Questions about player ratings/development

[CField17]

Just a couple questions here...

1. How can a player throw 99-101 and have "30" stuff? This seems impossible. I have a prospect with these ratings. Even though he is young and hasn't developed, shouldn't his "stuff" be higher? I mean the dude throws 100.

2. This brings me to my second question. How can a guy throw 97-99 and only be projected to have "45" stuff? Shouldn't the fact that he throws so hard mean that he would have a higher projected stuff rating? Maybe I don't understand what "stuff" is, but I always thought it was a direct correlation to how hard a player throws, especially since movement has a totally different categorical rating.

2. How can a player have "25" control and be projected to have "65" control? 65 control is pretty damn good control, yet right now he has the second lowest possible control rating in the game. If he was projected to be an above average control pitcher, wouldn't he have to be somewhat of a control pitcher even at a young age?

Any explanations would be much appreciated. Thanks!

[CBeisbol]

Stuff = strike out rate
Control = walk rate

And, since we're here
Movement = the inverse of HR rate

Those scout ratings have very little to do with scouting. They are "peeks" at players' projected statistics.

[CField17]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

Stuff = strike out rate
Control = walk rate

And, since we're here
Movement = the inverse of HR rate

Those scout ratings have very little to do with scouting. They are "peeks" at players' projected statistics.

Thanks.

In my opinion, if a player throws 100 mph, he would likely have better "stuff" than somebody who throws 85. In the game they could have identical stuff ratings. Don't you think it would be more likely for a flamethrower to k more people than someone who throws 85 mph fastballs?

As far as the peeks at projected ratings, I'm suggesting that if you are comparing the game to reality, I think that it would be highly unlikely for a player with 25 control to eventually wind up with 65 control, unless they are 8 years old at time of original "scout". Essentially the game is saying that they have horrible control at 18 or 21 years old, but will wind up being an artist when it comes to placing their pitches. This seems unlikely when comparing to reality.

I guess the end game point I'm making is that if a player throws 100, they should have a much higher "stuff" rating than 30, even if they are a raw prospect. Same thing with control. If they are going to wind up having elite control ratings, they should probably have higher control ratings at a younger age than a 25 rating.

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by CField17

Thanks.

In my opinion, if a player throws 100 mph, he would likely have better "stuff" than somebody who throws 85. In the game they could have identical stuff ratings. Don't you think it would be more likely for a flamethrower to k more people than someone who throws 85 mph fastballs?

They do
There's a definite correlation between velocity and stuff
But, just like in real life, some players that throw 85 get more strike outs than players that throw 100.

As far as the peeks at projected ratings, I'm suggesting that if you are comparing the game to reality, I think that it would be highly unlikely for a player with 25 control to eventually wind up with 65 control, unless they are 8 years old at time of original "scout". Essentially the game is saying that they have horrible control at 18 or 21 years old, but will wind up being an artist when it comes to placing their pitches. This seems unlikely when comparing to reality.

I guess the end game point I'm making is that if a player throws 100, they should have a much higher "stuff" rating than 30, even if they are a raw prospect. Same thing with control. If they are going to wind up having elite control ratings, they should probably have higher control ratings at a younger age than a 25 rating.

I'd say look at minor league, college and high school pitchers.
Do some of them throw close to 100?
Do they all have incredible K rates at their level?K rates that would translate to average or better major league K rates?
I don't think so.

Here's a list of the hardest throwers (starters) in baseball

You can see most of them have a K%+ above 100. Meaning they get more K's than average

But, there are some, Sentaleza, Wheeler, that strike out many fewer.

It's certainly possible to throw hard and not get a lot of K's


*https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.as...12-31&sort=4,d

[CField17]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

They do
There's a definite correlation between velocity and stuff
But, just like in real life, some players that throw 85 get more strike outs than players that throw 100.


I'd say look at minor league, college and high school pitchers.
Do some of them throw close to 100?
Do they all have incredible K rates at their level?K rates that would translate to average or better major league K rates?
I don't think so.

Here's a list of the hardest throwers (starters) in baseball

You can see most of them have a K%+ above 100. Meaning they get more K's than average

But, there are some, Sentaleza, Wheeler, that strike out many fewer.

It's certainly possible to throw hard and not get a lot of K's


*https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.as...12-31&sort=4,d

So there is nothing questionable about the current rating system regarding stuff and control in your opinion?

[CBeisbol]

Originally Posted by CField17

So there is nothing questionable about the current rating system regarding stuff and control in your opinion?

Not that you've built a strong case here to support

[CField17]

Originally Posted by CBeisbol

Not that you've built a strong case here to support

OK, thanks.

[Rain King]

To elaborate, Velocity is a portion of Stuff. You seem to be arguing that Stuff and Velocity should be the same thing? I guess my response to that is why would you even need both ratings in that case?

The difference is that Stuff factors in the quality of all of the pitches. Fastballs (as well as some other pitches) get a better rating based on high velocity. But throwing hard does not having anything to do with having a good curveball. Stuff factors in that curveball and everything else the guy throws into one base rating that is meant to tell you how well they are at striking guys out.

IMO, the disconnect is likely that the Movement rating is poorly named. It has nothing to do with, say, how well a curveball drops. Instead, it should be named something like "Command" or "Precision". It is essentially measuring how well a pitcher can avoid making a major mistake that has a propensity to be sent over the wall by the batter. High K guys can also be High HR guys, so Movement is the HR rating.

Control is then the BB rating.

[Rain King]

To further bring this back to your case of the guy throwing 100 and having low stuff. What are his Pitch ratings? How is his Fastball rated? The issue is likely that this guy just doesn't have anything else but the heater...and a lot of guys throw hard these days.

[Palaaemon]

CField17,

Here is a link to an article that is very useful in regards to stuff.
https://deadspin.com/here-is-what-st...all-1734592813

Hope this helps.
Have a Great night!

Palaaemon

[ALB123]

Originally Posted by CField17

So there is nothing questionable about the current rating system regarding stuff and control in your opinion?

I think things are occasionally a little wonky when you see a guy with great stuff, but crap control & movement. But, the way those terms are used in OOTP aren't exactly the same as the way you might define them in real life. Plus, OOTP is trying to provide us with an enormous range of pitching talent or lack thereof. With only 3 main variables on our screens, there wouldn't be nearly as much variation if the factors were completely dependent on each other, in my opinion. The manual defines exactly what each attribute affects and with that said, I think most combos are certainly possible in real life.

Originally Posted by Rain King

To elaborate, Velocity is a portion of Stuff. You seem to be arguing that Stuff and Velocity should be the same thing? I guess my response to that is why would you even need both ratings in that case?

The difference is that Stuff factors in the quality of all of the pitches. Fastballs (as well as some other pitches) get a better rating based on high velocity. But throwing hard does not having anything to do with having a good curveball. Stuff factors in that curveball and everything else the guy throws into one base rating that is meant to tell you how well they are at striking guys out.

IMO, the disconnect is likely that the Movement rating is poorly named. It has nothing to do with, say, how well a curveball drops. Instead, it should be named something like "Command" or "Precision". It is essentially measuring how well a pitcher can avoid making a major mistake that has a propensity to be sent over the wall by the batter. High K guys can also be High HR guys, so Movement is the HR rating.

Control is then the BB rating.

I agree with Rain King. And I can personally say, having played college baseball that all sorts of strange combos did exist on the mound. Pitchers with rockets attached to their shoulder with terrifyingly bad control...no "movement". Guys with 4 or 5 pitches at varying speeds who seemed like mini Greg Maddux's to me. But then guys with the same number of pitchers who didn't know exactly where the ball would end up...but 3-4 times a game it ended up in your or a teammates thigh or lower back. The combinations were endless...just like in OOTP. Maybe the names of the attributes could be better, but those are the 3 main terms used to describe pitchers in real life.

[Dave Stieb II]

Originally Posted by Rain King

To elaborate, Velocity is a portion of Stuff.

IMO, the disconnect is likely that the Movement rating is poorly named. It has nothing to do with, say, how well a curveball drops. Instead, it should be named something like "Command" or "Precision". It is essentially measuring how well a pitcher can avoid making a major mistake that has a propensity to be sent over the wall by the batter. High K guys can also be High HR guys, so Movement is the HR rating.

Control is then the BB rating.

I agree with everything Rain KIng said but have quoted what I think is the most important part.
So to use OOTP terminology, a large part of 'stuff' is actually what I would refer to as movement IRL. (And as Rain King said, 'movement' in OOTP is really what I would refer to as command or precision IRL.
With that being said, it doesn't surprise me that a 100 mph heater doesn't, on its own, equate to a high 'stuff' rating. Lots of guys throw that hard or close to it these days and, if the pitch is flat and doesn't have a little break, most MLB hitters will catch up to it quickly and feed off it. (with some exceptions of course).

[ALB123]

Originally Posted by Dave Stieb II

I agree with everything Rain KIng said but have quoted what I think is the most important part.
So to use OOTP terminology, a large part of 'stuff' is actually what I would refer to as movement IRL. (And as Rain King said, 'movement' in OOTP is really what I would refer to as command or precision IRL.
With that being said, it doesn't surprise me that a 100 mph heater doesn't, on its own, equate to a high 'stuff' rating. Lots of guys throw that hard or close to it these days and, if the pitch is flat and doesn't have a little break, most MLB hitters will catch up to it quickly and feed off it. (with some exceptions of course).

Bingo, Mr. Stieb!

That is exactly what I believe...especially having faced a wide variety of pitchers over 4 years of college ball. I'd much rather face a guy with a 90+ mph heater that doesn't move at all than a guy with 3 solid varying speed pitches. Even if that 90+ mph pitcher throws a Curveball, he's not going to throw you 5 or 6 in a row. You make a decision to wait on his fastball in whatever location you like best. Of course, you need to swing at the Curveball if you've got two strikes or it's hanging in the air forever, but you know what I mean.

I had a lot of confusion the first couple of months. That's because I never looked at the manual to see what those terms defined in ootp. One of you forum members told me in one of my "Help! I suck!" threads... Now,I'm very happy with how ootp grades its pitchers. Especially because you could take 50 pitchers with 50 Stuff, 50 Movement & 50 Control and all 50 of them will be different overall levels of quality thanks to velocity, stamina, pitch types thrown and grades on each pitch type.

Yeah...overall...I think the devs built a very realistic pitcher/pitching system in ootp.

[Dave Stieb II]

Thanks, ALB123.
I was very confused by the OOTP terminology at the start, which differs from what I had become accustomed to over my years as a diehard basball fan.
Then I read the manual and, over time, wrapped my head around the different terminology. Now, I'd hate if they changed it. LOL