Quote:
Originally Posted by ubernoob
They are but you need to read them as a formula.
A player with 100 Contact/0 Power/100 Avoid K's will hit for an infinitely higher average than someone that is 100/100/100 in those 3 stats.
Contact is an amalgamation of BABIP + Power, not a straight rating. So Player A would have a super high BABIP score. Player B would be average. Given the same number of at bats, Player A would hit for a better average just because the BABIP score is much higher.
|
I'll preface this by saying I agree 100% with Abnerdoubleday.
Now onto the reply to the other part of your comment...
I get it. But Rose is only 2 pts higher in AvoidK. 2 pts shouldn't translate to a .269 avg vs .a 181 avg. I'll explain why that doesn't make sense below.
Here are some cards with Contact/AvoidK/ ratings, and their typical performances at Diamond level (I'm looking at my players and about the first few teams in my league that show up on player search, and giving a rough average):
Pete Rose 113/93: .270
Ted Williams: 114/91: .215
Sam Crawford: 101/98: 240
Arky Vaughan: 95/102: .225
Wander Franco: 99/93: .260
Joe Mauer: 109/87: .255
Lou Gehrig: 102/89: .220
Mike Trout: 121/84: .265
Where's the rhyme or reason here? Friggin Wander Franco hits .260 with 99/93 and Ted Williams hits .215 with 114/91? And if your answer is "AvoidK is a more important stat" then how do you explain Joe Mauer and Mike Trout? You just told me +5/-2 means jack between Williams and Franco, but +7/-7 means Trout is a far better player than Williams?
The system is broken, and there are important hidden ratings that DON'T contribute to the visible ratings scales. Mike Trout is a perfect example of this. And I'm not even going to get into pitching, because I could show even moreso with pitching how the ratings don't make sense compared to performance.