Relative Ratings Average

Smodes · 02-10-2018, 08:30 AM

I use a 1-20 scale, and I switched the ratings to be relative to league. Does this mean that any rating equal to 10 is the average rating?

For example, a batter with a contact of 10 is average, and a batter with a contact of 20 is the best in the league?

I'm playing with a single league (no minors).

Dr. P.R. Park III · 02-10-2018, 09:17 AM

If your playing with a single league, you probably don't want to use relative ratings but absolute.

Relative ratings are really for universes with a ton of leagues to help the user differentiate between the various levels.

With one league and reserve rosters, you should be seeing absolute ratings anyway.

To answer the question, your math does sound correct.

NoOne · 02-10-2018, 11:27 AM

relative --

simply, whatver the average (median? they'll be close in the context of ootp) is becomes 1/2 scale... so if contact in the league average ~60/100, that will now look like 50/100 and players will fall proportionately around that as they were before. if 10% higher, will be 10% higher. (60->66 now 50->55)

or something similar to that in general. it moves league baseline to 1/2 scale, then the chips fall around it proportionately.

with one league it won't matter much... whatever shift occurs, it will become second nature to you and the year-to-year volatility of player's ability won't be visible to the naked eye with anything but 100% accuracy, even then you'd have to pay close attention.

so, it can ebb and flow a bit year-to-year as far as what =1/2 scale and how things fall around that will also change each year a little bit. that's the main drawback to it -- muddies the water a bit. you will be inherently less accurate about certain things.

mil stuff: maybe future reference for you?

it can be argued that it makes minor league promo/demo a bit more intuitive, but it's really just muddied up and ~same process as having an absolute scale.. whther you look for "50" or some other # it's the same line in the sand, it just has a different facade that isn't as precise due to ebb and flow each year. it's objectively worse information to use for this 1 reason. can't get around that fact.

i guess you need a little less experience to do it reasonably well, but it's not a big learning curve at all. (figuring out ability per mil level). you'll make better decisiosn due to better info with an absolute scale, eventually.

02-10-2018, 08:30 AM	#1
Smodes Bat Boy Join Date: Jan 2018 Posts: 9	Question - Relative Ratings Average? I use a 1-20 scale, and I switched the ratings to be relative to league. Does this mean that any rating equal to 10 is the average rating? For example, a batter with a contact of 10 is average, and a batter with a contact of 20 is the best in the league? I'm playing with a single league (no minors). Last edited by Smodes; 02-10-2018 at 08:58 AM. Reason: Updated title to show as question

02-10-2018, 11:27 AM	#3
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	relative -- simply, whatver the average (median? they'll be close in the context of ootp) is becomes 1/2 scale... so if contact in the league average ~60/100, that will now look like 50/100 and players will fall proportionately around that as they were before. if 10% higher, will be 10% higher. (60->66 now 50->55) or something similar to that in general. it moves league baseline to 1/2 scale, then the chips fall around it proportionately. with one league it won't matter much... whatever shift occurs, it will become second nature to you and the year-to-year volatility of player's ability won't be visible to the naked eye with anything but 100% accuracy, even then you'd have to pay close attention. so, it can ebb and flow a bit year-to-year as far as what =1/2 scale and how things fall around that will also change each year a little bit. that's the main drawback to it -- muddies the water a bit. you will be inherently less accurate about certain things. mil stuff: maybe future reference for you? it can be argued that it makes minor league promo/demo a bit more intuitive, but it's really just muddied up and ~same process as having an absolute scale.. whther you look for "50" or some other # it's the same line in the sand, it just has a different facade that isn't as precise due to ebb and flow each year. it's objectively worse information to use for this 1 reason. can't get around that fact. i guess you need a little less experience to do it reasonably well, but it's not a big learning curve at all. (figuring out ability per mil level). you'll make better decisiosn due to better info with an absolute scale, eventually. Last edited by NoOne; 02-12-2018 at 01:42 PM. Reason: median?

02-10-2018, 09:17 AM	#2
Dr. P.R. Park III All Star Reserve Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 974	If your playing with a single league, you probably don't want to use relative ratings but absolute. Relative ratings are really for universes with a ton of leagues to help the user differentiate between the various levels. With one league and reserve rosters, you should be seeing absolute ratings anyway. To answer the question, your math does sound correct.