Relative importance of ratings

[Lex Logan]

When I look at ratings to set a lineup or acquire a player, I tend to treat Contact/Power/Eye as having equal value, so I would rank Ramon Castro at 76/94/92 considerably ahead of Randy Winn at 92/76/84. (Mogul 2011, 2002 season, dynasty started in 1973; I don't pay too much attention to speed.) Does anyone have a sense that there is a drastic difference in the relative value of any of these? Also, how about pitching? I rely much more on actual performance, but it is my impression that Control and Movement continue to be more important than Power, though perhaps not as drastic as in older versions of Mogul.

[filihok]

http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showthr...tion-Worksheet

[jshaw]

I try to use, control, contact, age and health to evaluate players

it is still a work in process for me though

[Merlin401]

Speed is a very tricky one. I find its important but the "speed" rating doesn't give you the important story. I don't look at these because I think its unrealistic for me to do so, but the "base stealing skills" will give you a better picture. I have a guy with 87 speed who just sucks as a baserunner. He's ok but he's a 66% SB type guy. I had another 94 speed guy who just never wanted to run... ever. And I have a veteran 74 speed guy who will be able to steal bases with 90% success rate if you keep him to 15 attempts a year, he ALWAYS breaks up double plays, he goes 1st to 3rd very well. I've never looked at those metrics for him but I'm sure all his instincts are awesome because just playing every day I can see how much better he is on the bases than most of his peers.

[Evo X]

Batters: Contact/Power, Eye, Speed
Starters: Control, Power/Movement
Relievers: Control, Movement, Power
Closers: Power, Control/Movement

[Lex Logan]

Thanks filihok, but I seem to be having some problems with Excel. Perhaps your sheet includes some feature not supported by Excel '97. Anyway, from playing around with it, do you have the sense of a drastic difference in ratings importance? Looking at your sample picture, the weights seem to be about equal for Contact/Power/Eye, somewhat lower for Speed, and higher for all the defense ratings (for catchers, I assume.) Is that your sense of things overall? Or am I misinterpreting the Weights?

[Evo X]

Excel 97?!

[joelwest]

When I look at ratings to set a lineup or acquire a player, I tend to treat Contact/Power/Eye as having equal value, so I would rank Ramon Castro at 76/94/92 considerably ahead of Randy Winn at 92/76/84. (Mogul 2011, 2002 season, dynasty started in 1973; I don't pay too much attention to speed.) Does anyone have a sense that there is a drastic difference in the relative value of any of these? Also, how about pitching? I rely much more on actual performance, but it is my impression that Control and Movement continue to be more important than Power, though perhaps not as drastic as in older versions of Mogul.

Power is best predictor of OPS/RC which in turn is best predictor of offensive power (runs per game scored). Contact boosts batting average which is part of OPS, and so is also important. Eye creates walks which boosts OBA, but this is of much lesser importance. Some high Eye players can have OPS so low they should not be playing in MLB. Speed means more steals and perhaps extra bases, but is also of much less importance

Movement and control are the best predictors for pitchers, but do NOT strictly correlate with low predicted ERA. For pitchers I look for low predicted ERA combined with actual performance in at least 60 IP per year. The actual performance is more importance if you have set the HOF careers switch high (like I have)

High peaks/MG for batters usually corresponds to high OPS if they reach that peak. High peak pitchers on the other hand may never develop in a top (low ERA) pitcher, even with a long number of peak years

As RP become SP their power goes down, but not usually their predicted ERA. Hence RP with low predicted ERA are the best goldmine in BBM for finding SP pitchers that the AI always overlooks (until they have already become SP)

In BBM 08 RP had some possibility of becoming SP by just making them SP during spring training. BBM 10 seems to have made it harder to get RP to become SP using that technique, but still makes such a conversion during the regular season quite possible, particularly if their starting END is above 30

[cfeedback]

Speed is a very tricky one. I find its important but the "speed" rating doesn't give you the important story. I don't look at these because I think its unrealistic for me to do so, but the "base stealing skills" will give you a better picture. I have a guy with 87 speed who just sucks as a baserunner. He's ok but he's a 66% SB type guy. I had another 94 speed guy who just never wanted to run... ever. And I have a veteran 74 speed guy who will be able to steal bases with 90% success rate if you keep him to 15 attempts a year, he ALWAYS breaks up double plays, he goes 1st to 3rd very well. I've never looked at those metrics for him but I'm sure all his instincts are awesome because just playing every day I can see how much better he is on the bases than most of his peers.

This. Worst thing in the world is a guy with high speed / steal tendency and low "base running" (success rate). On the other hand, guys with an extremely high success rate (sometimes Mogul will generate guys in the 85%+ career success rate) are worth quite a bit.

[End of the Road]

Excel 97?!

LOL Yes most people I know are too cheap to keep upgrading something like MS Office. I use 97 and I know dozens of other who use it as well. I don't know anyone who uses a newer version than 2004 and that is only because it came with a new puter that she bought.

[cfeedback]

LOL Yes most people I know are too cheap to keep upgrading something like MS Office. I use 97 and I know dozens of other who use it as well. I don't know anyone who uses a newer version than 2004 and that is only because it came with a new puter that she bought.

Not to get all off topic or anything, but wow. You're better off using Open Office than a 15 year old version of MS Office. OO isn't bad, there's just a few idiosyncrasies in Calc that make me prefer to use Excel.

In any case, for around a year now I've always saved/shared files in .xlsx format, which came about with Office 2007 and I've only had one person complain in that timespan. So for my purposes, I don't know anyone who uses a version older than 2007 (or if they do they've at least figured out how to use a converter).

[mathguy69]

I feel like power is a category by itself, and it is only all that useful if there's a high combination of Contact and Eye. From what I have experienced, it seems like someone with high Contact and lower Eye will perform better than low Contact and high Eye...that's in-game anyway. I haven't simulated as much without playing the games myself.

Off-topic: I use OpenOffice over any version of MS Office. What a monumental waste of money, at least for my purposes (opening files sent to me and creating files mostly for print-off or personal use).

[libradawg]

Speed is a very tricky one. I find its important but the "speed" rating doesn't give you the important story. I don't look at these because I think its unrealistic for me to do so, but the "base stealing skills" will give you a better picture.

I just need help understanding the comment, but it does go a long way towards the original post's question as far as interpretation goes.

The best blind answer would be Eye trumping everything out. Big market/small market, young team/veteran team, simulation/play-by-play, it doesn't make a difference; Eye is your rating. Luckily, the game DOES NOT underestimate the value of nor cheapen OBP, so this is your best fix for small market teams. It'll also give you the "missing piece" for a playoff contender. Then and only then will the SB come into play, again realistically. Putting a 50-steal guy at the top of the order will cost you a ton of runs over a season if the OBP is ignored, while putting a 50-Speed guy with a high OBP works. Just like reality, only start looking at the SB column if you have a guy with a .350 you're thinking of giving 600 ABs.

Applying the Attribute to the Statistic is probably an exercise in futility, so assume one attribute is 99 with all others set to 50. Personal rule of thumb is to insert two Power guys into this...at no point will Contact or Speed ever come up when building any team.

[joelwest]

Not to get all off topic or anything, but wow. You're better off using Open Office than a 15 year old version of MS Office. OO isn't bad, there's just a few idiosyncrasies in Calc that make me prefer to use Excel.

In any case, for around a year now I've always saved/shared files in .xlsx format, which came about with Office 2007 and I've only had one person complain in that timespan. So for my purposes, I don't know anyone who uses a version older than 2007 (or if they do they've at least figured out how to use a converter).

since we have ventured offtopic into what is "old" for computers -

I would still use Excel 5 if I could get away with it since very little functionality was added from that version up to Excel 2003. however I id eventually upgrade to Excel 2003 (primarily to open documents created with it) but plan no further upgrades since Excel 2007 totally redesigned the use interface and created meaningless new file extensions. ditto for Word 2007

Excel 2007 does offer one useful feature, more rows (>64k) = bigger databases. however it is buggy if you format the data

I also would still be running Windows 3.1 if I could get away with it. however with the now "old" Win XP MS finally got an OS as stable as Win 3.1 (although much, much larger and built upon Win NT). many corporate offices refuse to upgrade from Win XP and that led to a SP ver 3

in the long run most computer user's objective is to have something merely functional, so this makes it harder and harder for MS to sell new versions of their OS or apps for more money when the current versions work just fine (are apparently fully functional). maybe this will change if MS ever decides to go to a light version of their OS designed for desktop computers (not cell phones) that improves stability by jettisoning all the unneeded junk they have piled into their OS over the years since Win 3.1

[joelwest]

The best blind answer would be Eye trumping everything out. Big market/small market, young team/veteran team, simulation/play-by-play, it doesn't make a difference; Eye is your rating. ...at no point will Contact or Speed ever come up when building any team.

I currently have a league for 1953 with a lot of high OPS batters. of 163 batters with more than 40 games, 17 have OPS > 1.000 (I boosted the batting sim settings)

16 of 17 have CON > 90, all have POW > 82, all have EYE > 90, SPEED is from 61 to 86, so naively this would say CON and EYE are more important than POW and SPEED is meaningless. however if I sort on each of these, many CON and EYE in the 90's have low OPS, but ALL POW >94 have an OPS of at least 0.836 with most in the 0.900's and seven with OPS > 1.000. (Six of top twenty in SPEED have an OPS of at least 0.900, so there is little correlation of SPEED with batting results.)

high POW is rarer than CON and EYE and so is a better predictor of high OPS. to round out the rest of my team I look for high OPS predicted or high peak which generally corresponds to high OPS. it turns out these additional batters usually have CON and EYE in the 90's and POW in the 80's

so the result is that power hitters with POW of at least 80 are the most desirable batters, even if they have to waddle around the base paths (like the older Babe Ruth). if they happen to have some speed so much the better since it may generate some steals, but high power gives more predictable results