Overall Rating Based on All Players

PSUColonel · 08-17-2021, 08:40 PM

Do people find any benefit to NOT using this option? I ask because it is unchecked by default, and I am wondering if it has some sort of benefit for the AI.

Basically by not checking it, the overall rating compares players to other of the same position, and essentially ranks them and then rates them based on those rankings. (or at least that's how I understand it)

By checking it, players are rated based on their own, and not compared to other players...which I feel is probably more realistic, but maybe not as good for the AI? But I don't know...so I am trying to figure out if the AI somehow gains a benefit by being able to compare players of the same position.

Bobfather · 08-17-2021, 10:25 PM

I thought (based on nothing) It is like Listi9ng the top 100 players in the Pipeline the players are ranked overall. If you filter by position then you see ratings by position and overall. A better example might be the positional rankings. I am using these as examples.

You could have a **** CF but he is rated 9th at CF.
But a *** 3B rated #1 3bB when on the overall they could Rank 15th and 64th.

PSUColonel · 08-17-2021, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobfather

I thought (based on nothing) It is like Listi9ng the top 100 players in the Pipeline the players are ranked overall. If you filter by position then you see ratings by position and overall. A better example might be the positional rankings. I am using these as examples.

You could have a **** CF but he is rated 9th at CF.
But a *** 3B rated #1 3bB when on the overall they could Rank 15th and 64th.

This has to do with how the AI evaluates players (if at all)

PSUColonel · 08-18-2021, 12:47 PM

To phrase this another way…

Is there an advantage (smarter AI) to having the AI judge players on a positional scale (relative) or having it judge players individually as they are?

So for example if you had a catcher who is really a 65, but is deemed to be the best pitcher in the league, he may be graded as a 70 or 75 if this option is left unchecked.

BBGiovanni · 08-18-2021, 01:05 PM

I'm not sure if this is helpful, but I've noticed this in playing promotion/relegation leagues. When going through the initial draft, and even during free agent signings after the season, star ratings (and those underlying them I assume) change a fair bit as the makeup of the league changes. In the initial draft, whoever is drafted first at a position by default becomes the average, and everyone looks too good or really terrible in comparison.

When I moved down to the second tier to take over a different team, I changed the rating to be based on that league. Because I don't care about all the future hall of famers in the premier league, I need to sort among the AAAA guys I can afford in my league. It would make sense if you were running an international or indy team for the same reason, but if you are running an MLB team only it wouldn't do much (except that you'd have a much bigger army of one star specials in the lower leagues and free agent lists). I've always thought of the setting as irrelevant to the AI.

PSUColonel · 08-09-2022, 12:10 AM

I am using the setting to "overall ratings based on all players". I feel too often players' can get an artificial bump or decline based on the quality and quantity of players' at the same position in any given league.

I am not sure that's how scouts really grade players. I think leaving relative ratings on accomplishes what scouts' actually do....which is grade players individually an not necessarily compared to the amount of talent (or lack thereof) in a league.

Any thoughts?

08-17-2021, 10:25 PM	#2
Bobfather All Star Starter Join Date: Jun 2016 Location: Boston Ma. Posts: 1,619	I thought (based on nothing) It is like Listi9ng the top 100 players in the Pipeline the players are ranked overall. If you filter by position then you see ratings by position and overall. A better example might be the positional rankings. I am using these as examples. You could have a ** CF but he is rated 9th at CF. But a * 3B rated #1 3bB when on the overall they could Rank 15th and 64th. __________________ I play out every game—one pitch mode.

08-18-2021, 01:05 PM	#5
BBGiovanni All Star Starter Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: Republic of California Posts: 1,910	I'm not sure if this is helpful, but I've noticed this in playing promotion/relegation leagues. When going through the initial draft, and even during free agent signings after the season, star ratings (and those underlying them I assume) change a fair bit as the makeup of the league changes. In the initial draft, whoever is drafted first at a position by default becomes the average, and everyone looks too good or really terrible in comparison. When I moved down to the second tier to take over a different team, I changed the rating to be based on that league. Because I don't care about all the future hall of famers in the premier league, I need to sort among the AAAA guys I can afford in my league. It would make sense if you were running an international or indy team for the same reason, but if you are running an MLB team only it wouldn't do much (except that you'd have a much bigger army of one star specials in the lower leagues and free agent lists). I've always thought of the setting as irrelevant to the AI. __________________ Let's Go (San Jose) Giants, Let's Go Mets! Current Project: WBAT/AABBA: Organized Base Ball And the "New Normal" World Baseball Aid Tournament 2023 trophy round underway!

08-17-2021, 08:40 PM	#1
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,104	Overall Rating Based on All Players Do people find any benefit to NOT using this option? I ask because it is unchecked by default, and I am wondering if it has some sort of benefit for the AI. Basically by not checking it, the overall rating compares players to other of the same position, and essentially ranks them and then rates them based on those rankings. (or at least that's how I understand it) By checking it, players are rated based on their own, and not compared to other players...which I feel is probably more realistic, but maybe not as good for the AI? But I don't know...so I am trying to figure out if the AI somehow gains a benefit by being able to compare players of the same position.

08-18-2021, 12:47 PM	#4
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,104	To phrase this another way… Is there an advantage (smarter AI) to having the AI judge players on a positional scale (relative) or having it judge players individually as they are? So for example if you had a catcher who is really a 65, but is deemed to be the best pitcher in the league, he may be graded as a 70 or 75 if this option is left unchecked.

08-09-2022, 12:10 AM	#6
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,104	I am using the setting to "overall ratings based on all players". I feel too often players' can get an artificial bump or decline based on the quality and quantity of players' at the same position in any given league. I am not sure that's how scouts really grade players. I think leaving relative ratings on accomplishes what scouts' actually do....which is grade players individually an not necessarily compared to the amount of talent (or lack thereof) in a league. Any thoughts?