[Matches]

It seems like they should be taken cumulatively. But I'm having trouble figuring out if it does it that way or not. My sense is that a lot of guys are rated a bit high for their first year. I am using a 3-year recalc, for example, and Stan Hack with a 111 contact rating according to the editor. The real Stan Hack had 178 ABs as a rookie and hit .236. This right off the bat suggest to me that first-year players, if you use a multi-year recalc, are including the second and third years. This actually kinda bugs me because it means first year players are often stronger than it "feels" that the should be.

Hack hit .350 in his second season in just 60 at bats which means the ratings for this year should have been adjuted downward as well. He hit .289 in his third year. Taken independently and then averaged, it doesn't seem to me like those years would result in a relatively solid contact rating of 111.

That's just one example I happened to notice, though. For every one of those there seems to be a Hal Trosky, who got a contact rating of 60/250 even though he hit .330 in his second real season.