position rating calculator

[jaa36]

I did some research in OOTP 26 to try to figure out how position ratings are calculated. This builds on research done by others, including https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...#gid=796150206, which in turn has been incorporated into the excellent (but now somewhat outdated) https://ootpcalculator.com/position-calculator. I actually don't think this has changed much since OOTP 25, but it has changed since OOTP 22 and 23 when much of this was done.

Of course, you can always just plug in ratings to the player editor within OOTP 26, but I wanted to back-calculate the formulas to figure out what a player's positional ratings would be based on his defensive ratings.

The main takeaways:
-For most positions, the ratings are calculated by combining components from each category: so a catcher would get points for framing, blocking and arm, which adds up to a total max position rating. The current position rating is then just the % experience the player has (how many "experience points" out of 200) times that max rating.
-The points for the individual components is generally linear, and there is often a "cut point" where the slope changes. To see this, you need to look at ratings on the 1-250 scale rather than on 20-80 or other scales. So for catcher blocking, for example, the slope is 2.91 "position" points for every "catcher blocking" point above 40, and 0.487 for every blocking point below 40. You can look at each position's tab to see the details.
-After you get the individual components, you generally just add them up to get the total ratings. At a couple positions you also have to add or subtract a few points.
-The biggest quirk is with first base, where the height rating has a multiplier effect on the other ratings, with the steepest penalty to 155 cm and below, and the biggest gain at 215 cm and above.
-I couldn't quite sort things out for pitchers, but pitcher defense really doesn't matter so I didn't stick with it.

I also did a little research into how quickly players gain positional experience in different situations. The biggest takeaways there were:
-Players accumulate experience much faster when they are first learning the position than later. For example, the left fielder I tested picked up 27 experience points in his first spring training game (starting from 0), but then only gained 1 point at a time once he reached 150 (where max experience is 200).
-Players gain positional experience fastest in spring training, just a tick slower in the minor leagues, and much slower in the majors.
-Catchers gain positional experience MUCH slower than any other position. It's not uncommon for a catcher to play several games in a row and gain zero experience, whereas other positions generally will gain at least some experience about 90% of the time they play a game.

Feel free to look through the whole spreadsheet! The first sheet lets you put in ratings on a 20-80 scale, which are then internally converted to 1-250 and back to 20-80 for the final rating, and the second sheet lets you put in the exact ratings (from the editor) on the 1-250 scale directly. The third sheet shows the ratings crosswalk from the 20-80 and 1-250 scales.

[spartacus007]

This is fantastic, thank you! I use the OOTP Calculator a lot.

[micropterus58]

Thanks for the time and effort put in to this. Should solve the old LF or RF questions.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by jaa36

-Players gain positional experience fastest in spring training, just a tick slower in the minor leagues, and much slower in the majors.

Is this with fictional players?

Last I knew real players got almost nothing in ST if recalc is set to On.

[jaa36]

Yes, fictional players. I haven't looked at this with real players, so can't speak to how it would be different for them.

[jpeters1734]

Just an FYI, position potential has been a visible rating in OOTP for a couple of versions now. If you want to know what a LF rating would be for an IF with no experience there, just look at the LF Potential column

[jaa36]

Yeah, I'm aware . The "value" of this tool (if any) is to see how the components affect the rating- what would happen if this player's range decreased, etc, without editing in game- and knowing generally what drives the overall rating.

[Garlon]

The overall rating is really just for reference. The component ratings are what actually drives the outcomes.

Due to the way the overall rating is calculated in OOTP there are times when a defender with a lower overall rating is actually a better defensive player in terms of EFF and ZR.

If you are playing in an earlier baseball era when there were more infield errors and more outs in play, then the infield error rating becomes more valuable compared to a more modern era with better fielding percentages and a higher rate of strikeout which reduces outs in play.

The overall rating gives you some idea but you should still consider the component ratings.

[jaa36]

Thanks for the info. I tried to parse out what the relative "in game" value of the different components was in a modern environment last year, but found it really difficult to do because there was so much noise in the sample, including the issue of players having variable levels of experience. In the end, the positional rating turned out to be a better proxy for defensive value than the individual components were, but maybe with a big enough sample...