Player Attribute Rating and Potential Rating Standards for Roster Sets (long read)

[mrj513]

Operation Sports members are universally recognized as hard core gamers.
What makes a sports gamer hard core?....It is a player who wants a simulation style of play
that directly reflects the specific sports real-life counterpart.

For this very reason, we all eventually venture into the “Rosters” section of a sports title and this particular case, baseball’s “The Show”.

Well, like many of you know, we have a multitude of “roster edits” to choose from, of which, 3 of them have been recognized as the crème of the crop and thus “Stickied”. Each with its own identity.

• “Ridins Rosters”
• Knight’s “Full Minors Roster for 09’”
• “Wookies Complete 09 Rosters”

Each has its fair share of preferred users; however, it seems that Knights rosters are the more popular roster edit option.
I see Ridin’s Rosters as a middle ground for both Knights and Wookies set as those 2 sets are far left and far right with regard to the focus of there roster edits.

I like all 3, the point of this thread is this: What is the rhyme and reason as to how 1 prospect or major leaguer from one set can have a totally different look in another set with regard to PLAYER RATINGS….

Now, I know that these sets differ in more than one way, which encompasses everything from player music, player uniforms, team lineups, minor league accuracy and volume, player faces, player stances and my point of emphasis…..PLAYER RATINGS.

I BELIEVE THAT OS MEMBERS WHO BROWSE THE ROSTER FORUM SHOULD HAVE A GENERAL EXPECTATION OF ANY GIVEN PLAYERS RATING.

I have read through many different roster threads of people posing questions to RidinDwnKingsley, Wookie48, & Knight165 with regard as to why John Doe of the Brewers has a “C” rating when John Doe of the Cardinals has a “B” rating or why does John Doe of the Rangers have a L45/R55 power attribute when he is projected to hit 20-25 homeruns this year or did so last year.

Player ratings are THE MOST IMPORTANT EDIT to a roster set because baseball’s foundation is based on stats……not lineups, not uniform accuracy, not batting stance, and not even player faces.

These things are important, but should not be the bread and butter of a roster set.


I believe that MLB players need to be evaluated on 3 yrs of stats.

• Last 2 years of major or minor league production
• Average projection of current years production (2009) utilizing Fantasy League publications (example – Robinson Cano is projected to hit 21-24 homeruns, however, his power attribute is generally below 50-55 when it should exceed 65)
• Projected production is important b/c injuries could have skewed previous production totals and natural progression downward if not accounted for can mask a declining players attributes.

I believe that Minor League players need to be evaluated on 2 criteria:

• Minor League body of work for current ratings
• Potential rating based off of various publications such as Baseball Prospectus Top 100 Prospects. This rating should be a minimum “B” for all Top 100 Players and utilizing a bell curve, give an “A” potential to the Top 25 – 33 percentile (%) which would be #’s 1-25 or 1-33
• The Potential Rating should be weighted in that the attribute ratings have to be skewed toward this potential sooner rather than later…reason being is that players such as Joey Votto, Jay Bruce, Evan Longoria & Soto started the 2008 season in the minors and were subsequently called up and were obvious Key Contributers immediately, therefore I should be able to call up a Top Tier player and expect immediate production to the team….maybe not Longoria quality, but starter quality.

I don’t make rosters and I appreciate the work that is applied to the roster edits, I just would like to see more conformity with regard to any players attribute ratings when compared to the real life player’s production expectation and potential.

Anyone’s differing opinion is welcome.

[mrj513]

Prospect #33 can have the same potential rating as prospect #99, however, the difference between the two players would be there individual skill sets.

The potential rating just dictates the rate at which a player progresses throughout his career and when it will max out...basically when he hits the ceiling and begins to decline.

[Heisman316]

I definately agree. This was very well thought out and you said it perfectly.

[mrj513]

yeah...i'm just surpised there is not more discussion of actuall player attribute ratings for both major leaguers and minor leaguers when the stock ratings are clearly not as accurate as they should be