|
FWIW, as long as this distribution is as expected, all is fine.
To answer your questions:
1. It is a single unaffilated league (no minors or feeders)
2. The list was all players in the universe -- at this time, all players were FAs as the teams had empty rosters. Perhaps the game expected me to fill the rosters with the best players, such that the average of the actual rosters was 50. I'm not sure if this is right, but I could check. I don't think this has any bearing on the actual ratings, however.
3. The ratings are set to 100% accurate scouting, so while they are relative to the league (vs. absolute), the only way they'll change is if a player's talent changes over time, because, well the scouting ratings are perfect at this setting.
4. FWIW, if 50 is truly an average, then "most players [being] below average" doesn't compute -- half the players should be below average and half should be above...that's what average is. But, kriscolic, you're point is taken.
Anyway, I'll do another analysis of just players on the active roster and see if there's any difference, and include the difference between "relative" and "asbolute". Stay tuned.
|