How does avoid K's rating interrelate to other ratings?

[daves]

If you have a high Contact rating and a high Eye rating, should you have a similar avoid K rating? Why is it different? Why does a player have a 60 Contact, 60 Eye but 40 avoid K? Please explain?

I like players to put the ball in play.

[NoOne]

contact is a combination of babip (unseen rating), avoid k's and power

eye is perceived as an exclusive force in ootp.

a high avoid k would mean less strikeouts and more outs of other varieties, mainly balls in play, eh? ... you pair that with a high babip rating, and they will be consistent performers for sure.

if you prefer your rakers to put the ball in play more, you probably want a lower eye rating, rather than a higher one... going too low isn't good, typically... but i've seen plenty of amazing players that didn't take walks in ootp, too. these players, if hit machines ratings-wise, will put up huge counting stats in a season... less walks, more AB --> larger #'s. is that better than taking a few more walks? no idea... but if you like setting records that's the type of player to go after.

when it comes to rakers, if using "eye" as a factor, i would consider any difference in power to be a much more significant factor than having the best eye rating for that role (no matter high or low).

BA records and the like -- more likely to be acheived with fewer AB which cna be achieved through a better eye=>greater influence of luck with a smaller sample / more volatility down comes with that territory, too.. but, hopefully of the good variety. again... is this better? no idea, lol.... but maybe fun for some, same with acheiving large # of hits or hr above aided by a 'lower' eye rating.

i typically avoid terrible eye batter, but i've also found certain profiles of those players that exceed in spite of a terrible eye... but, they need ~full scale contact rating or extremely high if not.

opportunity trumps theory at all times... but still good to know theory... "prototypical" simply isn't common. some flaws are more easily overcome than others.

[Izz]

Originally Posted by daves

Why does a player have a 60 Contact, 60 Eye but 40 avoid K? Please explain?

More likely to watch a pitch he thinks might be just missing than try to foul it off?

[OldFatGuy]

I think you're "over thinking" this. These ratings are... "mathematical" not physics based, I think.

In other words a "high contact" rating doesn't mean a player makes more physical contact per se.... it simply means, I think, he has a mathematically higher chance of getting a hit. Same with the other ratings.

So a High Contact and Low Avoid K rating together is not some mismatch (like it sounds) because it isn't a rating of physically making contact with the ball (I think). It is simply saying this player would have a higher chance of getting a hit than "average" and a higher chance of striking out than "average."

Think this guy. A career average of .312 but a strikeout rate about 10% higher than average (I think the overall K rate is about 20%, and he strikes out about 22% if I did the math right LOL) Votto would have a high contact rating because he gets hits more often than the average player; a high Eye rating because he walks more than the average player; and a low Avoid K rating because he strikes out more than average player.

EDIT: Ummm, I'm not sure Votto is a good example. Now that I think about it, I think the 20% K rate is 20% of PLATE APPEARANCES, not 20% of AT BATS, which is what I used. If so, then Votto is probably about average or maybe even above average at avoiding K's because he has so many walks that increases his plate appearances. I'll do a quick check and see what his percentage is using PA instead of AB.

Yeah, he is only striking out 18% of PLATE APPEARANCES. Sorry, my bad. Brain fails me again. LOL. But the bottom line remains. These ratings don't really "interrelate together" at all. They're separate ratings describing a players chances of getting separate results. If that makes sense. LOL I should probably just shut up now. lol

[NoOne]

meh, i misread lol nothing to see here

[StratMan]

In the OOTP world, the contact rating is essentially a batting average rating which is calculated as:

Batting Average on balls in play (BABIP) * % of balls in play

Your K avoidance rating DIRECTLY affects the contact rating because you will have fewer balls in play if you strike out alot.

Power will also affect your contact rating. If you are expected to hit 30 home runs, these essentially count as 30 balls in play with a 100% chance of a hit instead of the BABIP ratio.

Eye rating ONLY affects walks. It has nothing to do with SO or batting average.

[NoOne]

guys, it's not overthinking, re-read my post.

Contact isn't used in the game of baseball (simming a game in ootp)... the 3 ratings that make it up are... they relate to the specific events that you would assume they relate to as far as influencing %chance of success...

e.g. babip rating isn't used unless earlier in the logical steps through the process of a Plate Appearance it is learned that the ball has in fact been hit by the batter ... now babip is referenced and influences wher eit lands (or somethign similar, they can be more sophisticated or less... same conceptually in some loose parrallel way). think of it like you approach a simple physics probelm, like the force with which a ball is thrown and how far it will go based on launch angle etc etc -- mutually exclusive forces playing out over time. gravity is a constant force, "drag" can be seen as that to keep it simple, force thrown and angle (force - requires a direction, it's a vector) is the variable from the player etc etc..

if it's calculated earlier in the logical process that it was a swing and miss, it doesn't even look at babip because it's irrelevant. that portion of the calculation isnt' even made, because that would be a total waste of resources, logically.

The contact rating is for "your eyes" only... the AI may use it for player procurement, i won't rule that out, but for the actual mechanics of a PA being calculated based on the players ratings (pitcher and batter) and physics (wind etc) blah blah blah in the moment relevant factors all have their range of influence... the summarized "contact" rating is inconsequential and unused durring this process of a PA.

think of it as a 'better' Overall ratings, in that it is more telling, stronger correlation to results that you see... but still weaker than using the 3 individual ratings that make up Contact... just like using individual ratings of the palyer is WAY better to assess talent than Overall.

[RonCo]

Yes, Contact is a projection of batting average based on a hitter's BABIP, HR, and Avk ratings. In a sense, knowing HR, AvK, and Contact, one can begin to guess a hitter's BABIP rating.

Also, in a sense a players "real" contact (what we mean by it, anyway) is controlled by AvK (and to a lesser extent Power).

When it first changed, I was hoping to see "AvK" re-labled as "Contact" and the BABIP rating actually shown along with the calculated field of "Projected Batting Average" ... that would be clearer, but I think part of the goal was to avoid making it clear (that last is purely my opinion, anyway).

[RonCo]

Anyway, when we talk about real baseball, a good contact hitter is one who rarely strikes out (and has a tendency to hit for average rather than power). This is very essentially what the AvK rating controls.

[Hoiles]

While the contact rating simultaneously accounts for the batter's ability to put the ball in play and get a hit on that play, it probably puts doesn't put enough weight on the former. I haven't recorded anything, but it seems that players, given identical contact ratings, will have higher batting averages with better avoid K ratings, than those with worse avoid K ratings. In other words, players with high contact ratings who strike out a lot have a bigger tendency to disappoint. Just something to think about when making trades.

[RonCo]

Originally Posted by Hoiles

While the contact rating simultaneously accounts for the batter's ability to put the ball in play and get a hit on that play, it probably puts doesn't put enough weight on the former. I haven't recorded anything, but it seems that players, given identical contact ratings, will have higher batting averages with better avoid K ratings, than those with worse avoid K ratings. In other words, players with high contact ratings who strike out a lot have a bigger tendency to disappoint. Just something to think about when making trades.

Without going into too much detail, I think that will change from league to league and era to era, depending on a few parameters...given the process that NoOne kinda laid out, I posit that things like the talent distribution of pitchers (especially stuff) relative to the league totals setting, and skewed ballpark ratings can make a subtle but somewhat noticeable difference.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by RonCo

Yes, Contact is a projection of batting average based on a hitter's BABIP, HR, and Avk ratings. In a sense, knowing HR, AvK, and Contact, one can begin to guess a hitter's BABIP rating.

Also, in a sense a players "real" contact (what we mean by it, anyway) is controlled by AvK (and to a lesser extent Power).

When it first changed, I was hoping to see "AvK" re-labled as "Contact" and the BABIP rating actually shown along with the calculated field of "Projected Batting Average" ... that would be clearer, but I think part of the goal was to avoid making it clear (that last is purely my opinion, anyway).

the only tidbit in direct reply is about hte baseline babip and using tha tfor stats-only without ratings... other tidbits not for you, ron.

there may be times it's a guess, but for the most part you can know with near certainty what their BABIP rating is, even wihtout ratings on.

babip from stats:

As long as you know your league's baseline babip AND assuming LTM are callibrated within a reasonable +/- of the intended League Totals..... Stats and AI gives this info for league, or can wait for league to provide that info with results.

~Average BABIP rating will be ~Average resulting babip for the league...

(sample size being important here* if that needs to be said for some or a reminder to others)

with a known baseline, you'll still need ~couple years (check required samples size for a reputable BABIP calculation, totally guessing) to verify babip for batters. if you have inaccurate scouting or no-ratings visible, etc, that's defintely a way to verify or learn what it is.

but, if you have the ratings visible, you have 2 out of 3 variables known and the resulting value for contact rating at any one time, so the third (babip) can be calculated immediately at any time. (don't hammer it out on your scale, hammer it out using the 0-200 scale, remember that 201-250 is actually above your scale. like 128/100 for any rating seen in the player profile is really 255/200 in the editor.)

solve for the unknown! take you bakc to elementary school.

you'll have to deduce that simple mathematical equation for Contact form the editor with comissionar mode on, i'm happy eye-balling it, or i'd be happy to share that knowledge (you could figure it out loosely by comparing differnt players, but that would take alot more time and less precise -- that said, it's how i do it => lazy). once i get into playing the game with consistency, that stuff refreshes in my memory, i don't care if i am 1-to-5 / 100 rating scale off on my guess... my guess of the exact weights in this moment of time would be kinda poor, but i'd quickly remember after a season or two. that's why i hesitate to say somethign specific... i'd rather not throw someone off with a guess on specifics.

[RonCo]

Right. No question that with the right sample size you will know what the player's BABIP rating is via "simple" math. Same for all the other skills--hence why it's possible to play stats-only leagues.

To me the more interesting maths are the ones that apply when your ratings are skewed from the general case that your league totals are set for. That's where you get the results that influence what Hoiles is talking about.

[daves]

Originally Posted by RonCo

Anyway, when we talk about real baseball, a good contact hitter is one who rarely strikes out (and has a tendency to hit for average rather than power). This is very essentially what the AvK rating controls.

I understand but why would a player with 70 contact have a 40 rated avoid K?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RonCo]

Originally Posted by daves

I understand but why would a player with 70 contact have a 40 rated avoid K?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A high "contact" (meaning projected batting average) and a low AvK rating says the player has a high BABIP rating.

[RonCo]

There do exist real players who strike out a fair amount and have good batting averages. That is because that real player has a high BABIP skill. When he puts his bat on the ball, it results in hits more than than average player.

[Hoiles]

Originally Posted by RonCo

Without going into too much detail, I think that will change from league to league and era to era, depending on a few parameters...given the process that NoOne kinda laid out, I posit that things like the talent distribution of pitchers (especially stuff) relative to the league totals setting, and skewed ballpark ratings can make a subtle but somewhat noticeable difference.

I'd agree with this... I was mostly talking about modern high-K leagues, whereas in historical leagues a guy like Mantle or even Killebrew performs well in low L eras.

[RonCo]

It's really a question of ratings imbalance over whatever the league totals say the league should be working toward. The math is a little complex, but bottom line, if you say the average K-rate should be X/AB, and your average AB is thrown by a pitcher with a K-rate that's keyed to a higher value, then you'll see this split.

Technically, you can say the same thing about pitchers in the opposite way. If the entire league has the average hitter with an AvK above that target (defined by league totals, then you can have the "average" pitcher strike out less guys than you would think.

That's the basic math of the situation.

Regardless, the main message is that OOTP uses the word "Contact" to mean "Batting Average" and OOTP uses the word "Avoid K" to mean "make contact." This is a root of the confusion, IMHO.

[Harmon Killebrew]

Originally Posted by Hoiles

I'd agree with this... I was mostly talking about modern high-K leagues, whereas in historical leagues a guy like Mantle or even Killebrew performs well in low L eras.

Yes I do.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by daves

I understand but why would a player with 70 contact have a 40 rated avoid K?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

you'd have to play in the editor to understand... there's many ways to get to 70/100 or 70/80 contact... smaller the scale, more ways to get there, too.

just start with 100/200 power then dink around with the other 2 ratings.


as far as league baseline stats being off or the results spoken of... long-term sims to callibrate LTM's will be very precise... auto-calc at anytime will get you at least close, if your league isn't quite average it will be skewed inversely to that reality when you clicked "auto-calc"

change of era, real->fictional players would be exceptions to that... historical is just its own animal anyway.

i think ronco has something off a bit, could be wrong: and anything below is strictly about a 'mature' league that isn't in transition or changing eras etc etc... static LTM environment.

league totals set a basic framework along with LTM - hand-in-hand can't have one without the other.

regardless of what those values actually are, the combination of LT and LTM equate to some baseline statistical environment -- if untouched in perpetuity, all injuries and iterations of players/year fluctuation will be known and accounted for eventually... that's the real "Baseline" environment no matter what the LT or predicted slash line says. (no gaurantee it's callibrated to that predicted slash without long-term sim to prove it.)

a rising tide raises all ships... so, this "baseline" merely sets the new league average... the players that will be ~125% better, will likely still be ~125% better than baseline.

e.g. essentially the LT/LTM if unchanged keeps the probability of a Xpower hitter (simple, ignore all other ratings for example only) to hit a home run consistent relative to their ratings... of course, their competition fluctuates, which will influence probability that guy will hit a home run, as it should... auto-calc on the other hand merely shifts it based on current competition to roughly ~meet those league totals used. (fast and easy is good too, for some)

changing the LTM for homeruns will increase that chance, and it will be distributed among the players -- more power gets a greater proportion. i believe, it's not evenly distributed.

if LTMs stay the same, then as talent fluctuates up and down, home runs will fluctuate up and down in proportion to the change in talent (again, not a gaurnatee, but overtime with enough iterations of the same context, it most certainly is a guarnatee.)

this is the heart of why i maintain LTM/LT (same era, i dont' roleplay changing eras)... this year, unless different in recent patch, i'm also introducing fluctuation to PCM to allow change of player talent to affect resulting stats, not a dial, like LTM for entire league, but merely manipulating the already randome way of creating new fictional players..

but by doing it this way, i know that an 80power guy has the same chance to hit a home run no matter what is going on (in a basic sense, relative to baseline defined by ltm/lt).... if there is really good pitching, that will further influence that probability... so, ONLY a shift in talent will cause these types of differences between a player in 2017 and 2517 in my leagues. not whether autocalc provided an elevated LTM (probability) due to low talent in leaugue in order to hit that LT for HR and that situation was prominent for a large portion of a highly-rated player's career.... that can be a huge advantage and it's nothing to do with how they modeled player creation nor the game of baseball.

LTMs model things like a new mound height... things that fundamentally shift the probability of results for specific situations. otherwise, try to find a nice happy zone and leave it there.

i don't recommend what i do to the weak of heart it's a hornet nest most wish to avoid... auto-calc works well, too. then, tweak a bit over time... nearly as good as a long-term sim and hammering out LTM to meet long-term Slash prediction, or in my case all relateable stats to an LTM.