Quote:
Originally Posted by Syd Thrift
I am almost positive that the “even”, “difficult” and so on metrics are nothing that you’re going to find in a baseball stat book because they’re OOTP based metrics that describe how the fielders play within the context of the game itself. I have no idea of the exact algorithm but there’s some kind of formula when a ball is hit to, say, dead centerfield that some percentage of the time it’ll be automatic, some percentage easy, hard, and so on, and then the fielder’s ratings are used against a die roll to determine if they made it. All those numbers and percentages are basically how often each player makes a play in a given bucket and so on.
I think the “even” one is a good way of eyeballing if a player is average or not at their position - if they make more than 50% of the plays there, they’re probably above average (of course, sample size still matters, and I’ve seen players not be so great at these plays but get to a higher than expected number of unlikely balls, etc). You can also choose to ignore these if you want.
|
Yes, understood thank you. But again perhaps distinction could be made between theory and practice? I haven't looked at RL results to compare to how close the game is, but it stands to reason a guy >50% even, should be relatively stronger with routine and likely and I have players that aren't. And am having trouble imagining how that could play out over time (assuming substantial sample sizes).