Ratings Accuracy

[Abnerdoubleday]

While it is my understanding that the overall ratings are intentionally not exact, are the underlying/secondary ratings accurate?

Or are they similar to when scouting is turned on in the regular game?

[mess]

Originally Posted by Abnerdoubleday

While it is my understanding that the overall ratings are intentionally not exact, are the underlying/secondary ratings accurate?

Or are they similar to when scouting is turned on in the regular game?

The underlying ratings are accurate. The Overall ratings are weighted kind of funny and also tied to rarity.

[Abnerdoubleday]

Originally Posted by mess

The underlying ratings are accurate. The Overall ratings are weighted kind of funny and also tied to rarity.

Do you know that for a fact? Because much of what I'm seeing for results doesn't make much sense unless the ratings aren't really accurate or there is a higher level of random performance built into PT.

[mess]

Yeah, if your pitcher has a 95 Stamina rating... he has a 95 stamina rating. There's no fluff behind it.

[DonkeyKongSr]

Originally Posted by mess

Yeah, if your pitcher has a 95 Stamina rating... he has a 95 stamina rating. There's no fluff behind it.

However, are there some unlisted ratings going on behind the scenes? It seems like sometimes guys will consistently outperform their listed individual stats. Particularly pitchers, but maybe it's their unique pitch repertoires that differentiate similar looking players.

[One Post Wonder]

Originally Posted by mess

The Overall ratings are weighted kind of funny and also tied to rarity.

I don't think they're tied to rarity. I know I see the same 96-98 rated guys in the AH pretty often.

IMO if a guy is performing differently from his underlying ratings then it is luck, either good or bad. I always leave underperforming players in and they turn it around in the end.

[Abnerdoubleday]

One of the things that has me questioning this is that in looking over the stats of the first season (in three different leagues) you will see multiples of the same player with very different stats. You would think that over an entire season, in the same league, the results would be pretty similar from one another.

[Galeg]

Originally Posted by Abnerdoubleday

One of the things that has me questioning this is that in looking over the stats of the first season (in three different leagues) you will see multiples of the same player with very different stats. You would think that over an entire season, in the same league, the results would be pretty similar from one another.

I'm not surprised. Outside of the obvious hot and cold streaks, in a format like PT the oppositions within division can differ wildly.

[chazzycat]

Originally Posted by Abnerdoubleday

One of the things that has me questioning this is that in looking over the stats of the first season (in three different leagues) you will see multiples of the same player with very different stats. You would think that over an entire season, in the same league, the results would be pretty similar from one another.

I think you're underestimating the amount of pure, random chance in baseball. That's just a sign of a realistic sim engine, IMO. I would be concerned if the stats were too similar.

[Matt Arnold]

Originally Posted by chazzycat

I think you're underestimating the amount of pure, random chance in baseball. That's just a sign of a realistic sim engine, IMO. I would be concerned if the stats were too similar.

I forget what the numbers are, but I think the basic deviation on a player's batting average over the course of a season is around 20 points, not even counting differing opponents. That means that a guy who is a "true talent" .300 hitter will likely hit between .280 and .320, but is still only like a 2/3 chance of being in those ranges.

[mess]

Originally Posted by One Post Wonder

I don't think they're tied to rarity. I know I see the same 96-98 rated guys in the AH pretty often.

Right. 96-98 are in the same rarity group (Iron, Bronze, Silver, etc)

That's all done by OVR