Quote:
Originally Posted by Syd Thrift
TCR won't even really have a massive impact except over time, so if you're having the game recalc ratings according to historical player ability, any randomness is eliminated at the end of the year. If you're doing fictional leagues, which it sounds like this person isn't since they're implying actual players aren't producing at their rates, even if you raise TCR to 200 I don't think you'd actually see a lot.
But yeah, 43 game seasons means you're going to get a lot of variance. There's even a lot of variance for a 162 game season - IIRC the standard deviation for batting average over 550 or so at-bats is about 25 points and so right about each team on average will have a guy who hits either 50 points too high or 50 points too low. For a quarter of that length... yeah, it's still going to be all over the place for some numbers. Others - I think K rate is one - lock in a bit earlier. Still more - HR rate's one that can have huge outliers - often don't lock in for 162 games per se to the point that it's possible for a guy like Brady Anderson to hit 50 dingers in a year even in real life.
|
I never seriously played historical with recalc on so I can't comment, but with fictional players or historical rookies imported with only the dev engine on and no recalc, from season to season, I've found that lowering the tcr does seem to produce less variance in regards to performance relative to the shown scout ratings than with a high tcr (150 +). Very anectodal since I haven't played thousands of identical seasons obviously and the sample size is still only 162 games per season, but I do prefer a higher tcr due to this.
With a tcr around 100 I never got crazy outlier seasons from league average guys, but with it bumped to 150 (or more), I sometimes get guys around the league who were very average for years who decide to light the league on fire for a single year and then never do it again (i.e the Lonnie Smith special).