Home | Webstore
Latest News: OOTP 25 Available - FHM 10 Available - OOTP Go! Available

Out of the Park Baseball 25 Buy Now!

  

Go Back   OOTP Developments Forums > Prior Versions of Our Games > Out of the Park Baseball 18 > OOTP 18 - General Discussions

OOTP 18 - General Discussions Everything about the 2017 version of Out of the Park Baseball - officially licensed by MLB.com and the MLBPA.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-21-2017, 07:07 PM   #1
joejccva71
Minors (Double A)
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 101
I don't understand the ratings system

I look at these players who are probably some of the best at their position:

CF: Mike Trout - Player Rating is 80 (best rating)

But then I look at his Contact, Gap Power, HR Power, Eye/Discipline, and POSITIONAL RATING and I'm perplexed.

Mike Trout's ratings are:
Contact: 60 out of 80 (very average, on a 1-100 scale this is a 70)
Gap and HR Power: 65 out of 80 (above average, but not very good)
Eye/Disc: 70
Positional Rating: 65 out of 80 (Trout is probably the best at his position, so I just don't understand this)



Let's look at 3rd basemen:

Nolan Arenado ratings:
Contact: 50 out of 80 (this is below average for a .290+ hitter, not understanding this)

Gap and HR Power:65 out of 80 (he hit 41 home runs last year!....come on!)

Positional Rating: 70 (Nolan Arenado is arguably the best 3rd basemen in the entire MLB)

I mean I guess you could argue that Machado is as good, but their positional ratings should be atleast 75 if not 80.


I'm really confused as to how these numbers were obtained. If my contact hitter is batting .300 for the season, is he going to be at 50 out of 80 for contact hitting??


I guess the morale of my story really is if I were to base a youngster off his batter ratings of let's say 50 contact, 60 gap / hr power, and 60 eye/disc....I would probably think he sucks. Maybe I'm thinking about it the wrong way.

Last edited by joejccva71; 03-21-2017 at 07:21 PM.
joejccva71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2017, 07:38 PM   #2
Izz
Hall Of Famer
 
Izz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,466
Bear in mind that player ratings aren't just based against other current MLB players, but against all players who have ever played.
__________________
Not only do I play OOTP but I also write science-fiction: My Website

A brief history of the Australia-New Zealand Baseball League (AUNZBL 2019-2119)--A Dynasty Report
The National Penterham Four-Bases Association--A Dynasty Report
Izz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2017, 07:45 PM   #3
injury log
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,162
You have scouting on, and your scout is underrating those players. Their true ratings are higher.

Arenado and Machado have the two highest defensive ratings at 3B for any 3B in the game, for example.
injury log is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2017, 07:58 PM   #4
slugger922cubs
Major Leagues
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 311
on a 20-80 scale your relationship isnt to 80 at the top as in a 1-100 scale. It's to 50 as the average.
20=poor
30=bad
40=below average
50=average
60=good
70=great
80=elite
Scouts start at 50 and bounce guys notches up or down based on what they evaluate.
Trout being one of the only batters that rates good(60)-elite(80) at every rating is what makes him an elite(80) overall player. His defensive positional rating (65) of between good (60) and great (70) is probably about right. Fangraphs rates him as only the 8th best CF in baseball last year.

Arrenado is likely a .290 hitter because of his good to great(65) gap and power. HR and hits in the gap fall for hits not outs. While only being an average contact hitter. Hes a great(70) defensive 3b for sure. Obviously theres some reason they dont think hes better than that. Even at 70 he could still be the best.

You also need to remember theres also fog on ratings. So your scout and OSA could still be off a little based on thier perceptions.
slugger922cubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2017, 08:25 PM   #5
PSUColonel
Hall Of Famer
 
PSUColonel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 12,978
Blog Entries: 37
Are you using relative ratings? Relative ratings are far more realistic. The truth is you won't see scouts handing out 80's but once in a generation. A 65 is considered all star Claibur for any tool. Trout is an overall 80 because he's the best relative to other players in the league...I see your point though and think the overall ratings (along with defense and speed need an overhaul) the truth is OOTP needs to go to completely relative ratings before the scouting system can be improved upon....it's just going to take a little time I think.
PSUColonel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2017, 08:27 PM   #6
slugger922cubs
Major Leagues
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 311
on a 20-80 scale your relationship isnt to 80 at the top as in a 1-100 scale. It's to 50 as the average.
20=poor
30=bad
40=below average
50=average
60=good
70=great
80=elite
Scouts start at 50 and bounce guys notches up or down based on what they evaluate.
Trout being one of the only batters that rates good(60)-elite(80) at every rating is what makes him an elite(80) overall player. His defensive positional rating (65) of between good (60) and great (70) is probably about right. Fangraphs rates him as only the 8th best CF in baseball last year.

Arrenado is likely a .290 hitter because of his good to great(65) gap and power. HR and hits in the gap fall for hits not outs. While only being an average contact hitter. Hes a great(70) defensive 3b for sure. Obviously theres some reason they dont think hes better than that. Even at 70 he could still be the best.

You also need to remember theres also fog on ratings. So your scout and OSA could still be off a little based on thier perceptions.
slugger922cubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2017, 08:47 PM   #7
scott1964
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Denver
Posts: 5,551
Blog Entries: 19
I turned my ratings off. It more fun now to not know.
__________________
This just feels more like waiting in line at the Department of Motor Vehicles.

PETA.....People Eating Tasty Animals.

scott1964 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-21-2017, 08:57 PM   #8
Painmantle
Hall Of Famer
 
Painmantle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Greenfield ,IN
Posts: 3,053
It's all relative. also keep in mind that ratings don't produce stats, league modifiers do, ratings only distribute the stats that the league modifiers produce. If you build a league of Hall of fame hitters someone is going to suck because there are only so many statistics to go around based on the league modifiers for the core year you are playing in. Fill your league with 50 Home Run guys and no one hits 50, they all are more likely to hit 25-30

A players worth from a statistical stand point is only relative to how well everyone else is preforming and what their ratings are. Ratings are not absolute.

example: all .280 hitters are not created equal

If you hit .280 in 1930 you were 16 pts below the league average
If you hit .280 in 1968 you were 43 points above the league average
__________________
“As soon as I got out there I felt a strange relationship with the pitcher's mound. It was as if I'd been born out there. Pitching just felt like the most natural thing in the world. Striking out batters was easy.” -Babe Ruth
“Ruth made a grave mistake when he gave up pitching. Working once a week, he might have lasted a long time and become a great star.”-Tris Speaker
My Dynasties
The Beantown Bambino

Last edited by Painmantle; 03-21-2017 at 09:02 PM.
Painmantle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 12:10 AM   #9
Ts-Rock
Major Leagues
 
Ts-Rock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: H'ville - Home of 6x BSA World Series Champion
Posts: 319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Izz View Post
Bear in mind that player ratings aren't just based against other current MLB players, but against all players who have ever played.
they are?? man, been playing OOTP since 6.5 and this is first time I realized this!
__________________
Hendersonville Hitmen of the BSA
5x WS Champ (2010, 2013-15, 2017)
5x OOTY (2010-11, 2013-14, 2017)

2010 114-48, World Series Champions
2011 109-53, 1st Rd Loss to N.F.
2012. 96-66, 1st Rd Loss to L.A.
2013 112-50, World Series Champions
2014 119-43, World Series Champions
2015 124-38, World Series Champions
2016 111-51, LCS Loss to L.A.
2017 110-52, World Series Champions
2018 101-61, 1st Rd Loss to Baffin Island
2019. 98-64, LCS Loss to Baffin Island
2020 103-59,
Ts-Rock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 12:51 AM   #10
actionjackson
Hall Of Famer
 
actionjackson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 6,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Izz View Post
Bear in mind that player ratings aren't just based against other current MLB players, but against all players who have ever played.
I could be wrong, but I thought it was based against the players that are currently active in your game, and you can either base it against all the players in your game or break it down by positions. In that second scenario, it means that Mike Trout would only be measured against other active players in your league that play CF.

Last edited by actionjackson; 03-22-2017 at 09:36 PM.
actionjackson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 12:54 AM   #11
Stlcardinal50
Minors (Single A)
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 60
FYI the ratings are currently deflated by accident. They will fix it.

This is what is currently going on.



I have a thread in the Bug Forum about it here. http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...d.php?t=275427
Stlcardinal50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 01:06 AM   #12
injury log
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ts-Rock View Post
they are??
In a certain sense, I suppose they are, but in another sense they're not. The ratings scale itself has to go high enough so that the game can model a .420 hitter or a 70 HR hitter, because baseball has had performances like that. So if you're comparing a rating with the top of the scale, I guess you are sort of seeing how far a guy is from the best performers in history.

But it's not something anyone would think about when creating the roster set. No one is comparing Miguel Cabrera with Rogers Hornsby when deciding on Cabrera's Contact rating. The roster set ratings are chosen to produce the stats we expect players to produce, against the competition we expect those players to face.
injury log is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 04:01 AM   #13
Matt Arnold
OOTP Developer
 
Matt Arnold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Here and there
Posts: 14,089
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stlcardinal50 View Post
FYI the ratings are currently deflated by accident. They will fix it.

This is what is currently going on.



I have a thread in the Bug Forum about it here. http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...d.php?t=275427
That was only the 1-10 scale that was off. The others were not affected.
Matt Arnold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 04:03 AM   #14
Matt Arnold
OOTP Developer
 
Matt Arnold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Here and there
Posts: 14,089
And as for Trout, basically think of it the fact that everyone has flaws, but Trout is basically the only player who is significantly above average across the board. He doesn't have the best average, power, speed, or D, but he's damn near the top at all of them so grades out that way.
Matt Arnold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 05:12 AM   #15
Izz
Hall Of Famer
 
Izz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 2,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by actionjackson View Post
I could be wrong, but I thought it was based against the players that are currently active in your game, and you can either base it against all the players in your game or break it down by positions. In that second scenario, it means that Mike Trout would only be measured against other players that play CF.
I thought that was the star ratings rather than the 20-80 ratings (or whatever scale one uses)?

But anyway, looks like injury log has already set me right
__________________
Not only do I play OOTP but I also write science-fiction: My Website

A brief history of the Australia-New Zealand Baseball League (AUNZBL 2019-2119)--A Dynasty Report
The National Penterham Four-Bases Association--A Dynasty Report
Izz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 09:44 AM   #16
X3NEIZE
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Arnold View Post
And as for Trout, basically think of it the fact that everyone has flaws, but Trout is basically the only player who is significantly above average across the board. He doesn't have the best average, power, speed, or D, but he's damn near the top at all of them so grades out that way.

Just what I was about to say.... Trout's greatness comes in the sense that he does everything well, although not the best at any specific tools. Probably the most complete player ever.

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/201...es-angels-2016
X3NEIZE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 10:18 AM   #17
spleen1015
Hall Of Famer
 
spleen1015's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,950
What are his stats? Are they what they should be? That's what matters.
spleen1015 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 04:36 PM   #18
Painmantle
Hall Of Famer
 
Painmantle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Greenfield ,IN
Posts: 3,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by X3NEIZE View Post
Just what I was about to say.... Trout's greatness comes in the sense that he does everything well, although not the best at any specific tools. Probably the most complete player ever.

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/201...es-angels-2016
Probably would be the most complete player ever if Babe Ruth had never played
__________________
“As soon as I got out there I felt a strange relationship with the pitcher's mound. It was as if I'd been born out there. Pitching just felt like the most natural thing in the world. Striking out batters was easy.” -Babe Ruth
“Ruth made a grave mistake when he gave up pitching. Working once a week, he might have lasted a long time and become a great star.”-Tris Speaker
My Dynasties
The Beantown Bambino
Painmantle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 04:55 PM   #19
X3NEIZE
All Star Reserve
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by Painmantle View Post
Probably would be the most complete player ever if Babe Ruth had never played
You're right, I was talking about the humans The Babe was from out of this world...
__________________


X3NEIZE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 06:05 PM   #20
PSUColonel
Hall Of Famer
 
PSUColonel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 12,978
Blog Entries: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by spleen1015 View Post
What are his stats? Are they what they should be? That's what matters.



Not true. A realistic scouting/grading system is paramount.
PSUColonel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:28 AM.

 

Major League and Minor League Baseball trademarks and copyrights are used with permission of Major League Baseball. Visit MLB.com and MiLB.com.

Officially Licensed Product – MLB Players, Inc.

Out of the Park Baseball is a registered trademark of Out of the Park Developments GmbH & Co. KG

Google Play is a trademark of Google Inc.

Apple, iPhone, iPod touch and iPad are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries.

COPYRIGHT © 2023 OUT OF THE PARK DEVELOPMENTS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © 2020 Out of the Park Developments