|
Can I put in a word for a mixed approach? When deciding on whom to promote in my minor-league system, I depend on a mix of stats and the minor-league system report. I rarely use ratings, especially their potential, which seldom proves very useful!
On the other hand, when looking at major-league players, I go with both stats and ratings. The numbers represented by the ratings are not really that much of a cheat, IMO. A good scout can tell whether a batter is a hacker, whether he tends to make good contact, and whether he can hit with power. Moreover, stats and ratings don't really diverge that much at the major-league level, in my experience. But when they do, I go with stats. A pitcher whose ratings are only 9 or 10 in most categories, but who nevertheless can pitch for a 3.50 ERA, is one I want.
Where I find I depend on ratings most is in the amateur draft. It's not that they're reliable predictors of who is going to make it to the bigs (see above!), but they are useful for filtering a large number of players rapidly. I find that I lack the patience to study every player in the draft, examine his high-school or college record against the quality of the competition, and then make my draft decisions on the basis of that study.
|