I don't know if this helps with your particular questions, but here's some add'l explanation that Markus provided a while ago, that I have found useful:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn
When a player is below the "adjust" limit, his ratings will be adjusted towards the league average, the less playing time he had the more the ratings get adjusted. If a player is below the "weaken" limit, the ratings will also be adjusted, but not towards league average but rather towards replacement level, so that these players end up with rather low ratings.
|
Also, from a several-years-ago discussion in the beta forums, a couple of veteran OOTPers were under the assumption that these settings not only are applied to those who put up great numbers in small numbers of AB's or IP's, but also are applied - to bring
upwards - those who performed terribly in small #'s of appearances. For example, a guy who had 5 hitless AB's and struck out 4 times, might end up rated as a poor hitter, rather than one who simply cannot hit a all... But I don't know if that's been confirmed.
I have a vague recollection of some good discussion about this maybe a year or so ago. Not sure where it was, though. I'll try to find the link...
One thing, though, that I recall from that discussion - that may or may be important to you - is the following;
Let's say you are starting a historical game with the 1970 season, you choose 150 AB's for your Adjust settings, and you are doing 5-year recalc. OOTP will then take AB's from 1968 thru 1972, and only apply the Adjust operation if total AB's are under 750 total (150 ab's x 5 years). And then, if total AB's are, say 720, then the adjustment will
only apply to those 30 AB's that are necessary to get to 750.
So along those same lines, if you are using 200 AB's for Adjust setting, and 1-year recalc, and a player has 198 AB's, he will barely be adjusted because only 2 adjusted AB's will be added to his actual stats (that will be used for his ratings).
At least that's
my understanding... Outside of the dev team of course, Garlon, I believe, is the expert on this. Perhaps he'll weigh in to add more, and/or confirm or correct my above ramblings...
