stecropper Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Yea - Bonds was off the Chart in my opinion ........ but perhaps there were reasons for that ??? I think a Power Rating of 152 would merit an * or even total elimination is in order ........ I'll check with Jose on this matter !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krawhitham Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 First of all, I work in Institutional Resarch at a University so I'm nuts about numbers in the first place. I've come up with a formula for power (it's a 4th order polynomial) that I really have been having good results with. Here it is: POWER = (19+469*ISO-1394*ISO^2+1801*ISO^3)-(2*(5-HR%)) where ISO=Slugging Average - Batting Average HR% = HR / AB * 100 100 actually means something in the scale. Roger Maris 1961. The biggest bug is that the minimum is 9. I'd like to set this to zero but would need to change my slopes and/or intercepts. Do you have a contact equation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cris987 Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Jabroni, Thanks for that info. It makes sense to me. It kinda boils down like this: Power 90-100 = Slug% .600 - .650 Power 80-89 = Slug% .550 - .600 Power 70-79 = Slug% .500 - .500 Power 60-69 = Slug% .450 - .500 Power 50-59 = Slug% .400 - .450 Power 40-49 = Slug% .350 - .400 Power 30-39 = Slug% .300 - .350 Power 20-29 = Slug% .250 - .300 Power 10-19 = Slug% .200 - .250 Power 00-10 = Slug% .150 - 200 Knowing some of the Oldtime Players like Mays; Mantle; McCovey etc OFTEN had Slugging % Season's > .600 and even into the 700s occassionally would not be out of line for a Super Year to be in the '90s - Exceptional Years to be in the '80s; Very Good Years to be in the '70s; Good Years to be in the 60s; Above Average Years to be in the 50s etc etc etc. Of course this is all personal perspective and I could see where this scale could range up a bit from where it is to give a bit higher Power Ratings to Players but overall I think it is fairly representative. I am very interested in others opinions on this subject. I'm sorry about that Chavez/Berkman thing, I probably pushed in the numbers wrong, anyways, I think it'd be better to use ISOp than SLG. Because for a guy like Ichiro , who has a fairly good SLG because of his high AVG, his power numbers would be rather....inaccurate. Ichiro's performance last year would have meant a power number in the range of 60-69, which is a bit high for a contact hitter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krawhitham Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Cris987 - I tend to agree. We should work to improve these formulas for 2005 wherevever we can. I hope Robert Glass will be working with us on this for 2005. Keep in mind that there will always be out lyers in these formulas when they are based solely on Statistics. Especially when the Statistics available are fairly limited depending on your input source. Great example would be a Player's Throwing Arm. Guys like Clemente and others that had a rifle for an arm would not necessiarly equate to a high rating if it is primarily based on assists since few players would ever attempt to take that extra base on them when it is hit their way. Thus they would have few assists in relation to put outs resulting in a lower rating than they rightfully would deserve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cris987 Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Well the game allows upto 127 but my point with the 2nd set of #s was bonds using the equations MVPedit uses should be 152.5 but it was only 102 when imported and I was wondering why I know Big Clu's power season when imported was 107 for power, so 102 is not the max MVPedit allows The game allows power numbers up to 127? I never knew that. Does this require editing the file by hand, or editing the player in the game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 krawhitham, Not sure how MVPEdit would assign a 102 as I thought that MVPEdit was limited to between 0-100. But there was also a slight Lefty vs Righty factor involved in MVPEdit as well for both Power & Contact. But that Lefty / Righty factor was a general %'s difference and not based on actual Lefty vs Righty stats as those weren't available from the input source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krawhitham Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 The game allows power numbers up to 127? I never knew that. Does this require editing the file by hand, or editing the player in the game? yes, notepad works MVPedit will not allow a number larger than 100 Or use http://mvpmods.com/modules.php?name=Downlo...DITOR#dldetails after you start a season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Looks like within MVPEdit it can only reflect a 0-100 rating in the Power slot but perhaps during import Robert's program actually maintained a the higher rating than 100 and imported that rating to MVP - Or perhaps a better guess is that MVP's progression stuff may have come into play ......... just not sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krawhitham Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 one more thing about #'s higher the 100, at the end of the season when MVP does it progression crap it will cut the number down to at least 99. and I do not care if you have 140 HRs it still chops the # down to 99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulw Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 There are MANY different equations that will work (mine I use for personal preference in that it gives me the best results for how I play) BUT there's one thing that some of your are missing - it's fundamental to understanding baseball stats. Isolated Power is a much, MUCH, *MUCH* better indicator of power than slugging average which is contaminated by batting average. I ran some analysis last year that "seemed" to indicate to me that MVP was using ISO and not slugging%. This was the first baseball sim I ever encountered that did this. High Heat - which I loved - didn't. Here's an example: Ichiro had a .455 Slugging Percentage last year with only 8 homeruns. Sammy Sosa had a .517 slugging percentage with 35 homeruns. Really not that much different. However Sosa had .264 Isolated Power while Ichiro had an ISO of .083. This gives Ichiro (who set a record for singles last year) an overall POWER rating in my system of 42. Sosa on the other hand rates an 83. Sounds pretty good to me. The second part of the equation - which factors in homerun percentage - takes into account guys who have lots of doubles and triples - but few homeruns. This is something which does affect ISO ratings which I'm trying to adjust for. Rember ISO = Slugging Avg. - Batting Avg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Excellent point. Improvement can be at hand if we all work together on this. I think ISO could be derived from the available stats in the Lahman data base but even if not perhaps Robert Glass can merge in multiple sources for input. I know it was missing several key categories I would have like to use in the formulas but we were pressed for time and wanted to get something out to the masses that at least were reasonable and had a good distribution amoung players. The closer to reality is absolutely the end result we all seek - at least I would think so. Another good point you made about how each of us play the game effects the best way to set ratings. But I would think Sliders could adjust for those differences since no set of equations or simple forumlas would satisfy everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cris987 Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 First of all, I work in Institutional Resarch at a University so I'm nuts about numbers in the first place. I've come up with a formula for power (it's a 4th order polynomial) that I really have been having good results with. Here it is: POWER = (19+469*ISO-1394*ISO^2+1801*ISO^3)-(2*(5-HR%)) where ISO=Slugging Average - Batting Average HR% = HR / AB * 100 100 actually means something in the scale. Roger Maris 1961. The biggest bug is that the minimum is 9. I'd like to set this to zero but would need to change my slopes and/or intercepts. I like your equation very much. However, is there anyway I can increase the results without increasing the min. result? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulw Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Thanks and yes you can increase the results without changing the minimum. The second number in the equation (469) is the linear slope component. Just increase this to something like 500 or whatever suits your needs. POWER = (19+469*ISO-1394*ISO^2+1801*ISO^3)-(2*(5-HR%)) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krawhitham Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Thanks and yes you can increase the results without changing the minimum. The second number in the equation (469) is the linear slope component. Just increase this to something like 500 or whatever suits your needs. POWER = (19+469*ISO-1394*ISO^2+1801*ISO^3)-(2*(5-HR%)) Do you have a equation for Contact? and how would hot zones play into all of this? what bonus does they game give a player when the pitch is in a RED zone complared to neutral? what kind of hit does your player take when the pitch is in the blue area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulw Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 My contact formula takes into account both batting average and strikeout rate - which is how contact works in MVP. Strikeout effects the rating much, MUCH less than batting average however. ((350*Batting Average)-25)+((0.1-Strikeouts/At bats)*50) I wish I had answers to your other questions. I've been thinking about setting up players with no hot and cold zones and seeing what happens. Just haven't had the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cris987 Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 My contact formula takes into account both batting average and strikeout rate - which is how contact works in MVP. Strikeout effects the rating much, MUCH less than batting average however. ((350*Batting Average)-25)+((0.1-Strikeouts/At bats)*50) I wish I had answers to your other questions. I've been thinking about setting up players with no hot and cold zones and seeing what happens. Just haven't had the time. I was gonna try making an equation consisting of BA and Ks too (I thought I was good at math....) , but looks like you've got some great stuff there (and you're MUCH better in math..... :cry: ). I really like your equations, I'm gonna try them and see how the results come out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 MVPEdit currently uses the below formula for Contact and then an adjustment is made for the Lefty / Righty factor: ((.BAvg * 1000) - 200 ) / 2 ) + 30.5 = Contact Rating BAvgs > .340 = Rating of 15 BAvgs < .140 = Rating of 0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 We factored in Strikeout ratios; Walk ratios & Batting Averages in the Plate Discipline Rating rather than the Contact Rating if I recall correctly ........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Nope ..... I was wrong ---- Plate Discipline was derived as follows: Ws / Ks * 100 + .5 = DF DF was a Discipline Factor then (( DF + Contact Rating ) / 2 )+ .5 * .1 = Plate Discipline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cris987 Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Nope ..... I was wrong ---- Plate Discipline was derived as follows: Ws / Ks * 100 + .5 = DF DF was a Discipline Factor then (( DF + Contact Rating ) / 2 )+ .5 * .1 = Plate Discipline I'm kind of confused. What are these "MVPEdit equations"? Isn't MVPEdit just an editor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 MVPEdit inputs Players/Teams from the Lahman Data Base which contains statistics. MVPEdit then uses these formulas to turn those statistics into MVP 2004 Ratings. MVPEdit then allows you to edit things. MVPEdit can also input Leagues from MVP 2004 at which time no statistics to ratings calculations are performed. Hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pujols_7777 Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 Cris987 - I tend to agree. We should work to improve these formulas for 2005 wherevever we can. I hope Robert Glass will be working with us on this for 2005. Keep in mind that there will always be out lyers in these formulas when they are based solely on Statistics. Especially when the Statistics available are fairly limited depending on your input source. Great example would be a Player's Throwing Arm. Guys like Clemente and others that had a rifle for an arm would not necessiarly equate to a high rating if it is primarily based on assists since few players would ever attempt to take that extra base on them when it is hit their way. Thus they would have few assists in relation to put outs resulting in a lower rating than they rightfully would deserve. This almost goes back, if you've read Moneyball, to Paul DePodesta's search for an equation to measure the exact value of Johnny Damon's defense to the team (when he left for Boston and was replaced by Terrence Long). Although he found a way to measure that value, in this case, I guess it really has to be subjective... unless maybe paulw has something to say (I really dont know for the life of me what i am talking about) :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stecropper Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 "pujols_7777" wrote: (I really dont know for the life of me what i am talking about) Regardless ....... I enjoyed reading your thoughts and they made sense to me !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoSoxRule Posted February 19, 2005 Share Posted February 19, 2005 First of all, I work in Institutional Resarch at a University so I'm nuts about numbers in the first place. I've come up with a formula for power (it's a 4th order polynomial) that I really have been having good results with. Here it is: POWER = (19+469*ISO-1394*ISO^2+1801*ISO^3)-(2*(5-HR%)) where ISO=Slugging Average - Batting Average HR% = HR / AB * 100 100 actually means something in the scale. Roger Maris 1961. The biggest bug is that the minimum is 9. I'd like to set this to zero but would need to change my slopes and/or intercepts. Wow, very good job on making that formula. Here are some players I tried: Manny Ramirez: 89 Albert Pujols: 92 Barry Bonds (I know, I know) 126 Jim Thome: 90 Alex Rodriguez: 77 Ichiro: 42 Mora: 74 David Ortiz: 87 Edmonds: 95 Those are 2004 numbers, so I don't know if you'd want to use 3 year splits, 2 years splits, or career numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.