Something I've Never Understood About Pitching Ratings

PSUColonel · 06-08-2016, 12:31 PM

Can someone explain to me why this pitcher has a stuff rating in the "average" zone? I think there could be an issue with the way stuff is calculated with some players. If you look at the number and quality of pitches (along with decent velocity) this guy has, I would think his stuff rating would be higher.

hillm2ca · 06-08-2016, 12:43 PM

Here is how your pitcher's "stuff" rating would be calculated according to the OOTP online manual:

"Stuff is a measure of the quality of a pitcher's pitch repertoire. Think of it as essentially how a pitcher 'puts it all together.' Stuff directly affects the number of strikeouts a pitcher throws. Stuff is calculated based on a combination of his individual pitch ratings and the velocity with which he throws.

Relief pitchers receive a small bonus to stuff, to reflect the fact that batters get fewer looks at their pitches and have less of a chance to adjust to them. OOTP displays that bonus in the form of increased Stuff ratings. This bonus is heavily tied into the strength of a reliever's top two pitches, since relievers have much less incentive to mix in their weaker offerings. This means that a pitcher with a strong fastball, a strong slider, and a weak changeup might make for an average starting pitcher but a great reliever. You get to decide how he provides the most useful fit for your team. You can see the change in a pitcher's Stuff rating if you change the player's position from SP to MR and back."

I do not know if this helps but I thought I would pass it along. It does appear that your pitcher should have a higher "stuff" rating (at least a six, but perhaps higher because he has four quality pitches) based on this description but I could be wrong. The "stuff" rating, however, is not only based on ratings of pitches, but also velocity which may explain the difference here. 91-93 is no slouch but perhaps the OOTP engine thinks differently - enough to lower your "stuff" rating.
The only other thing that I could think of (and it is not much of a thought really ) is that you are using the 1-10 rating scale. Perhaps if you switched to the 1-20 rating scale, the ratings would be a bit more descriptive and would provide you some more information.

PSUColonel · 06-08-2016, 12:50 PM

The scale doesn't matter, it's considered in the average zone, which on say the 20-80 scale would be a 45,50 or 55.

Maybe this isn't the time or place to bring it up, but I do have another idea for a rating scale. It's a 2-8 modified scale......20,30,40,45,50,55,60,70,80

BIG17EASY · 06-08-2016, 01:28 PM

He has good individual pitches, but he may not know how to use them all together effectively. In other words, he throws too many fastballs to fastball hitters, etc. Also, 91-93 MPH is extremely average these days, especially when combined with poor control. That could play a factor in a lower stuff rating than each of his individual pitches.

da commish · 06-08-2016, 01:53 PM

What is his groundball %?

SteveP · 06-08-2016, 02:01 PM

5 isn't average.

Ratings in OOTP are roughly the upper half (right side?) of a bell curve -- IOW, something that looks like a ski slope. 5 is halfway down that slope. But the overwhelming majority of players at all levels would be lower (toward the high side of the slope.

BIG17EASY · 06-08-2016, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveP

5 isn't average.

Ratings in OOTP are roughly the upper half (right side?) of a bell curve -- IOW, something that looks like a ski slope. 5 is halfway down that slope. But the overwhelming majority of players at all levels would be lower (toward the high side of the slope.

Yes, when you look at it that way. The way ratings are normally viewed is that 5 is an average Major League skill, which I believe is what the OP meant.

PSUColonel · 06-08-2016, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveP

5 isn't average.

Ratings in OOTP are roughly the upper half (right side?) of a bell curve -- IOW, something that looks like a ski slope. 5 is halfway down that slope. But the overwhelming majority of players at all levels would be lower (toward the high side of the slope.

Not really sure what you're trying to say here.

BIG17EASY · 06-08-2016, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Not really sure what you're trying to say here.

He's saying that if you take every player in the game (Majors and minors) that a player rated at a 5 is above average. He's right because 99.9% of minor leaguers are below a 5 in most skills.

But that's not how ratings are used by scouts and GMs. A 5 (or a 50 on the 20-80 MLB scouting scale in real life) is viewed as an average Major League skill.

PSUColonel · 06-08-2016, 05:12 PM

so does it make any difference if you use "ratings relative" or not?

RchW · 06-08-2016, 05:13 PM

What ratings scale are you using.Can't tell much until that is known.

Did I miss it?

Oops now I see it! I looked 3 times

PSUColonel · 06-08-2016, 05:14 PM

If 50 is above average, (and then clearly all of the individual pitches are well above avg.) then still, why is stuff still not way above avg? It just doesn't seem to jive to me.

RchW · 06-08-2016, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

If 50 is above average, (and then clearly all of the individual pitches are well above avg.) then still, why is stuff still not way above avg? It just doesn't seem to jive to me.

One name from real life. Marco Estrada.

When he was traded to Toronto, people were laughing. They were saying he was a HR machine at the Dome. Best changeup in MLB and he developed a cutter this year that just adds confusion to his below 90 mph fastball.

Not great stuff but 3 very good pitches that batters can't square up.

I think he has the lowest BA against and probably a very low BABIP this year

Sam_15 · 06-08-2016, 06:34 PM

Confused about this as well. Four 6 pitches should not equal 5 stuff. I've seen things like this too.

Rizon · 06-08-2016, 07:01 PM

Could it be a result of a degree of scouting error with some mathematical rounding?

RchW · 06-08-2016, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam_15

Confused about this as well. Four 6 pitches should not equal 5 stuff. I've seen things like this too.

With that scale the pitches are 5.5 rounded up and the stuff is 5.4 rounded down. Mathematically a decimal 5 ie 0.5 or 0.0005 is rounded up.

dcd111 · 06-08-2016, 07:22 PM

Could it be because he's a reliever? If stuff for a reliever is a function of his two best pitches rather than a mix of all pitches, 6 and 6 aren't that great. At least in my league, ML relievers with two pitches 6 or higher seem to be a dime a dozen. And that velocity isn't particularly impressive. If he gets that changeup to 7, maybe his stuff rating will dramatically improve.

PSUColonel · 06-08-2016, 07:35 PM

Same player 20-80 (hasn't reached potential in stuff, yet pitches are very good. Wouldn't you think he wouldn't have reached his individual pitch potentials as well?

RchW · 06-08-2016, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Same player 20-80 (hasn't reached potential in stuff, yet pitches are very good. Wouldn't you think he wouldn't have reached his individual pitch potentials as well?

You should clone him then edit to find the critical points.

Rizon · 06-08-2016, 07:47 PM

Maybe the Velocity is dragging it down from a 6 to a 5? Since Stuff includes Velocity.

06-08-2016, 12:31 PM	#1
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 12,987 Blog Entries: 37	Something I've Never Understood About Pitching Ratings Can someone explain to me why this pitcher has a stuff rating in the "average" zone? I think there could be an issue with the way stuff is calculated with some players. If you look at the number and quality of pitches (along with decent velocity) this guy has, I would think his stuff rating would be higher. Attached Images Last edited by PSUColonel; 06-08-2016 at 10:20 PM.

06-08-2016, 12:43 PM	#2
hillm2ca Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Mar 2016 Posts: 286	Here is how your pitcher's "stuff" rating would be calculated according to the OOTP online manual: "Stuff is a measure of the quality of a pitcher's pitch repertoire. Think of it as essentially how a pitcher 'puts it all together.' Stuff directly affects the number of strikeouts a pitcher throws. Stuff is calculated based on a combination of his individual pitch ratings and the velocity with which he throws. Relief pitchers receive a small bonus to stuff, to reflect the fact that batters get fewer looks at their pitches and have less of a chance to adjust to them. OOTP displays that bonus in the form of increased Stuff ratings. This bonus is heavily tied into the strength of a reliever's top two pitches, since relievers have much less incentive to mix in their weaker offerings. This means that a pitcher with a strong fastball, a strong slider, and a weak changeup might make for an average starting pitcher but a great reliever. You get to decide how he provides the most useful fit for your team. You can see the change in a pitcher's Stuff rating if you change the player's position from SP to MR and back." I do not know if this helps but I thought I would pass it along. It does appear that your pitcher should have a higher "stuff" rating (at least a six, but perhaps higher because he has four quality pitches) based on this description but I could be wrong. The "stuff" rating, however, is not only based on ratings of pitches, but also velocity which may explain the difference here. 91-93 is no slouch but perhaps the OOTP engine thinks differently - enough to lower your "stuff" rating. The only other thing that I could think of (and it is not much of a thought really ) is that you are using the 1-10 rating scale. Perhaps if you switched to the 1-20 rating scale, the ratings would be a bit more descriptive and would provide you some more information. Last edited by hillm2ca; 06-08-2016 at 12:52 PM.

06-08-2016, 05:13 PM	#11
RchW Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: The big smoke Posts: 15,628	What ratings scale are you using.Can't tell much until that is known. Did I miss it? Oops now I see it! I looked 3 times __________________ Cheers RichW If you’re looking for a good cause to donate money to please consider a Donation to Parkinson’s Canada. It may help me have a better future and if not me, someone else. Thanks. “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” Frank Wilhoit Last edited by RchW; 06-08-2016 at 05:14 PM.

06-08-2016, 07:01 PM	#15
Rizon Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: SF Area, California Total Posts: 531,691 Posts: 2,363	Could it be a result of a degree of scouting error with some mathematical rounding? __________________ JML MILKSHAKES

06-08-2016, 07:35 PM	#18
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 12,987 Blog Entries: 37	Same player 20-80 (hasn't reached potential in stuff, yet pitches are very good. Wouldn't you think he wouldn't have reached his individual pitch potentials as well? Attached Images

06-08-2016, 12:50 PM	#3
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 12,987 Blog Entries: 37	The scale doesn't matter, it's considered in the average zone, which on say the 20-80 scale would be a 45,50 or 55. Maybe this isn't the time or place to bring it up, but I do have another idea for a rating scale. It's a 2-8 modified scale......20,30,40,45,50,55,60,70,80

06-08-2016, 01:28 PM	#4
BIG17EASY Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 3,291	He has good individual pitches, but he may not know how to use them all together effectively. In other words, he throws too many fastballs to fastball hitters, etc. Also, 91-93 MPH is extremely average these days, especially when combined with poor control. That could play a factor in a lower stuff rating than each of his individual pitches.

06-08-2016, 01:53 PM	#5
da commish All Star Reserve Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Minnesota Posts: 517	What is his groundball %?

06-08-2016, 02:01 PM	#6
SteveP Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 3,109	5 isn't average. Ratings in OOTP are roughly the upper half (right side?) of a bell curve -- IOW, something that looks like a ski slope. 5 is halfway down that slope. But the overwhelming majority of players at all levels would be lower (toward the high side of the slope.

06-08-2016, 05:12 PM	#10
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 12,987 Blog Entries: 37	so does it make any difference if you use "ratings relative" or not?

06-08-2016, 05:14 PM	#12
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 12,987 Blog Entries: 37	If 50 is above average, (and then clearly all of the individual pitches are well above avg.) then still, why is stuff still not way above avg? It just doesn't seem to jive to me.

06-08-2016, 06:34 PM	#14
Sam_15 Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 252	Confused about this as well. Four 6 pitches should not equal 5 stuff. I've seen things like this too.

06-08-2016, 07:22 PM	#17
dcd111 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 131	Could it be because he's a reliever? If stuff for a reliever is a function of his two best pitches rather than a mix of all pitches, 6 and 6 aren't that great. At least in my league, ML relievers with two pitches 6 or higher seem to be a dime a dozen. And that velocity isn't particularly impressive. If he gets that changeup to 7, maybe his stuff rating will dramatically improve.

06-08-2016, 07:47 PM	#20
Rizon Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: SF Area, California Total Posts: 531,691 Posts: 2,363	Maybe the Velocity is dragging it down from a 6 to a 5? Since Stuff includes Velocity. __________________ JML MILKSHAKES