short, for potential ratings, the scouts tend to overrate talent more than underrate talent. However, scouts still DO underrate talent, just not all that much. For current ratings, this does not hold true, for current ratings, scouts can underrate and overrate just as equally often (roughly).
|
I'm glad you brought this up. I meant to break down ranges of ratings and forgot about it.
Below is a summary only for my best scout (this is a little too much to post on every scout) which shows how many players were rated within a specific range. That way we can see how many players were underrated and how many were overrated and by how far (gives a better idea of the distribution). For the ratings that were supposed to be equal to 45, there seemed to be a lot that were rated 46, so to prevent showing deceiving numbers I made a range of 44-46 (and 54-56 for the ones that are supposed to be 55). If I didn't do this, a lot more players would be categorized as overrated even though they were only off by 1.
Current Ratings:
PHP Code:
Range Con Gap Pow Eye AvK
25-29 0 1 0 0 0
30-34 2 1 4 2 1
35-39 6 5 1 6 5
40-43 6 8 3 6 8
44-46 23 24 24 22 21
47-49 5 0 6 5 10
50-54 5 9 8 9 5
55-59 6 3 6 3 3
60-64 0 2 0 0 0
Under 14 15 9 14 14
Over 16 14 20 17 18
Potential Ratings
PHP Code:
Range Con Gap Pow Eye AvK
25-29 0 0 1 0 0
30-34 1 0 2 0 1
35-39 2 1 0 2 1
40-44 1 6 2 3 4
45-49 3 2 0 3 3
50-53 3 1 5 5 4
54-56 2 22 22 20 21
57-59 21 2 3 1 8
60-64 6 5 4 5 1
65-69 3 4 2 5 4
70-74 1 4 5 5 3
75-79 6 2 4 3 2
80+ 4 4 3 1 1
Under 10 10 10 13 13
Over 41 21 21 20 19
So, what does this all mean?
For current ratings, it looks like there is about the same number of players being overrated as there are underrated except for power. Overall, I'd say there are slightly more being overrated than underrated, but it's pretty close.
For potential ratings, except for contact it looks like approximately twice as many players are being overrated as there are being underrated. Plus as you can see there is only 1 player in a category rated lower than 30 (25 points underrated) while there are several over 80 (25 points overrated). For contact, for some reason the range with the highest number of players is 57-59 while the others are 54-56. Not sure why that is.
As I mentioned, there are obviously players being underrated, just not as many as there being overrated (for potential). Glancing at the other categories (fielding and speed) in the same fashion, I'd say there are more players being overrated than underrated, but again, not by a lot. Plus those means are fairly in line with what they should be so I don't think that's a big deal.
This should give a little better idea of what's going on.