[Papa3]

I like the general concept of this, but I don't see how relying on a written scouting report is better than seeing talents expressed as ratings instead of words. When i see a report like this, I think stats-only using scouting reports is foolish.

How in the world can you glean a player's ability when all you have to go on is this:

SUMMARY: This guy will always be minor-league filler. Not much of a repertoire now, and shows no aptitude to learn.

STUFF: Above-average stuff for a kid of his age, tops out at around 90-92. Fastball isn't too straight, and he changes speeds nicely. Needs to trust his catcher a little bit more.

MOVEMENT: Throws dead straight. Unless he can change that, he's nothing more than fodder.

CONTROL: Projects to have average control.

PERSONALITY/MAKEUP: A student of the game, Duley will bust his tail to become better at his position.

Conflicting enough for you? In summary, this guy's "fastball isn't too straight" and he "throws dead straight". Huh?

Then he "shows no aptitude to learn" and is "a student of the game". Double huh? This report is far from an aberration.

The league's premier home run hitter (467 HR at age 29, 64 & 55 HR the past two seasons while no other guy had a season with more than 43) "doesn't have a clue what he's doing when he's up" and is "an offensive force that teams must pitch around or game-plan against."

Another guy is "an excellent, if not an elite, offensive player, who you can count on to have a solid season every year. .240/.260/.370 isn't out of the realm of possibility." Wow, what an ELITE prediction. How could those numbers translate to an elite offensive player? BTW, this past year he was .335/.359/.559

Perhaps most befuddling is this guy:

CONTACT: Outstanding bat control and plate discipline. Plus-plus contact.

EYE: Really needs to develop some discipline at the plate. He doesn't have a clue what he's doing when he's up.

OMG, what the heck is that!!!!!!

His ratings on a 2-8 scale are CONTACT 7 and EYE 3. The ratings tell me he'll hit for average but doesn't take walks. His scouting report tells me he has "outstanding plate discipline" but "really needs to develop some discipline at the plate."

As it turns out, he smoked his league in batting average by hitting .345/.370/.487 while the second place guy hit just .312.

His stats confirm my suspicion with regards to his ratings. I don't know what the hell to think of this guy if I went on just his written scouting report. I'm still trying to figure out how the league's top hitter can "have no clue what he's doing when he's up."

I rely almost entirely on stats (AI Eval 25/45/20/10), but a real-life GM can see what a fastball looks like, see how well a guy can run, see how hard a guy hits balls to the gap, etc. To me, that's what the ratings are - being able to see what a guy appears to do well or not well. In the end, it's about what a guy does, not what it appears he will do. That's why I use stats -- but NOT stats-only.

14 versions in, I guess I'm wondering if these written scouting reports will ever be useful and not just eye candy. Until then, the only way to play properly is to use ratings-based scouting reports.

After all, how in the world can you make intelligent decisions based on these written scouting reports?