League Talent Distribution Curve Tweaks?

9tails · 12-25-2008, 08:37 PM

I've been playing with fictional leagues, and I've noticed that there seem to be a fairly serious oversupply of above-average to star level players. It seems to me like there shouldn't often be more than one or two blue-rated players at any given position in a league at any one time (one or two per two dozen teams, I suppose), and only 4ish more green players after that.

This came up when I realized that I had a 38-overall, 11 (1 to 20) Con, 10 Pow, 12 Eye, 21 Fielding Centerfield player as a reserve, that I picked up for bascially free from another team. In real-life baseball, an above-league-average hitter with Gold Glove-grade defense in centerfield would be a very valuable player, not a reserve.

I'm hoping to have a league where even the best teams need to carefully consider which mid to low tier players to use as starters to support their limited supply of high skill players.

Thinking about it while writing this post, it's not (or not just) that there are too many 5 star players, but that there are too many 4 and 4.5 star players, so that a well-run team can realisitically work to have high ratings at all positions. I'd rather have a larger gap between the very best players (very limited supply) and the main bulk of the starters in the league.

pressure · 12-26-2008, 03:56 AM

The way that the computer rates players can be a bit out of whack sometimes. However, I have found that statistically the player/talent distribution is fairly close to what you see in the mlb. I actually don't play with ratings on so I can't really comment on how many 5 star players there are, but there are a number of variables that can effect how ratings are displayed. I know at one point there was a lot of complaining that the rating system produced too many 1 star players, so maybe the rating system was offset to create more 5 and 4 star players. Hope that was clear, it's late and I'm tired.

12-25-2008, 08:37 PM	#1
9tails Bat Boy Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 16	League Talent Distribution Curve Tweaks? I've been playing with fictional leagues, and I've noticed that there seem to be a fairly serious oversupply of above-average to star level players. It seems to me like there shouldn't often be more than one or two blue-rated players at any given position in a league at any one time (one or two per two dozen teams, I suppose), and only 4ish more green players after that. This came up when I realized that I had a 38-overall, 11 (1 to 20) Con, 10 Pow, 12 Eye, 21 Fielding Centerfield player as a reserve, that I picked up for bascially free from another team. In real-life baseball, an above-league-average hitter with Gold Glove-grade defense in centerfield would be a very valuable player, not a reserve. I'm hoping to have a league where even the best teams need to carefully consider which mid to low tier players to use as starters to support their limited supply of high skill players. Thinking about it while writing this post, it's not (or not just) that there are too many 5 star players, but that there are too many 4 and 4.5 star players, so that a well-run team can realisitically work to have high ratings at all positions. I'd rather have a larger gap between the very best players (very limited supply) and the main bulk of the starters in the league.

12-26-2008, 03:56 AM	#2
pressure Minors (Double A) Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 192	The way that the computer rates players can be a bit out of whack sometimes. However, I have found that statistically the player/talent distribution is fairly close to what you see in the mlb. I actually don't play with ratings on so I can't really comment on how many 5 star players there are, but there are a number of variables that can effect how ratings are displayed. I know at one point there was a lot of complaining that the rating system produced too many 1 star players, so maybe the rating system was offset to create more 5 and 4 star players. Hope that was clear, it's late and I'm tired.