Overall & Potential Scout Grade

[PSUColonel]

As it stands (from what I can tell...please let me know if I am incorrect) position ratings are part of what goes into the overall evaluation of any given player.

Since the developers made some changes in the last patch (players being positioned in better areas according to their skills) I was thinking it might be a better idea to base the overall & potential on a player's defensive skills, rather than position ratings.

I think we all agree position ratings are a combination of skills and experience, but skills alone kind of dictate what positions' a player might have aptitude for. (regardless of experience) So why not base the overall grade on these skills as opposed to experience....after all in many cases, we are talking about aptitude.

Each defensive skill could/would be weighted. Range might account for the heaviest weight, maybe followed by arm...and then errors & turn Double play. Obviously for outfielders the DP skill wouldn't matter, but some outfielders can play infield also.

So basically if you have a player with the following skills:

Range: 60
Infield Error: 70
Infield Arm: 60
Turn Double Play: 60

It's fairly obvious this player is a middle infielder. He's probably best suited to play 2B...but truthfully he can play SS & 3B also. SO...I don't think a player should be penalized in the overall grade because he has less experience at one of those positions, and maybe his team is choosing to play him in one of them. It's a matter of experience for this player...but clearly he has the aptitude to play all three.

Thoughts?, Comments?

[NoOne]

i think it's a matter of perspective. .. like you can't assume the double play. he's gotta do it before you can call him a 2b. There's gotta be a way to assess current ability, and if they don't have the experience, it is just a what if, even though we can be near 100% certain based on visible defensive ratings.

maybe it shouldn't impact potential, but should impact current. If that is't how it works at moment. As far as choices made by AI that use those metrics.

[Syd Thrift]

That “overall” grade does include experience but you can also get a player a lot of it by using them in spring training (where not only do the results not matter but you gain more experience per game) and in the minors (I’m not sure if you actually gain position experience quicker but of course the games don’t count). If you really want to use that player somewhere they’ve never played before, you can always open up he editor and just give them experience.

Also, experience only goes up to 200 and I believe players get maxed out in it within 3 years of regular play. Certainly there’s no benefit from having a guy who’s played shortstop for 15 years over a guy who’s played regularly for 5. It’s more of a hedge to keep people from suddenly putting a Derek Jeter at 3rd without ever having done any training with him (although even there I do think IRL even a mid season position move would have that guy doing extra practice on defense and there should probably be an in-game way to train players, perhaps at the cost of morale/happiness).

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

That “overall” grade does include experience but you can also get a player a lot of it by using them in spring training (where not only do the results not matter but you gain more experience per game) and in the minors (I’m not sure if you actually gain position experience quicker but of course the games don’t count). If you really want to use that player somewhere they’ve never played before, you can always open up he editor and just give them experience.

Also, experience only goes up to 200 and I believe players get maxed out in it within 3 years of regular play. Certainly there’s no benefit from having a guy who’s played shortstop for 15 years over a guy who’s played regularly for 5. It’s more of a hedge to keep people from suddenly putting a Derek Jeter at 3rd without ever having done any training with him (although even there I do think IRL even a mid season position move would have that guy doing extra practice on defense and there should probably be an in-game way to train players, perhaps at the cost of morale/happiness).

Well, I wouldn't advocate opening up the editor and giving a player experience...to me that's cheating. (but hey...that's just me)

The idea for me, is to incorporate the "tools" over the "ability". I at one time suggested we be able to scout players at any position, but Matt for some reason wasn't on board with that. I think it would be helpful to say "scout player at ss, or scout player at 3B". There should be a difference, and you should be able to scout a player at different positions IMO.

Short of being able to do that, incorporating skills into the overall grade seems like the next best option to me.

[Syd Thrift]

If you’re playing solo, is there really cheating? If that’s a rule you hold yourself to, by all means stick with it. I personally hold myself to the “no ratings” rule but don’t really consider it cheating if other people want to turn them on…

And skills are 100% included in the overall grade. No matter how hard you train a guy with 30/80 range, he will never be rated at shortstop, for example. In fact, one benefit of the editor is that you can go in, add experience, and see what that turns their ratings into (you could then put it back to the old value).

[NoOne]

i've proven if i micromanage mil, i can have all the position experience necessary for any prospect that doesn't zoom to the ML in 1-2 years. (+ST callups helping).

as the real years roll by i don't want to do that much work anymore, BWAHAH... if i know it's a formality and a matter of busy work, i have no problem opening that editor, lol. i'm old.. i don't do "busy" work anymore.

i also think some positions should translate as some portion of experience for others... e.g. ss and 2b has a lot of overlapping resposibilities. corner OF, too..

if not adding a little bonus exp, maybe a factor that makes it easier to pick up other similar positions.

not sure if this is in game or not, but it shouldn't be the same learning curve (rate of learning) for every postion, either.

but again, "current" means existing talent... so if they can't play a position efficiently, their current talent should reflect that. the potential will have the "what if all positions are 200exp" represented, right?

[PSUColonel]

Thought I’d bump this, as I feel it’s still worthy of some discussion

[PSUColonel]

I do think maybe overall and potential should be calculated differently when it comes to defense.

[mytreds]

I agree. Defense ratings needs another look and be more in-depth than it is. It would help if they can create a system where we ask a player or a coach to help a player learn a new position.