Ratings?
-
Does anyone have any idea how ratings are calculated? If you add all 17 of 95 Trout and divide by 17, you get a 74. If you add all 13 of 94 Ohtani, divided by 13 gives you an 81. 94 Aaron Judge, 71
96 Longoria, 73. 88 Griffey, 65. All about 22-23 short of the rating. -
Some things (contact, power) are weighted higher than others (bunt, durability)
-
@savefarris_psn said in Ratings?:
Some things (contact, power) are weighted higher than others (bunt, durability)
Hmm, curious to see the formula they use. Because the numbers they show, don't add up. Even the xp upgrades don't add up. My Betts is a +4 but only a 95-98, if it's plus 4 to all attributes, why isn't he a 99 with plus 4. SDS can't add?
-
@scottd_3ds_psn said in Ratings?:
Does anyone have any idea how ratings are calculated? If you add all 17 of 95 Trout and divide by 17, you get a 74. If you add all 13 of 94 Ohtani, divided by 13 gives you an 81. 94 Aaron Judge, 71
96 Longoria, 73. 88 Griffey, 65. All about 22-23 short of the rating.Not only are attributes weighted differently but the weighting is based on position, for example power is weighted more heavily for a first baseman than it is for a shortstop.
That is why comparing players of different position is usually not the best measurement.
-
@dolenz_psn said in Ratings?:
@scottd_3ds_psn said in Ratings?:
Does anyone have any idea how ratings are calculated? If you add all 17 of 95 Trout and divide by 17, you get a 74. If you add all 13 of 94 Ohtani, divided by 13 gives you an 81. 94 Aaron Judge, 71
96 Longoria, 73. 88 Griffey, 65. All about 22-23 short of the rating.Not only are attributes weighted differently but the weighting is based on position, for example power is weighted more heavily for a first baseman than it is for a shortstop.
That is why comparing players of different position is usually not the best measurement.
Now I'm more confused. I'm not sure what weighted means. It seems like comparing players by their attributes isn't a good measurement either. So basically you guys are saying the ratings are mystical and magical.
-
All that weighted means is that you can't just divide by 17 (roughly 5.9%) as you mentioned. It is distributed differently
For a first baseman maybe power is counts as 8% of the overall rating and for a shortstop maybe power only counts as 2% of the overall rating. That is because power is more commonly associated with first basemen while shortstops are usually judged on their defense and speed (and contact), That is why Ozzie Smith rates highly with below average power.
So when comparing players, compare two players of the same primary position. Two centerfielders for example (say Trout and Griffey) should be rated using the same criteria. So comparing them is valid.
-
@dolenz_psn said in Ratings?:
All that weighted means is that you can't just divide by 17 (roughly 5.9%) as you mentioned. It is distributed differently
For a first baseman maybe power is counts as 8% of the overall rating and for a shortstop maybe power only counts as 2% of the overall rating. That is because power is more commonly associated with first basemen while shortstops are usually judged on their defense and speed (and contact), That is why Ozzie Smith rates highly with below average power.
So when comparing players, compare two players of the same primary position. Two centerfielders for example (say Trout and Griffey) should be rated using the same criteria. So comparing them is valid.
Why not just raise the rating to match what the actual rating is? Why "weight" the ratings? I understand a SS may have less power than a Right Fielder or 3rd baseman, but why then is my SS Story leading my team in home runs? Shouldn't my 3rd or 1st baseman be leading, since their power is more "weighted?" Whatever formula they use, it doesn't work. I want my 96 player to be better than my 86 player. A 63 overall pitcher should not be able to strike out a 98 overall player, simple.
-
@scottd_3ds_psn said in Ratings?:
@dolenz_psn said in Ratings?:
All that weighted means is that you can't just divide by 17 (roughly 5.9%) as you mentioned. It is distributed differently
For a first baseman maybe power is counts as 8% of the overall rating and for a shortstop maybe power only counts as 2% of the overall rating. That is because power is more commonly associated with first basemen while shortstops are usually judged on their defense and speed (and contact), That is why Ozzie Smith rates highly with below average power.
So when comparing players, compare two players of the same primary position. Two centerfielders for example (say Trout and Griffey) should be rated using the same criteria. So comparing them is valid.
Shouldn't my 3rd or 1st baseman be leading, since their power is more "weighted?"
No, you're thinking of weighted wrong. 90 power is 90 power regardless of what position they play. It just that for a 1B or RF it will have more of an impact on their overall.
If all you care about is the four main offensive ratings then just look at those ratings and ignore the overall. Overall does not tell you what type of player it is.
A good example
Both Harrison Bader and Brandon Marsh are 84 overall rated centerfielders. But how they achieve that rating comes very differently. Brandon Marsh is much more of an offense first CF while Bader is much more of a fast, defensive CF. They are both worthy of 84 but if I only care about offense then I am taking Brandon Marsh 100% of the time.
The system is not perfect and a bit antiquated in my opinion, but it really seems like you would be better off ignoring overalls and looking at individual ratings. Very few experienced players will choose a card solely based on overall.
-
@dolenz_psn said in Ratings?:
@scottd_3ds_psn said in Ratings?:
@dolenz_psn said in Ratings?:
All that weighted means is that you can't just divide by 17 (roughly 5.9%) as you mentioned. It is distributed differently
For a first baseman maybe power is counts as 8% of the overall rating and for a shortstop maybe power only counts as 2% of the overall rating. That is because power is more commonly associated with first basemen while shortstops are usually judged on their defense and speed (and contact), That is why Ozzie Smith rates highly with below average power.
So when comparing players, compare two players of the same primary position. Two centerfielders for example (say Trout and Griffey) should be rated using the same criteria. So comparing them is valid.
Shouldn't my 3rd or 1st baseman be leading, since their power is more "weighted?"
No, you're thinking of weighted wrong. 90 power is 90 power regardless of what position they play. It just that for a 1B or RF it will have more of an impact on their overall.
If all you care about is the four main offensive ratings then just look at those ratings and ignore the overall. Overall does not tell you what type of player it is.
A good example
Both Harrison Bader and Brandon Marsh are 84 overall rated centerfielders. But how they achieve that rating comes very differently. Brandon Marsh is much more of an offense first CF while Bader is much more of a fast, defensive CF. They are both worthy of 84 but if I only care about offense then I am taking Brandon Marsh 100% of the time.
The system is not perfect and a bit antiquated in my opinion, but it really seems like you would be better off ignoring overalls and looking at individual ratings. Very few experienced players will choose a card solely based on overall.
Thanks for trying to explain this to me. I totally understand how 2 cards can reach the same overall in different ways. But the 2 cards with say, the same con R of 110, perform differently with con R because of position? That makes no sense. Why list the ratings at all, if they're not accurate. Just lower the rating for that card for that position. I think your saying a centerfielder with 100 power might not have 100 power because of his position. Thanks for trying, I'll never get it. But I'll still be wondering about it next time I strike out with my 99 hitter against a 63 pitcher.
-
@scottd_3ds_psn said in Ratings?:
@dolenz_psn said in Ratings?:
@scottd_3ds_psn said in Ratings?:
@dolenz_psn said in Ratings?:
All that weighted means is that you can't just divide by 17 (roughly 5.9%) as you mentioned. It is distributed differently
For a first baseman maybe power is counts as 8% of the overall rating and for a shortstop maybe power only counts as 2% of the overall rating. That is because power is more commonly associated with first basemen while shortstops are usually judged on their defense and speed (and contact), That is why Ozzie Smith rates highly with below average power.
So when comparing players, compare two players of the same primary position. Two centerfielders for example (say Trout and Griffey) should be rated using the same criteria. So comparing them is valid.
Shouldn't my 3rd or 1st baseman be leading, since their power is more "weighted?"
No, you're thinking of weighted wrong. 90 power is 90 power regardless of what position they play. It just that for a 1B or RF it will have more of an impact on their overall.
If all you care about is the four main offensive ratings then just look at those ratings and ignore the overall. Overall does not tell you what type of player it is.
A good example
Both Harrison Bader and Brandon Marsh are 84 overall rated centerfielders. But how they achieve that rating comes very differently. Brandon Marsh is much more of an offense first CF while Bader is much more of a fast, defensive CF. They are both worthy of 84 but if I only care about offense then I am taking Brandon Marsh 100% of the time.
The system is not perfect and a bit antiquated in my opinion, but it really seems like you would be better off ignoring overalls and looking at individual ratings. Very few experienced players will choose a card solely based on overall.
Thanks for trying to explain this to me. I totally understand how 2 cards can reach the same overall in different ways. But the 2 cards with say, the same con R of 110, perform differently with con R because of position? That makes no sense. Why list the ratings at all, if they're not accurate. Just lower the rating for that card for that position. I think your saying a centerfielder with 100 power might not have 100 power because of his position. Thanks for trying, I'll never get it. But I'll still be wondering about it next time I strike out with my 99 hitter against a 63 pitcher.
A 110 rating performs the same for every position it just effects the overall differently.
Long story short, don’t worry about the overall. Look at the individual ratings.
-
A admin locked this topic on
