Attribute Effect on the PAR (Research)
-
Hey all. I was curious about how BB/9 and individual pitch Control affect the new Pinpoint Pitching mechanic as well as the PAR (Perfect Accuracy Region). Since I directly asked SDS about what the attributes do and got no clear answer, I took matters into my own hands.
TL;DR: BB/9 affects PAR size. I do not know what individual pitch Control does.
I created 3 players and added them to a custom roster. Player A had 99 BB/9 and 99 control for each pitch. Player B had 99 BB/9 and 0 control for each pitch. Player C had 0 BB/9 and 99 control for each pitch. After entering Custom Practice, I compared PAR sizes between the three players. Players A and B had the same sized PARs, while Player C had much larger PARs. This lead me to deduce that increasing BB/9 will decrease PAR size for all pitches.
So what does individual pitch Control do? I don’t know. SDS’s answer to my question implies that it affects PAR size, but I found no visible evidence of that. I performed the Pinpoint mechanic for both Player A and B to see if perfect input was easier to get, or if non-perfect pitches end up closer to the target for Player A. These are subjective measures, but I didn’t notice a difference between the two that I would expect to notice with a difference of 99 Control attribute points.
So now I ask @Collin_SDS_PSN , can you clarify this for us? How exactly does pitch Control affect Pinpoint Pitching and the PAR? Did whoever answered my question here pre-launch lie? They said pitch Control would affect PAR size, but I am finding that it doesn’t. I- and I’m sure everyone here - feel that we deserve to know how attributes affect gameplay when picking which cards to use. The ball is in your court.
Also of note: PAR size changes based on what number pitch it is. Example: Player D and E are identical, except that Player D has a changeup as the number 5 pitch and Player E has a changeup as his number 1 or primary pitch. Player E’s changeup PAR was significantly smaller than Player D’s - even though both had 99 changeup Control. This doesn’t quite make sense to me. If Ricky Vaughn had a fastball primary pitch with 0 control and Greg Maddux had a fastball number 5 pitch with 99 control, Vaughn’s fastball would have a smaller PAR (making the erroneous assumption that both have the same BB/9). I don’t know about anyone else, but that doesn’t seem right to me.
P.S. if you made it this far, check out the latest episode of The Good/Okay Pocast
-
I’ve also wondered this since I’m using pinpoint but your Vaughn/Maddux comparison is flawed.
Typically a pitcher’s #1 pitch is the one he’s most comfortable with and throws more often. So for the most part, he should have better control of the pitch. The opposite could be said of the #5 pitch.
I’m not sure if making custom players is the way to compare. Maybe we’d see more of a difference comparing similar stat players with the pitch selection. Like Luis Castillo with a CIR primary vs a pitcher who has it as their 4th or 5th pitch
-
@hikes83_psn said in Attribute Effect on the PAR (Research):
I’ve also wondered this since I’m using pinpoint but your Vaughn/Maddux comparison is flawed.
Typically a pitcher’s #1 pitch is the one he’s most comfortable with and throws more often. So for the most part, he should have better control of the pitch. The opposite could be said of the #5 pitch.
I’m not sure if making custom players is the way to compare. Maybe we’d see more of a difference comparing similar stat players with the pitch selection. Like Luis Castillo with a CIR primary vs a pitcher who has it as their 4th or 5th pitch
Why have a pitch control attribute if you’re going to override it with how comfortable the pitcher is with the pitch? I don’t care what number pitch it is in the repertoire, a 99 control pitch should be more accurate than a 0 control pitch. You say he “should have better control of [his primary] pitch”. I say no, the player with the higher control attribute on the pitch should have better control of it!
I used custom players so that I could keep everything else constant and study the effects of the attribute changes. Not sure how that wouldn’t be the best way to test this.
-
I get that, all I’m saying is Vaughn has a FB primary, it’s unrealistic that it’ll be 0 control.
Maybe there’s more to it that just pitch control. I care to wager that the pitch alignment repertoire also has a effect.
For example a pitcher with 4FB primary versus a pitcher with 4FB as his third pitch will have a smaller PAR even though their individual pitch attributes are the same
-
@hikes83_psn said in Attribute Effect on the PAR (Research):
I get that, all I’m saying is Vaughn has a FB primary, it’s unrealistic that it’ll be 0 control.
Maybe there’s more to it that just pitch control. I care to wager that the pitch alignment repertoire also has a effect.
For example a pitcher with 4FB primary versus a pitcher with 4FB as his third pitch will have a smaller PAR even though their individual pitch attributes are the same
I know for a fact that your last paragraph is correct in that pitch order changes PAR size - superseding pitch control in the process. I just don’t agree with it.
And yeah lol it’s obviously not a realistic comparison. I also made the assumption that Vaughn and Maddux had the same BB/9 which would clearly not be true. Just a hypothetical to serve my complaint. But if anyone has 0 control on a FB, I think it would be the Wild Thing!
What’s Maddux’s R1 pitch? CB? So if you or I picked up a baseball today and made CB our “primary pitch”, we would have a smaller PAR with it than Greg Freaking Maddux by yours and SDS’s logic - regardless of pitch control. Again I’m making the incorrect assumption that us and Maddux have the same BB/9, but that is beside the point.
The part I don’t know is what pitch control actually does. I couldn’t find a visible effect of it. That’s what I’m hoping @Collin_SDS_PSN will clarify for us.
-
I’m pretty sure BB/9 is how accurate a perfect pitch is (the visible PAR) and pitch “control” determines the difficulty to achieve said perfect pitch.
The visible par for a FB will always be smaller than CB, but your CB could have more control, and be easy to achieve a perfect, even if the PAR is bigger than a FB with lower control.
-
@charterbus_psn said in Attribute Effect on the PAR (Research):
I’m pretty sure BB/9 is how accurate a perfect pitch is (the visible PAR) and pitch “control” determines the difficulty to achieve said perfect pitch.
The visible par for a FB will always be smaller than CB, but your CB could have more control, and be easy to achieve a perfect, even if the PAR is bigger than a FB with lower control.
This is my thought as well. But to be honest I spent about 10 minutes with both a 99 control pitcher and a 0 control pitcher and I didn’t really notice perfects being easier to achieve with 99 control. So who knows lol.
-
-
@wdk19_psn said in Attribute Effect on the PAR (Research):
Bump. I’m sure there are others interested in this.
Re-bumping this
-
Individual pitch control must affect how difficult it is to execute the shape and release of the pitch. I've noticed with guys like Shane bieber I can do the pinpoint pitch meter well while it's much tougher with some relievers
-
Update on this: control doesn’t seem to do anything at all. I (and some of you all) thought control might make perfect pitches easier to achieve. So to test this, I threw 100 pinpoint pitches each with two created players.
Player A (99 BB/9 and 99 pitch control) : 62 perfects
Player B (99 BB/9 and 0 pitch control): 67 perfectsSo until further notice I will only be using BB/9 to evaluate pitcher cards and not pitch control at all.
-
Sorry to bust in on this thread, especially as I haven't tried pinpoint yet. I just observed two curvevalls in a row, hit the meter perfectly, and both were strikes but not near the PAR circle -- actually on the other side of the strike zone from where I aimed (and where the PAR circle was). Is PAR only relevant to pinpoint even if visible when using meter?
-
@cbpm72_psn said in Attribute Effect on the PAR (Research):
Sorry to bust in on this thread, especially as I haven't tried pinpoint yet. I just observed two curvevalls in a row, hit the meter perfectly, and both were strikes but not near the PAR circle -- actually on the other side of the strike zone from where I aimed (and where the PAR circle was). Is PAR only relevant to pinpoint even if visible when using meter?
I used meter in 17, 18 and half of 19. Used analog half of 19 through last yr. pinpoint is by far the best to use to be consistently accurate. You can literally paint all game once you master it.
Analog is second but by a wide margin, even if you’re perfect you’ll hang balls you shouldn’t and get a result like you stated.
Meter is the hardest to get perfect and even so will still result in random balls like you said above.
My advice is practice with pinpoint and if you get even decent at it and you’ll have more success than the other two options. It only took me a couple days of using it get perfect perfect at least half the time. Just gotta concentrate a tad bit more. Makes pitching super fun as it really does fell like your input matters to the smallest degree. I’ve also noticed if I lock in I can get out of jams I’d typically not have in prior years.
-
thanks, I didn't realise a perfect input will be random to the PAR! Appreciate this info greatly, cheers!
-
I believe pitcher confidence comes in to play.
-
@jpott23_psn said in Attribute Effect on the PAR (Research):
@cbpm72_psn said in Attribute Effect on the PAR (Research):
Sorry to bust in on this thread, especially as I haven't tried pinpoint yet. I just observed two curvevalls in a row, hit the meter perfectly, and both were strikes but not near the PAR circle -- actually on the other side of the strike zone from where I aimed (and where the PAR circle was). Is PAR only relevant to pinpoint even if visible when using meter?
I used meter in 17, 18 and half of 19. Used analog half of 19 through last yr. pinpoint is by far the best to use to be consistently accurate. You can literally paint all game once you master it.
Analog is second but by a wide margin, even if you’re perfect you’ll hang balls you shouldn’t and get a result like you stated.
Meter is the hardest to get perfect and even so will still result in random balls like you said above.
My advice is practice with pinpoint and if you get even decent at it and you’ll have more success than the other two options. It only took me a couple days of using it get perfect perfect at least half the time. Just gotta concentrate a tad bit more. Makes pitching super fun as it really does fell like your input matters to the smallest degree. I’ve also noticed if I lock in I can get out of jams I’d typically not have in prior years.
If a player can "paint all game" regardless of who their pitcher is, their BB/9, their control, their fatigue, their confidence, then the mechanic is broken. If true, you really would need only one pitcher on your team (except for pitch selection). Once mastered by half of the players it will become very hard to score runs and people will be complaining about how hard it is to hit. Right now if you are one of the few who has mastered it, you are golden, but eventually you too will have to bat against perfect/perfect pitching all game.
-
@vipersneak_psn said in Attribute Effect on the PAR (Research):
@jpott23_psn said in Attribute Effect on the PAR (Research):
@cbpm72_psn said in Attribute Effect on the PAR (Research):
Sorry to bust in on this thread, especially as I haven't tried pinpoint yet. I just observed two curvevalls in a row, hit the meter perfectly, and both were strikes but not near the PAR circle -- actually on the other side of the strike zone from where I aimed (and where the PAR circle was). Is PAR only relevant to pinpoint even if visible when using meter?
I used meter in 17, 18 and half of 19. Used analog half of 19 through last yr. pinpoint is by far the best to use to be consistently accurate. You can literally paint all game once you master it.
Analog is second but by a wide margin, even if you’re perfect you’ll hang balls you shouldn’t and get a result like you stated.
Meter is the hardest to get perfect and even so will still result in random balls like you said above.
My advice is practice with pinpoint and if you get even decent at it and you’ll have more success than the other two options. It only took me a couple days of using it get perfect perfect at least half the time. Just gotta concentrate a tad bit more. Makes pitching super fun as it really does fell like your input matters to the smallest degree. I’ve also noticed if I lock in I can get out of jams I’d typically not have in prior years.
If a player can "paint all game" regardless of who their pitcher is, their BB/9, their control, their fatigue, their confidence, then the mechanic is broken. If true, you really would need only one pitcher on your team (except for pitch selection). Once mastered by half of the players it will become very hard to score runs and people will be complaining about how hard it is to hit. Right now if you are one of the few who has mastered it, you are golden, but eventually you too will have to bat against perfect/perfect pitching all game.
That’s not true; the mechanic is not impacted by what you said, but the result/randomness is. Nolan Ryan’s PAR is going to be bigger than Kershaw because of BB/9 and control. You can still get perfect and get hammered or let one slip and the guy whiffs.
-
Tell you one thing, when I throw a common on the hill, yeah its not harder to hit perfect on pinpoint but his PAR is ginormous. I wouldn’t count that as painting when the PAR is the size of half the strike zone
-
@wdk19_psn said in Attribute Effect on the PAR (Research):
@hikes83_psn said in Attribute Effect on the PAR (Research):
I get that, all I’m saying is Vaughn has a FB primary, it’s unrealistic that it’ll be 0 control.
Maybe there’s more to it that just pitch control. I care to wager that the pitch alignment repertoire also has a effect.
For example a pitcher with 4FB primary versus a pitcher with 4FB as his third pitch will have a smaller PAR even though their individual pitch attributes are the same
I know for a fact that your last paragraph is correct in that pitch order changes PAR size - superseding pitch control in the process. I just don’t agree with it.
And yeah lol it’s obviously not a realistic comparison. I also made the assumption that Vaughn and Maddux had the same BB/9 which would clearly not be true. Just a hypothetical to serve my complaint. But if anyone has 0 control on a FB, I think it would be the Wild Thing!
What’s Maddux’s R1 pitch? CB? So if you or I picked up a baseball today and made CB our “primary pitch”, we would have a smaller PAR with it than Greg Freaking Maddux by yours and SDS’s logic - regardless of pitch control. Again I’m making the incorrect assumption that us and Maddux have the same BB/9, but that is beside the point.
The part I don’t know is what pitch control actually does. I couldn’t find a visible effect of it. That’s what I’m hoping @Collin_SDS_PSN will clarify for us.
It could simply be that the control is supposed to have an impact but it doesn't because of a bug. I know, I know, a bug in The Show 21? Surely not!
Gotta say I really appreciate the effort you went to in testing this out with the scientific method. It was a refreshing break from all of the other 'testing' that we read about here
-
Just to respond to some of the comments above mentioning the size of the PAR changing for various reasons, confirming that I hit perfect on the meter twice but the curveballs didn't hit the PAR region at all. Not even close, so it's not even a case of getting the outside millimetre of the PAR. However, I have no idea what pitch confidence was at the time, but it just seemed remarkable to me that I could nail the input and not get close to the target. At least both were strikes, which is what I was trying to throw.
