Ratings Discrepancies

[LowRight]

I'm new to OOTP. When checking the "Resulting Stats (in a neutral, modern major league environment)" in the editor for imported players, sometimes the stats don't look anything like the player's actual stats.

Case in point, 1981 Tom Seaver had a 2.54 ERA, but in OOTP, it's 3.33. OOTP also rates him 3 stars when he was an All Star and came in second in Cy Young voting that year.

Here's another one. I imported 1933 Carl Hubbell. His ERA that year was 1.66, but in OOTP, it's 2.97. His FIP was 2.53, but in OOTP, it's 3.50. His WAR is only 4.7. He's only rated 4 stars and he was the MVP that year! And, of course, he's a Hall of Famer.

As a comparison, I also imported 1930 Lefty Grove. His actual stats aren't as good as Hubbell's, but his OOTP "Resulting Stats" are much better! ERA 2.19, FIP 2.80, WAR 7.2. And he's rated 5 stars.

Is this an issue or what am I missing?

[ohiodevil]

Do you have scouting turned on?

[Lukas Berger]

This is because the stats in the editor reflect performance in a different league environment than those guys pitched in. "neutral, modern major league environment" is the key. None of those guys pitched in that environment, so their ratings are adjusted based on the era they pitched in.

Even for guys who pitched in a modern environment, there still may be be some differences depending on the specific year and how that compares to what we use as a default in the editor.

[Lukas Berger]

Another thing to be aware of is what we actually use to generate the ratings. Basically, only fielding neutral stats. So what a players actual ERA was is irrelevant to their ratings. Basically, what matters most is K's, BB's and HR's. And how these translate to ratings depends on how they compare to the league as a whole in a specific year.

So pitchers who pitched behind a great defense in real life and/or who got really lucky with their batted ball performance will show up with ratings below what you might expect them to have. Vice-versa for guys who did well in the categories we use, but who may've had bad luck/defense.

Of course, a pitcher who benefited from great defense in real life, just because their ratings are below what you might expect, all is not lost. Because if you put a great defense behind them in the game, or put them in a pitcher's park they will likely out pitch their ratings. Vice-versa with a bad defense/hitter's park.

[Pendragon]

Originally Posted by Lukas Berger

So pitchers who pitched behind a great defense in real life and/or who got really lucky with their batted ball performance will show up with ratings below what you might expect them to have.

This I think is an very subjective premise.

Assuming "really lucky" for pitchers with consistently low ERAs and solid success is a reach. I love this game, but do think too much emphasis is placed on Ks vs controlled pitching affecting the way the batter makes contact with the ball (e,g., timing, quality of contact).

I really enjoy OOTP (you wouldn't believe the number of teams and leagues I have going ), but I'll admit it makes it frustrating to play Random Rookies when all-star historical pitchers import as mediocre pitchers simply because they were not strikeout kings.

Note: I'm not sure how you would program for this; K, BB, and HR are straightforward stats. Nuances of great control are not.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by Pendragon

This I think is an very subjective premise.

Assuming "really lucky" for pitchers with consistently low ERAs and solid success is a reach. I love this game, but do think too much emphasis is placed on Ks vs controlled pitching affecting the way the batter makes contact with the ball (e,g., timing, quality of contact).

I really enjoy OOTP (you wouldn't believe the number of teams and leagues I have going ), but I'll admit it makes it frustrating to play Random Rookies when all-star historical pitchers import as mediocre pitchers simply because they were not strikeout kings.

Note: I'm not sure how you would program for this; K, BB, and HR are straightforward stats. Nuances of great control are not.

Sounds like it might do you some good to read up on DIPS (Defense Independent Pitching Stats)

Here's a good article from SABR.org
https://sabr.org/research/many-flavo...y-and-overview

Here's a bit on "luck"

Additionally, Erik Allen, Arvin Hsu, and Tom Tango used regression analysis to break down the responsibility of what determines the outcome of a batted ball:26

Luck: 44 percent
Pitcher: 28 percent
Fielding: 17 percent
Park: 11 percent

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by Pendragon

This I think is an very subjective premise.

Assuming "really lucky" for pitchers with consistently low ERAs and solid success is a reach. I love this game, but do think too much emphasis is placed on Ks vs controlled pitching affecting the way the batter makes contact with the ball (e,g., timing, quality of contact).

I really enjoy OOTP (you wouldn't believe the number of teams and leagues I have going ), but I'll admit it makes it frustrating to play Random Rookies when all-star historical pitchers import as mediocre pitchers simply because they were not strikeout kings.

Note: I'm not sure how you would program for this; K, BB, and HR are straightforward stats. Nuances of great control are not.

I don't totally disagree, but like you mention, it's awfully hard to make work in practice and to quantify something like poor contact.

I'm just explaining how things actually do work in game for now, not commenting on how they should work in a perfect world

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

Sounds like it might do you some good to read up on DIPS (Defense Independent Pitching Stats)

Here's a good article from SABR.org
https://sabr.org/research/many-flavo...y-and-overview

Here's a bit on "luck"

Yeah, that's it. The game is using a DIPS based model.

[Pendragon]

Originally Posted by Lukas Berger

Yeah, that's it. The game is using a DIPS based model.

Yep, I understand DIPS, including its strengths, limitations, and subjectivity. It does provide a logical model to work with (which programming needs), but does not always line up with historical performance.

For nostalgia's sake, I prefer historical performance.

I have no idea how to account for the nuances of pitching in an environment like this and understand the limitations in a game.

Please don't take my comments as negativity. They're just observations. I love this game and think you guys are doing a great job.

[Pendragon]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

Sounds like it might do you some good to read up on DIPS (Defense Independent Pitching Stats)

Here's a good article from SABR.org
https://sabr.org/research/many-flavo...y-and-overview

Here's a bit on "luck"

The bit on "luck" is highly subjective. There is no conclusive way to determine the pitcher's effect on "luck."