Can Anyone Explain The Overall Rating Here?

TomVeal · 09-13-2014, 04:11 PM

I happened to notice this free agent whose Overall Rating of 55 seems completely unjustified by his individual ratings. Can anyone devise an explanation, plausible or not?

Scouting is set at "Normal", and my head scout is supposed to be excellent at all levels of scouting.

OakDragon · 09-13-2014, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomVeal

I happened to notice this free agent whose Overall Rating of 55 seems completely unjustified by his individual ratings. Can anyone devise an explanation, plausible or not?

Scouting is set at "Normal", and my head scout is supposed to be excellent at all levels of scouting.

His 2016 stats have "R" for the league type. Is he really playing in a rookie league? If you have ratings set to be relative to the league (as opposed to all players), that could be it.

jpeters1734 · 09-13-2014, 09:32 PM

you have the 20-80 scale for overall. 50 is average. 55 would be half of one standard deviation above average.

TomVeal · 09-13-2014, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OakDragon

His 2016 stats have "R" for the league type. Is he really playing in a rookie league? If you have ratings set to be relative to the league (as opposed to all players), that could be it.

The rating is relative to the Major Leagues. Last year he was in the Korean Rookie League (at least I think that's what it was). Currently he's unemployed. I'm tempted to offer him a minor league contract just to see what happens.

PSUColonel · 09-14-2014, 12:18 AM

the overall rating is showing the actual rating...it is a bug. This happens when "ratings relative to" is activated.

TomVeal · 09-14-2014, 09:26 AM

Yes, that seems to be the solution to this riddle. When I turn off "ratings relative to", his overall rating falls to 20, though his individual ratings improve considerably (to 7 Contact, 6 Gap Power, 7 HR Power, 8 Eye).

The bug distresses me, because I liked the "ratings relative to" feature, which made it easier to differentiate among players in the lower minors.

PSUColonel · 09-14-2014, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomVeal

Yes, that seems to be the solution to this riddle. When I turn off "ratings relative to", his overall rating falls to 20, though his individual ratings improve considerably (to 7 Contact, 6 Gap Power, 7 HR Power, 8 Eye).

The bug distresses me, because I liked the "ratings relative to" feature, which made it easier to differentiate among players in the lower minors.

That doesn't seem right to me either...if your scout feels he's that good(ratings wise) and unless you're playing stats only..which it sounds you are not...I can't see why this player would/should receive only one star for his overall potential rating.�� I have long thought there are issues with the way the overall ratings (stars or 20-80) are handled. I hope Markus is going to take a hard look at what's going on with actual vs overall ratings, and the weights they carry. I also very often see OSA rate a player much better (individual ratings) than my scout, yet then award him a lower star value than my scout...who has given the player much lower individual ranking. I also see this situation in the reverse.

PSUColonel · 09-14-2014, 11:26 AM

Here is another issue with scouting and ratings. I think the written report is giving me the real skinny, while the ratings are make by scouting. This is why I have been proponent of fixing this for a long time now. There is definitely something screwy when it comes to scouting, ratings, and overall ratings. Take note of this player's movement rating and the written report. Please don't say just ignore the written report, because that's not a viable solution, and fixes nothing.

PSUColonel · 09-14-2014, 11:36 AM

Also take note at the above...while it's only a half star, doesn't it seem the overall ratings should be reversed...with the two and a half potential stars coming from my scout, and the two potential coming from OSA? I see this all the time, and this is a mild case of it here.

PSUColonel · 09-14-2014, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomVeal

Yes, that seems to be the solution to this riddle. When I turn off "ratings relative to", his overall rating falls to 20, though his individual ratings improve considerably (to 7 Contact, 6 Gap Power, 7 HR Power, 8 Eye).

The bug distresses me, because I liked the "ratings relative to" feature, which made it easier to differentiate among players in the lower minors.

what is this player's overall and overall potential?

TomVeal · 09-14-2014, 01:32 PM

He's Overall 20, Potential 21.

I should have noted that the individual ratings are on a 1 to 20 scale and thus are quite mediocre.

PSUColonel · 09-14-2014, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TomVeal

He's Overall 20, Potential 21.

I should have noted that the individual ratings are on a 1 to 20 scale and thus are quite mediocre.

Oh right...I am so used to dealing on a 2-8 scale

PSUColonel · 09-14-2014, 04:37 PM

Another example of what I am talking about. These overall star ratings appear flip-flopped to me.

09-13-2014, 04:11 PM	#1
TomVeal All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Spanaway, Washington Posts: 1,260	Can Anyone Explain The Overall Rating Here? I happened to notice this free agent whose Overall Rating of 55 seems completely unjustified by his individual ratings. Can anyone devise an explanation, plausible or not? Scouting is set at "Normal", and my head scout is supposed to be excellent at all levels of scouting. Attached Images

09-13-2014, 09:32 PM	#3
jpeters1734 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Juust a bit outside... Posts: 6,316	you have the 20-80 scale for overall. 50 is average. 55 would be half of one standard deviation above average. __________________ "Cannonball Coming!" Go Bucs!! Founder and League Caretaker of the Professional Baseball Circuit, www.probaseballcircuit.com An Un-Official Guide to Minor League Management in OOTP 21 Ratings Scale Conversion Cross-Reference Cheat Sheet

09-14-2014, 11:26 AM	#8
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,145	Here is another issue with scouting and ratings. I think the written report is giving me the real skinny, while the ratings are make by scouting. This is why I have been proponent of fixing this for a long time now. There is definitely something screwy when it comes to scouting, ratings, and overall ratings. Take note of this player's movement rating and the written report. Please don't say just ignore the written report, because that's not a viable solution, and fixes nothing. Attached Images

09-14-2014, 11:36 AM	#9
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,145	Also take note at the above...while it's only a half star, doesn't it seem the overall ratings should be reversed...with the two and a half potential stars coming from my scout, and the two potential coming from OSA? I see this all the time, and this is a mild case of it here. Last edited by PSUColonel; 09-14-2014 at 11:40 AM.

09-14-2014, 04:37 PM	#13
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,145	Another example of what I am talking about. These overall star ratings appear flip-flopped to me. Attached Images

09-14-2014, 12:18 AM	#5
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,145	the overall rating is showing the actual rating...it is a bug. This happens when "ratings relative to" is activated.

09-14-2014, 09:26 AM	#6
TomVeal All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Spanaway, Washington Posts: 1,260	Yes, that seems to be the solution to this riddle. When I turn off "ratings relative to", his overall rating falls to 20, though his individual ratings improve considerably (to 7 Contact, 6 Gap Power, 7 HR Power, 8 Eye). The bug distresses me, because I liked the "ratings relative to" feature, which made it easier to differentiate among players in the lower minors.

09-14-2014, 01:32 PM	#11
TomVeal All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Spanaway, Washington Posts: 1,260	He's Overall 20, Potential 21. I should have noted that the individual ratings are on a 1 to 20 scale and thus are quite mediocre.