What If Player Ratings Are Squeezed?

[knockahoma]

Just curious. I have a 1976 league going, playing God-mode as usual. I did some defensive ratings editing. Wound up squeezing the high and low ratings closer. For example, the highest catching arm was a 20. The lowest (I think) was around a 6.

My editing made the highest catcher arm a 15 and the lowest an 8. I made similar adjustments to other positions. It made me curious. What if all shortstops had an infield range between 12-20, instead of 8-20? Or what if you had all shortstops with ratings between 12-16?

How would that affect stats?

[KBLover]

I would guess that the ranges those stats impact would get closer together and almost cancel out in a comparison sense.

If range is 8 to 20, then it would matter more if you're on the high end or low end. But if it's 12 to 16, it matters less as the low and high end are close together, especially if you're in the middle, like had a 14 range SS. 14 in an 8 to 20 range, it would matter much more if you went to 8 or 20.

It would also make the teams pretty much even strength, making randomness more of a factor since low to high, the spread is small, there's more likely going to be overlap where a 12 might do as well as the 16 in any given year or series. Meanwhile it's much less likely that an 8 would do as well as a 20 for any decent length of time.

[endgame]

An easier way, perhaps, to adjust your overall 'closeness' in the effect of ratings would be to adjust the defensive influence in the config file. Personally, I dial mine up. I want to see the excellent defenders perform well and give credit where credit is due, IMHO, to the positional player's fielding abilities.

OTOH, I've never entered a number below 100, but I believe it would work. I've asked a question about spacing and such, but never received anything definitive. I only suggest it because it's a one-step adjustment that, on the surface, appears to achieve the goal you're describing in process. FWIW

[ryanivr]

endgame,

I've always considered changing that number to something a bit higher. What number do you use?

[endgame]

Originally Posted by ryanivr

endgame,

I've always considered changing that number to something a bit higher. What number do you use?

The three changes you see here are the only ones I've made, but keep in mind each league will have its own repercussions. I'm very pleased with the way mine has been proceeding.

GAME_GROUNDBALL_FLYBALL_FACTOR
115
GAME_DEFENSE_INFLUENCE
135
GAME_FIELDING_ERROR_FREQUENCY
100
GAME_THROWING_ERROR_FREQUENCY
100
GAME_DOUBLE_PLAY_FREQUENCY
125

[Curtis]

Thank you for that, endgame. I understand all of those except the first. What does increasing the Groundball/Flyball factor do? (I do understand groundball/flyball ratio.)

[endgame]

Originally Posted by Curtis

Thank you for that, endgame. I understand all of those except the first. What does increasing the Groundball/Flyball factor do? (I do understand groundball/flyball ratio.)

My very basic understanding is influence effect, so in this case it's simply that G/F has its impact increased 15% greater (roughly). I do this - and again, it's marginal - to compliment the defensive increase, giving, IMHO, the total defensive spectrum an added bump. If I'm using high percentage groundballers, they are theortetically more likely to produce balls in play that are subsequently handled by position players who will have to prove their capabilities or have their weaknesses exposed.

[Curtis]

Hmm, I'll have to think on that. I'm torn between realism and self-interest here. I'm trying to teach five players new positions, and third base is already a .5 errors per game black hole. Still…

[knockahoma]

Thanks for the replies.

I tightened the ratings, thinking of how playing time often skews numbers.

In real life, you might get Reds backup infielder Darrel Chaney start 20 games and have a .925 fielding percentage. So, OOTP assigns poor Darrel a 6 out of 20. But, the guy was better than that. Playing 150 games likely would get Chaney to his true performance level, .965-ish-- not great, but not beer softball league territory either. Now, if the guy really was beer softball league material, I'll leave him at that low-low rating (c-1B Earl Williams trying to survive a terrible experiment at 3B, for example).

I figure playing time and the engine's unpredictability will still give me those backup shortstops who play only 20 games and have a .930 fielding percentage, even though I squeeze the ratings.

In other words, I rate each player based on what I think they would achieve in 150 games at that position. Then I let playing time and the Engine do their thing for the results.

Seems to make sense, I think--unless there's something about the OOTP engine I'm failing to consider.

[StyxNCa]

Originally Posted by knockahoma

Just curious. I have a 1976 league going, playing God-mode as usual. I did some defensive ratings editing. Wound up squeezing the high and low ratings closer. For example, the highest catching arm was a 20. The lowest (I think) was around a 6.

My editing made the highest catcher arm a 15 and the lowest an 8. I made similar adjustments to other positions. It made me curious. What if all shortstops had an infield range between 12-20, instead of 8-20? Or what if you had all shortstops with ratings between 12-16?

How would that affect stats?

You always like to start trouble don't you?

[knockahoma]

Without conflict, there is no story. Oops! I meant !!!!

How to Write Conflict: Understanding the Most Important Part of Writing Fiction

[Curtis]

If you set defense to being based on either three years or (preferably) career, wouldn't that obviate the necessity to adjust their ratings nearer to the mean (and simultaneously save you a lot of work)?

{Thank you for giving me the opportunity to write 'obviate the necessity'; that always makes for a good day.}

[knockahoma]

double post

[knockahoma]

Hey Curtis. Glad I could help.

Actually, I start the league off on a three year option. I don't like the career option for obvious reasons to do with aging, injury, etc.

Why edit from there? A few reasons

* fielding stats often miss the mark in representing a player's true talent. I think its fascinating that in OOTP we KNOW a player's true range and fielding talent. Yet, how often is that talent misrepresented on the leader boards? And OOTP is a much less complex system that real life.

* Take the case of Derrell Thomas, SF Giants infielder. He plays SS, 2B, 3B, CF. His lifetime fielding % at 2B was .970. in 539 games. In 1977, he played only 23 games at 2B and sure enough, had an anomalous year where 7 errors led to a .948 percentage. I believe that number had more to do with playing time than talent level. So, that year isn't really representative of Thomas' ability at 2B, no more than George Brett hitting .228 in 96 ABs would be representative of his talent. So, why throw that abberation into the mix? I'll rate Derrell what I believe was his true talent level and let the game engine work it from there.

* Throwing arms. Joe Ferguson, the catcher-rightfielder for the Dodgers, Astros and Cardinals had a rocket arm. I read a story where he stood at the centerfield wall and fired a no-hopper right to the plate. The stats don't show that (although games like strat do). The same was true of Dwight Evan's arm rating. He had a gun among guns. Didn't show up at all in the 3 year calc.

* I also look at minor league fielding stats where guys got plenty of playing time. Another example is Frank White, the gold glove 2B for the Royals. His first three years he had limited playing time at SS and 2B, which seems to have hurt his ratings. He's rated as average to low-- and higher as a SS-- which, wasn't really the truth at all. He was a much better 2b, regardless of what limited fielding numbers suggest. So, I rate him in a way that would make the Royals want Frank as their 2B, instead of trading SS Freddie Patek to make room for Frank there.

* I am very familiar with the 70s and the reputation of various players. I grew up in that era an avid baseball fan. And I rely some of strat-o-matic's defensive ratings which are highly respected (I believe the strat creator was invited to the big Bill James defensive pow-wow a few years ago).

* I look at how the players were used by their managers. For example, in OOTP, the Pirates SS Frank Taveras consistently is rated more highly than his long-time defensive replacement, Mario Mendoza. In fact, in this last upload, Frank was in the top five in range out of 24 starting shortstops....mmmmm, I don't think so.

So, basically, I'm augmenting the fielding stats with other research. And I can change ratings from year to year. I give each piece of evidence the emphasis I believe it deserves. I will say this: Version XI made great strides in defensive ratings, far as I'm concerned. I spend much less time editing than I have in previous versions.

And, as you can probably tell, I actually enjoy the editing process.

[Curtis]

Originally Posted by knockahoma

* Throwing arms. Joe Ferguson, the catcher-rightfielder for the Dodgers, Astros and Cardinals had a rocket arm. I read a story where he stood at the centerfield wall and fired a no-hopper right to the plate.

* I am very familiar with the 70s and the reputation of various players. I grew up in that era an avid baseball fan. And I rely some of strat-o-matic's defensive ratings which are highly respected (I believe the strat creator was invited to the big Bill James defensive pow-wow a few years ago).

And, as you can probably tell, I actually enjoy the editing process.

I read a similar story about Satchel Paige, where to win a bet he nailed a catcher's mitt to the wall behind home plate, then hit the mitt with a throw from the centerfield wall. He was given three tries, but only needed one.

I don't know how Strat gets/got the ratings for players from the '70s, but for modern era players they have many (double digits) radio and tv announcers on retainer to give their subjective opinions of how players should be rated. Ron Darling of the Mets is one of them. I wonder if that's how they get their bunt/hit-and-run ratings?

One of the bad things about relying on statistics for some ratings is that if you're good, the statistic will lie. I played in a Strat league for six seasons (1996-2001), and my catcher was Ivan Rodriguez, who had the best catcher arm rating in the game, ranging from -4 to -5 (maybe -6 one year?). He never made the leaderboards for either number of runners thrown out or percentage of runners thrown out, because in no year did enough runners attempt for him to qualify. He completely shut down my opponents' running games. Conversely, an outfielder who leads the league in assists three years running might have a poor arm, but so many guys run on him that his stats get padded. (I had that guy, too.)

Hey, if you enjoy the editing, then go to it. At least it keeps you off the streets.

[bwhansen]

Originally Posted by knockahoma

Joe Ferguson, the catcher-rightfielder for the Dodgers, Astros and Cardinals had a rocket arm. I read a story where he stood at the centerfield wall and fired a no-hopper right to the plate.

I heard a story (from a few different people) of Tony Oliva occasionally pitching some batting practice from the outfield.

[StyxNCa]

Originally Posted by bwhansen

I heard a story (from a few different people) of Tony Oliva occasionally pitching some batting practice from the outfield.

Oliva had a great arm. I've also heard numerous stories about Clemente. Many think he had the best arm of all during the years he played.

[Malleus Dei]

Originally Posted by StyxNCa

Oliva had a great arm. I've also heard numerous stories about Clemente. Many think he had the best arm of all during the years he played.

I watched them both play. Oliva had a very strong arm and was very accurate with it, but nobody could come close to Clemente because he would just throw laser beams in from right field. He was a perennial Gold Glover and assist leader until finally the all the smart players learned the lesson: never try to run on Roberto Clemente, because he will throw your ass out. After that his assists dropped, but he still had the laser for an arm.

Oilva was a very good player, but Clemente was a joy to watch and one of those guys you always remember. Sometimes I'd sit in right field just to see him play close up. It was tragic losing him early. Very few players are humanitarians off the field, but Clemente was, and he died helping others. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends, but Roberto Clemente laid his down for people in need that he had never met in a country that even wasn't his. Hero doesn't even begin to cover it.

[jagreen]

Originally Posted by Curtis

{Thank you for giving me the opportunity to write 'obviate the necessity'; that always makes for a good day.}

And thank you b/c I particularly enjoyed that phrase.