wudl83

Haha That one looks so cool. Keep it going.

How do you do this? I mean...I edited cyberfaces myself, I think I am not the best, but I can do them. But you do such an incredible job, It is simply unbelievable what you put out there. I have so much respect for your work. :good:

:clapping:

http://www.operationsports.com/forums/mlb-2k-sliders/540846-mkharsh33-mlb-2k12-sliders-classic-hitting-total-control-pitching.html --> tweak some numbers to your liking

That would be so damn cool... :clapping:

I am 90% done with pitchers. All the pitch calculation works and most of the contact, BB/9 and so, too. Some insight: Dan Haren 83 OVR, 73 Ctrl, 94 Stam, 72 Comp 69 4FA, 75 FC, 78 FS, 68 2FA, 81 12-6-curve Matt Cain 91 OVR, 87 Ctrl, 98 Stam, 80 Comp 81 4FA, 87 SL, 79 12-6-curve, 85 CH, 87 2FA :)

As long as there is no great demand or marekt for baseball games there won't be a pc game IMO. Why should they work for something that is a nearly sure financial deficit work? For the rest of the post I have simply a different opinion. You care less about some optical or graphical things, I don't care about minor leagues in franchise. ;)

Guys I have now finished up the formulas for all the pitches noted above. I tested each formula for 3-5 pitchers and they look at least okay if not even very good. I hope you won't be annoyed that I do not post down every formula, since most formulas are quite the same, most times only some constant numbers are changed. Next will be an indepth look at the other pitcher's ratings, like contact, BB/9, K/9, stamina, and so on since I am not satisfied with my first version.

This is serious business man. Keep up the good work. You really have some talent. :clapping:

Thank you very much. My goal is to create a sheet with formulas for nearly every rating in this game so that I/we only have to use the extract-option of fangraphs.com and can calculate the rating for one player within seconds. Also we would have a common base for those ratings. The best thing would be that I got some reliable guys which would allow us to spread work. We could use this for a season ending roster or even a next year's roster. Vlad's editor would really be nice, I was really looking forward to it. No plan what he is doing now.

Nah sorry I did not make it clear what I wanted to say. What we have now is 11 skintone options in the 2k12 editor which do not fit the colors of the game 2k12, because 2k changed the amount of colors from 2k11 to 2k12 and changed some numbers of the slots in the global.iff or where it is located. I wanted to know if it would be possible to make new numbers in the global.iff so that the old numbers which Ty used for his editor in 2k11 and 2k12 would match again? Right now we have some numbers in the global.iff that can't be accessed via editor because the editor does not have them band we have some possible numbers in the editor that can't be accessed because the global.iff does not have them. I was wondering if we could recreate those slots which are in the editor. Your suggestion seems viable but to be honest I do not think this would be a good option since every new roster update you would have to reassing thousands of skin tone numbers again and again.

[placeholder for other pitches]

I think I got something for the 2-seamer, too. We need: 2010, 2011, 2012, career wFT/c 2010, 2011, 2012, career Mov-x and Mov-y for FTs Max-speed 1) weighed wFT/c = (2010 wFT/c *1 + 2011 wFT/c *2 + 2012 wFT/c *3 + career wFT/c *1) / 7 2) wanted 2-seamer pitch rating = 75 + (99-75) * weighed wFT/c * 0,6 3) weighed Mov = (square root of (Mov-x² + Mov-y²) of 2010 * 1 + square root of (Mov-x² + Mov-y²) of 2011 * 2 + square root of (Mov-x² + Mov-y²) of 2012 * 3 + square root of (Mov-x² + Mov-y²) of career * 1) / 7 4) pitcher's speed: max-speed - 1 5) new subtotal for pitch rating = subtraction of possible max-rating for pitcher's speed = (95 - pitcher's speed) * 1,667 (see above: 3 points in pitch speed mean 5 points in pitch rating) 6) movement-rating = 70 + weighed Mov * 1,1 7) new subtotal pitch rating counting speed and movement = subtotal of 5) - (99 - movement-rating) * 0,2 (since 5 points in movement mean 1 point in pitch rating) 8.) control-rating = 99 - ((new subtotal of 7) - wanted rating) / 0,4 (since 5 points in control mean 2 points in pitch rating) Some Examples: Jered Weaver (wFT/c, max-speed and mov): wanted rating 83 --> 81 ctrl, 83 mov, 92 speed --> 83 rating Justin Verlander (wFT/c, max-speed and mov): wanted rating 95 --> 95 ctrl, 85 mov, 95 speed --> 94 rating Matt Cain (wFT/c, max-speed and mov): wanted rating 85 --> 81 ctrl, 85 mov, 93 speed --> 85 rating If the ratings for the 2-seamers come out too low it would be easily adjustable via step 2). I could simply use another constant, perhaps 0,8 instead of 0,6 and the wanted ratings would be higher. The rest would be calculated the same way.

Okay. Let's try it with the 4-seamer. First I use the weighed wFA/c rating: (2010 * 1 + 2011 * 2 + 2012 * 3 + career *1) / 7 For Justin Verlander we would get the weighed average of: + 0,71 After that I created a basic pitch rating formula for the 4-seamer: 75 + (99-75)* weighed average * 0,8 (simply a test formula seems to work quite good). For Verlander we get: 89 Max speed of 2012 was 101, so: max speed - 1 = 100 Because 1 point in speed results in 1 point in pitch rating I use: possible pitch max - max speed of pitcher = 105 - 100 = 5. Interium result: 99 (possible pitch max) - 5 (for the speed) = 94 (new interim overall). This 94 would be Verlander's possible pitch rating when movement and control would be at 99. But we want to have a rating of 89. So we take 99 as the max and substract something from it: 99 - (1,6 * (interim result - pitch rating) The 99 is the possible max for control, we substract the difference from the interim result and the wanted pitch rating from it. This difference must be counted 1,6 times, since for the 4 seamer we learned that -5 points in control result n -3 points in pitch rating. 3/5 is roughly 1,6, so I use that. Since the movement rating doesn't matter for the 4 seamer rating I would put it at the same rating as the control rating. So we would have: Justin Verlander's 4-seamer: control 91, movement 91, speed 100 mph --> rating 89 Is this calculation reasonable or too weird for you? Some other results: Jered Weaver (calculated rating of 97, but can't be achieved since his pitch is too slow, so control/movement will be max anyway): control 99, movement 99, speed 93 --> rating 86 Matt Cain (calculated rating of 82): control 89, movement 89, speed 94 --> rating 82 David Price (calculated rating of 87): control 91, movement 91, speed 98 --> rating 87 Too bad it doesn't work for the worse 4-seamer pitchers: Ubaldo Jimenez (calculated rating 62): control 55 + movement 55 + speed 96 = rating 67 Perhaps I will bring in a blocking rating at something like 50 or 45, which means that a pitcher can't have a lower 4-seamer rating than 50 or 45 or something like that. Otherwise pitchers like Bronson Arroyo with catastrophic wFA/c in 2012 would have a calculated rating of something in the 30s.

Tweaked a little bit more formulas yesterday. Now I think I can finish the batting and fielding rating calculation. Bunt ratings are a little bit tricky but I will stick with it now. I took some looks at pitchers ratings againand first I played a little bit around with pitch ratings. Those ones seem to be very difficult to adjust. The pitch ratings influence the OVR of a pitcher quite much. With some pitches the movement rating simply doesn't matter (e.g. 4seamers), while with other pitches the movement rating counts very much (e.g. sliders). With some pitches the control rating matters very much, while with other pitches the control rating doesn't matter too much. Always the pitch speed seems to play a big role. Some examples: 4-seamer: speed 105 (max), movement 99 (max), control 99 (max): rating 99 speed 100, movement 99, control 99: rating 93 speed 95, movement 99, controll 99: rating 88 speed 105, movement 99, control 95: rating 97 speed 105, movement 99, control 90: rating 94 speed 105, movement 99, control 85: rating 92 speed 105, movement 95, control 99: rating 99 speed 105, movement 90, control 99: rating 99 speed 105, movement 85, control 99: rating 99 Every -5 in speed results in -5 pitch rating. Every -5 in control results in -3 pitch rating. Movement does not matter for pitch rating. So although Jered Weaver has a (for a SP) good wFA/c of 1.38 for his 4-seamer, he won't get a 90 rating for his 4-seamer ingame, since his max-speed with the 4-seamer was 93.8 mph this season. I would not give him more than 93 mph for it (always calculating the ingame pitch speed like this: max-vel of pitch - 1). Giving his fastball a max speed of 93 mph would mean that he would get a 86 4-seam-fastball rating in the best case. Perhaps I gotta try to find a complicated formula which takes wFA/c, max-speed, control and movement into account. It should be clear that a wFA/c of 1.38 must not be a 70ish rating. 2-seamer: speed 95 (max), mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 92, mov 99, con 99: rating 94 speed 89, mov 99, con 99: rating 89 speed 95, mov 99, con 95: rating 97 speed 95, mov 99, con 90: rating 95 speed 95, mov 99, con 85: rating 93 speed 95, mov 95, con 99: rating 98 speed 95, mov 90, con 99: rating 97 speed 95, mov 85, con 99: rating 96 Every -3 in speed results in -5 pitch rating. Every -5 in control results in -2 pitch rating. Every -5 in movement results in -1 pitch rating. (This seems to be the reason why the 2-seamer of most pitchers has a way higher pitch rating than their 4-seamer. The max speed of the 2-seamer is way lower ingame than the 4-seamer so the 2-seamer pitch rating does not suffer too much from lower speed like the 4-seamer does.) Cut-Fastball: speed 95 (max), mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 92, mov 99, con 99: rating 94 speed 89, mov 99, con 99: rating 90 speed 86, mov 99, con 99: rating 87 speed 95, mov 99, con 95: rating 97 speed 95, mov 99, con 90: rating 95 speed 95, mov 99, con 85: rating 94 speed 95, mov 99, con 80: rating 92 speed 95, mov 95, con 99: rating 97 speed 95, mov 90, con 99: rating 96 speed 95, mov 85, con 99: rating 94 speed 95, mov 80, con 99: rating 93 Every -3 in speed results in (about) -3.5 in pitch rating. Every -5 in control results in (about) -1.5 in pitch rating. Every -5 in movement results in (about) -1.5 in pitch rating. Sinker: speed 94 (max), mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 91, mov 99, con 99: rating 95 speed 88, mov 99, con 99: rating 92 speed 85, mov 99, con 99: rating 89 speed 94, mov 99, con 95: rating 97 speed 94, mov 99, con 90: rating 95 speed 94, mov 99, con 85: rating 93 speed 94, mov 95, con 99: rating 98 speed 94, mov 90, con 99: rating 96 speed 94, mov 85, con 99: rating 95 Every -3 in speed results in -3 pitch rating. Every -5 in control results in -2 pitch rating. Every -5 in movement results in (about) -1.5 pitch rating. Knuckleball: Speed 75 (max), mov 99, con 99: rating 99 Speed 72, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 Speed 69, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 Speed 66, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 Speed 75, mov 99, con 95: rating 97 Speed 75, mov 99, con 90: rating 95 Speed 75, mov 99, con 85: rating 94 Speed 75, mov 99, con 80: rating 92 Speed 75, mov 95, con 99: rating 96 Speed 75, mov 90, con 99: rating 93 Speed 75, mov 85, con 99: rating 89 Speed 75, mov 80, con 99: rating 86 Speed doesn't matter for the Knuckler. Every -5 in control results in (about) in -1.5 pitch rating. Every -5 in movement results in (about) in -3.5 pitch rating. Splitter: speed 91 (max), mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 88, mov 99, con 99: rating 95 speed 85, mov 99, con 99: rating 92 speed 82, mov 99, con 99: rating 88 speed 91, mov 99, con 95: rating 97 speed 91, mov 99, con 90: rating 96 speed 91, mov 99, con 85: rating 94 speed 91, mov 95, con 99: rating 97 speed 91, mov 90, con 99: rating 95 speed 91, mov 85, con 99: rating 94 Every -3 in pitch speed results in (about) -3.5 pitch rating. Every -5 in control results in (about) -1.5 pitch rating. Every -5 in movement results in (about) -1.5 in pitch rating. Slider: speed 93 (max), movement 99 (max), control 99 (max): rating 99 speed 90, movement 99, control 99: rating 97 speed 87, movement 99, control 99: rating 95 speed 93, movement 99, control 95: rating 97 speed 93, movement 99, control 90: rating 95 speed 93, movement 99, control 85: rating 93 speed 93, movement 95, control 99: rating 97 speed 93, movement 90, control 99: rating 95 speed 93, movement 85, control 99: rating 93 Every -3 in speed result in -2 rating. Every -5 in control result in -2 rating. Every -5 in movement result in -2 rating. A formula for the slider seems to be much easier than for the FA. 12-6-curveball: speed 85 (max), movement 99 (max), control 99 (max): rating 99 speed 82, movement 99, control 99: rating 99 speed 79, movement 99, control 99: rating 99 speed 76, movement 99, controll 99: rating 99 speed 85, movement 99, control 95: rating 97 speed 85, movement 99, control 90: rating 95 speed 85, movement 99, control 85: rating 93 speed 85, movement 95, control 99: rating 96 speed 85, movement 90, control 99: rating 93 speed 85, movement 85, control 99: rating 90 Speed does not matter. Every -5 of control results in -2 in the pitch rating. Every -5 in the movement rating results in -3 of the pitch rating. Curveball (this is crazy): speed 86 (max), mov 99, con 99: rating 96 (???) speed 83, mov 99, con 99: rating 96 speed 80, mov 99, con 99: rating 97 (???) speed 77, mov 99, con 99: rating 97 speed 74, mov 99, con 99: rating 98 (???) speed 71, mov 99, con 99: rating 98 speed 68, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 (???) speed 68, mov 99, con 95: rating 97 speed 68, mov 99, con 90: rating 94 speed 68, mov 99, con 85: rating 92 speed 68, mov 95, con 99: rating 97 speed 68, mov 90, con 99: rating 94 speed 68, mov 85, con 99: rating 92 Every -3 in speed results in +0.5 in pitch rating. (The slower the pitch, the higher the rating. Okay, slow curveballs may often seem to be difficult to hit, especially when the pitcher has a quick fastball, but that seems somehow wacky to me.) Every -5 in control result in (about) -2.5 in pitch rating. Every -5 in movement result in (about) -2.5 in pitch rating. Knucklecurve: speed 85 (max), mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 82, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 79, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 85, mov 99, con 95: rating 97 speed 85, mov 99, con 90: rating 95 speed 85, mov 99, con 85: rating 93 speed 85, mov 95, con 99: rating 96 speed 85, mov 90, con 99: rating 93 speed 85, mov 85, con 99: rating 90 Speed does not matter. Every -5 in contact results in -2 in pitch rating. Every -5 in movement results in -3 in pitch rating. Slurve: speed 85 (max), mov 99, con 99: rating 96 (???) speed 82, mov 99, con 99: rating 96 speed 79, mov 99, con 99: rating 97 (???) speed 65, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 (???) speed 65, mov 99, con 95: rating 97 speed 65, mov 99, con 90: rating 95 speed 65, mov 95, con 99: rating 96 speed 65, mov 90, con 99: rating 93 speed 65, mov 85, con 99: rating 90 Every -3 in speed results in +0.5 in pitch rating. (The slower the pitch, the higher the rating. Okay, slow slurves may often seem to be difficult to hit, especially when the pitcher has a quick fastball, but that seems somehow wacky to me = CURVEBALL) Every -5 in control results in -2 in pitch rating. Every -5 in movement results in -3 in pitch rating. Changeup: speed 88 (max), mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 85, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 82, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 88, mov 99, con 95: rating 95 speed 88, mov 99, con 90: rating 90 speed 88, mov 99, con 85: rating 86 speed 88, mov 99, con 80: rating 81 speed 88, mov 95, con 99: rating 98 speed 88, mov 90, con 99: rating 98 speed 88, mov 85, con 99: rating 97 speed 88, mov 80, con 99: rating 97 Speed does not matter. Every -5 in control results in (about) -5 in pitch rating. Every -5 in movement results in -0.5 in pitch rating. Split Change: speed 90 (max), mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 87, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 84, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 81, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 90, mov 99, con 95: rating 97 speed 90, mov 99, con 90: rating 94 speed 90, mov 99, con 85: rating 92 speed 90, mov 95, con 99: rating 97 speed 90, mov 90, con 99: rating 94 speed 90, mov 85, con 99: rating 92 Speed does not matter. Every -5 in control results in (about) -2.5 in pitch rating. Every -5 in movement results in (about) -2.5 in pitch rating. Circle-change: speed 89 (max), mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 86, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 83, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 80, mov 99, con 99: rating 99 speed 89, mov 99, con 95: rating 96 speed 89, mov 99, con 90: rating 92 speed 89, mov 99, con 85: rating 89 speed 89, mov 95, con 99: rating 97 speed 89, mov 90, con 99: rating 96 speed 89, mov 85, con 99: rating 94 speed 89, mov 80, con 99: rating 93 speed 89, mov 75, con 99: rating 91 Speed does not matter. Every -5 in control results in -3.5 in pitch rating. Every -5 in movement results in -1.5 in pitch rating. ____________________ I think those are all the basic pitches we should use. The game offers us 4 more pitches: - power curve - eephus - screwball - palmball But to be honest I can not think of anybody in today's baseball who uses those pitches regularly. Perhaps I will be able to find some formulas that allow me to come up with adequate pitch ratings.

Can't the global be edited, so that we can insert new texture slots?

Regarding the batting ratings I feel quite fine with what I got now. Here are some screenshots of the 5 WAR-leaders of both leagues. If you think some ratings are way off then please let me know it. Everything is open for discussion.

Still tweaking formulas, still not satisfied. Still working on hitters and pitchers. I will come with updates - I promise. When I got the sheet together the bunch of work is done. The rest will only be transfering the ratings from the sheet into the game.

The editor works it only has some bugs. 1) The Marlins bug which makes it impossible to edit their team colors. 2) The bug with the dark skinned players. Nevertheless I use the editor for those players and teams where it works. The rest is edited ingame. I have not heard about another company that would come up with a MLB license or franchise. I also do not mind that the Astros won't be in the AL in 2013 in 2k12 since I mainly play play now games. I am quite satisfied with the game besides some glitches and I think I will stick to it longterm as far as no other baseball game comes out. Because of that I already started a roster project for next year. Would be cool if some modding guys would also stay.

Yeah but because it would inflate the reliever's K-tendencies I use different formulas for relievers and starters. Compare Romo to Lincecum. Thanks for the shutdown/meltdown stat, but how do you think I could use it? EDIT: I think that it doesn't really matter if you use K/9, BB/9, H/9 or K%, BB%, BAA%. Reason is because those two stats show the same thing only on a different base. IMO you should only use one method. E.g. when you want to use H/9 to rate the contact you should then use K/9 and B/99 and so on.

I played around with some batting formulas. Still not finished. The places that are empty still need tweaking. The rest looks quite good. I will calculate the Contact, 2B, HR and Eye via the BASE ratings and career splits I mentioned while talking about the pitchers. Here are some players: Name: Jose Bautista Clutch - 44 Durabil - Contact - 74 2B - 73 3B - 56 HR - 100 Eye - 88 Bunt - DragBunt - Speed - 78 Aggr - 55 Awar - 70 Accel - 79 Bu Tend - K Tend - 59 GB Tend - 41 BB Tend - 94 SB Tend - 42 Glove - 76 ArAcc - 90 ArStr - 93 OF Rng - 78 IF Rng - 65 Antic - 79 C - 1B - 2B - 3B - SS - LF - CF - RF - Bl Plate - Bl Pitch - Game Call - Name: Hunter Pence Clutch - 65 Durabil - Contact - 79 2B - 79 3B - 57 HR - 71 Eye - 77 Bunt - DragBunt - Speed - 83 Aggr - 60 Awar - 71 Accel - 81 Bu Tend - K Tend - 67 GB Tend - 56 BB Tend - 57 SB Tend - 38 Glove - 78 ArAcc - 84 ArStr - 87 OF Rng - 84 IF Rng - Antic - 78 C - 1B - 2B - 3B - SS - LF - CF - RF - Bl Plate - Bl Pitch - Game Call - Name: Derek Jeter Clutch - 47 Durabil - Contact - 84 2B - 83 3B - 35 HR - 56 Eye - 80 Bunt - DragBunt - Speed - 75 Aggr - 64 Awar - 84 Accel - 65 Bu Tend - K Tend - 48 GB Tend - 69 BB Tend - 52 SB Tend - 43 Glove - 80 ArAcc - 82 ArStr - 76 OF Rng - 48 IF Rng - 68 Antic - 71 C - 1B - 2B - 3B - SS - LF - CF - RF - Bl Plate - Bl Pitch - Game Call - This was calculated via fangraphs and baseball reference. I will try to keep it simpler so that I only have to use one page. Fangraphs is my preference because with this page I can extract (hopefully) all necessary stats while I had to make it manually for every player with baseball reference.

I played around with some batting formulas. Still not finished. The places that are empty still need tweaking. The rest looks quite good. I will calculate the Contact, 2B, HR and Eye via the BASE ratings and career splits I mentioned while talking about the pitchers. Here are some players: Name: Jose Bautista Clutch: 44 Durabil Contact 74 2B 73 3B 56 HR 100 Eye 88 Bunt DragBunt Speed 78 Aggr 55 Awar 70 Accel 79 Bu Tend K Tend 59 GB Tend 41 BB Tend 94 SB Tend 42 Glove 76 ArAcc 90 ArStr 93 OF Rng

Yap, you are right. And I tried it out with higher base numbers for CF than for the other OF, but let's take a look at Dexter Fowler (CF): 2010: RF/9 2.29 - lgRF/9 2.59 --> -0.30 (*1) 2011: RF/9 2.64 - lgRF/9 2.55 --> +0.09 (*2) 2012: RF/9 2.27 - lgRF/9 2.51 --> -0.24 (*3) Since I weighed the different years one time, two time and three times (I said that earlier) we get: ((-0.30)+(0.18)+(-0.72))/6 = -0,14 This means that (using the weighed average) difference between Dexter Fowler's RF/9 and the lgRF/9 he is -0,14. Let's look at Tyler Colvin (CF): 2010: RF/9 2.25 - lgRF/2.59 --> -0.34 (*1) 2011: RF/9 2.55 - lgRF/2.55 --> 0.00 (*2) 2012: RF/9 3.04 - lgRF/2.51 --> +0.53 (*3) Calculation: ((-0.34)+0+(1,59))/6 = 1,25 See what I mean? And those numbers occur for so many players. When we compare this to reality, you will see in the Rockies games that Dexter Fowler has a so so arm, but has plus speed and a really big range. And you will see that Tyler Colvin's arm is okay, but his range isn't the best. It is like day and night. Yap, you are right. In the OF it seems valid. The range stats sometimes do not reflect what we can see in reality. So I think the idea of somehow calculating the OF range by using speed and anticipation may be ok. Regarding IF I am undecided. Maybe I could use fangraphs "Range Runs" (http://www.fangraphs...ion=SS#fielding)? It seems that this stat reflects reality a little bit more. When I compare Brandon Crawford to Marco Scutaro at SS I see a rather real number: (Year/Crawford/Scutaro) 2010: --- / -1.5 2011: 2.6 / 0.9 2012: 4.2 / -0.3 As in reality, Crawford would get a way better range rating than Scutaro at SS or IF in general. I will post my opinion and then come up with what I did, Pitch Speed - I first used fangraphs average and tried to add +1 or +2 to the number. Won't work properly. Look at Justin Verlander.http://www.fangraphs...ion=P#pitchtype He averages 94.6 mph on his fastball, which would be a 96.6 (=97) but he is able to throw 99ers or 100 mph fastballs in his games. When you look here you see that Verlander is able to reach nearly 102 mph: http://www.fangraphs...tion=P&pitch=FA. So I used this "max-Vel", substracted -1 and used that as the speed for a pitch. Pitch Tendency - I do the same like you. Base on Ball tendency - I think you misunderstood the ingame rating. The lower the BoB tendency a pitcher has ingame the lower his walks will be. The higher his BoB tendency the more walks he will issue. I for myself used a somehow more complicated formula, which is also a little bit different for relievers and starters. First I calculated the weighed (you know 3 times, 2 times, 1 time) average for league BB for last 3 seasons. This would be 3,147. Then I took the weighed 3 year average for the pitcher. Let's do it with Matt Cain (http://www.fangraphs...4732&position=P). He got (2010) 2,46 BB/9, (2011) 2,56 BB/9 and a projected (2012) 1,89 BB/9. That makes up for a 2,208 BB/9 weighed average. Now I simply used the formula: 70 + 25 * (weighed average of the pitcher - weighed average of the league). In Matt Cain's case we would come up with: 70 + 25 * (2,208-3,147) = 46,53. So we would have a BB/9 tendency of 47 for Matt Cain. Do not wonder about "70" and "25", those numbers are quite random but guarantee accurate results. Do not know why, but it works. For relievers the "70" is exchanged with "50". Sometimes relievers with low BB/9 numbers would get BB tendencies in the 10s or so, but in those cases I feel free to add +10 to this number. Sergio Romo would get a tendency of 13 using this formula, but I add +10 and so he gets 23. Strikeout tendency - Could it be that you took some strange numbers? I do not remember pitchers having a K% of 25 or something like that. Ingame a high strikeout tendency means that a pitcher normally gets many Ks. First I calculated the league's weighed 3 year average (7,246 K/9), then I calculated the weighed 3 year average for the pitcher. Let's take Tim Lincecum: 9,79 K/9 in 2010, 9,12 K/9 in 2011, 9,34 K/9 in 2012. So we would get a weighed 9,34 K/9 for his last 3 seasons. After that I use the formula: 60 + 15 * (weighed average of the pitcher - weighed average of the league). Again: Do not care about 60 and 15. So Lincecum would get: 60 + 15 * (9,342-7,246) = 91,34. So Lincecum gets a strikeout tendency of 91. Since relievers tend to strike out players more often than starters I changed the formula into: 65 + 5 * (weighed average of the pitcher - weighed average of the league). Sergio Romo has a weighed average of 11,25 K/9 for the last 3 seasons, he would get a 85 strikeout tendency. Groundball tendency - same like you. Easiest number for pitchers. Contact - I do not like to use avg. for this for some reason, I use H/9 instead. Problem with your approach is that .200 is a very damn good number for SPs, while many relievers (e.g. left-handed specialists like Randy Choate, finess bullpen guys like Romo or boombastic closers like Kimbrel) have a much lower number than 200. To put it in a nutshell I find that a starting pitcher who has a .200 BAA should have a much higher contact rating than 80, while it could be that a reliever with .200 BAA could have a rating in the 80s. Again I first calculated the 3 year weighed average for H/9 for the whole league (8,781). Then I calculatd the 3 year weighed average for the respective pitcher. For starters I use the formula: 80 + 10 * (weighed league average H/9 - weighed pitcher average H/9). Relievers: 75 + 10 * (weighed league average H/9 - weighed pitcher average H/9). Some examples for starters. Tim Lincecum (8,217 H/9): 80 + 10 * (8,781 - 8,217) = 85,63 --> 86 BASE contact rating. Let's take Joe Blanton (10,502 H/9) of the Dodgers for a comparison: 80 + 10 * (8,781 - 10,502) = 62,782 --> 63 BASE contact rating. Or Josh Johnson (7,492 H/9) of the Marlins: 80 + 10 * (8,781 - 7,492) = 9,288 --> 93 BASE contact rating. You get it: Josh Johnson doesn't allow many H/9 so he gets a very good number for it. Tim Lincecum struggled this year, so his rating is smaller than Johnson's. Blanton really is a joke of a starting pitcher, allowing many hits, so he gets the worst number. Some relievers: Jeremy Affeldt (8,151 H/9): 75 + 10 * (8,781 - 8,151) = 81,29 --> 81 BASE contact rating. JJ Putz (7,175 H/9): 75 + 10 * (8,781 - 7,175) = 91,06 --> 91 BASE contact rating. Kameron Loe (8,573 H/9): 75 + 10 * (8,781 - 8,573) = 75,57 --> 76 BASE contact rating. It may be that some relievers could get a calculated number above 100. For those I feel free to substract -5 or -10. Sometimes relievers would get numbers about 50. For those I feel free to add +5 or +10. I was not able to find a better formula. For starters it works nearly perfect, but for relievers it is very difficult. The stats for relievers are very widespread. But I can live with that. Now let's talk about what I mean with BASE contact rating. When we look at the split stats of the pitchers we will see that some (example) right handed starters may have one bad year against right handed batters, while in the same year they shine against left handed batters (e.g. Matt Cain last season as far as I remember). But when we look at their career split it may be that this starter is overall better against righties than he is against lefties. Got me? And not only to talk about starters, but relievers have this problem still more. Since relievers sometimes only have a few at bats versus opposite hitters (e.g. LHP against RHB) over the course of a season it may screw up their stats. So I find it very inaccurate to calculate pitching the contact ratings vs. LHB and RHB independent. So I think it is a better method to look at the career split of a pitcher and then calculate the contact vs RHB or LHB based on the career split. Let's look at Tim Lincecum. Career split vs RHB .224 BAA, career split vs LHB .224 BAA. His numbers are indeed identic, so he gets a 86 contact rating against LHB and 86 against RHB. Joe Blanton: .269 career BAA against LHB, .271 career BAA against RHB. Nearly identical, Blanton gets 63 for both. Josh Johnson: .249 career BAA against LHB, .224 career BAA against RHB. Finally we got a pitcher that has different success vs LHB and RHB over his career. I found out that it would be a good method to substract the two numbers from each other and multiply the result by *2. After that I use this number and substract it from the BASE contact rating. So let's do it: .249 - .224 = .025. Then let's take 0.25 as a 2.5 and multiply it by 2 and we get 5. So Josh Johnson would get a 93 contact rating against RHB and (93 - 5) 88 contact rating against LHB. I know it is not the best way but when I would calculate the numbers separately it would be screwed up. Double - I can not calculate everything. For pitchers doubles rating I make it easy. When a player has a high groundball rate I assume he does not give up many doubles. So I add a certain number (for pitchers with 55 GB% about +5) to his contact rating or I substract a certain number (for pitchers with 35 GB% about -5) of his contact rating. Triples - It seems that every pitcher ingame had a rating of 25. So I let it be. Homeruns - I calculate a BASE homerun rating and according to the career BAA split difference I substract this difference from the BASE homerun rating, too. Otherwise there would be this problem where the stats and then the ratings would get awkward. Formula for both starters and relievers: 99 - 20 * ( weighed league average HR/9 - (weighed league average HR/9 - weighed pitcher average HR/9) Examples: Tim Lincecum (weighed 0,82 HR/9): 99 - 20 * ( 0,974 - ( 0,974 - 0,82) = 82,576 BASE homerun rating Josh Johnson (weighed 0,462 HR/9): ... 90 BASE homerun rating JJ Putz (weighed 0,74 HR/9): ... 84 BASE homerun rating Kevin Gregg (weighed 0,99 HR/9): ... 79 homerun rating Matt Reynolds (weighed 1,52 HR/9): ... 69 homerun rating Durability - Is there anywhere a statistic which tells us how often a players was on the DL? As far as I (really!) like your idea I do not know of such a statistical overview. But what I do know is that the durability rating (not only stamina) ingame does affect somehow the regeneration of a player. For that starters with many IP per season should get a higher durability rating than relievers. For that I use different formulas. Starters: 70 + (weighed 3 year start-IP * 0,1) Relievers: 50 + (reliever's stamina rating * 0,3 Stamina - Starters stamina: (weighed 3 year start-IP / weighed 3 year GS) * 15 Relievers stamina: (weighed 3 year relief-IP / (G - GS) ) * 45 Some results: Josh Johnson: 94 stamina, 85 durability Tim Lincecum: 92 stamina, 90 durability Sergio Romo: 36 stamina, 61 durability JJ Putz: 43 stamina, 63 durability Composure - Since I think that ingame the differencies regarding some ratings between the good and the bad are way too big, I simply use those formulas: Starters: 80 + 100 * (weighed 3 year LOB% of the player - weighed 3 year LOB% of the league) Relievers: 75 + 100 * (weighed 3 year LOB% of the player - weighed 3 year LOB% of the league) Examples: Josh Johnson: 84 composure Tim Lincecum: 80 composure Sergio Romo: 89 composure JJ Putz: 81 composure Since ingame the composure rating stands for nothing else than how fast a players gets rattled when he allows guys to get on base I think LOB% is a valid choice. Clutch - quite easy once again. Fangraphs offers a clutch rating for every player that determines how a player over- or underperforms in high leverage situations. Starters and relievers: (5 + 3 year weighed player average * 2,5) * 10 Two last examples: JJ Putz: 44 clutch Tim Lincecum: 56 clutch I do not know anything more for the moment. If you have any questions feel free to ask me

Ah okay I got it. This problem was discussed every series. When you have more than 25 players on your roster (it starts with having 26) there will be the "odd man out". This guy will get the bald head, but this status is assigned randomly. So it can be that in roster X the player A has a bald head, while he has his normal face in roster Y. But there can be the player B, that has a normal head in roster X, while he has a bald head in roster Y. This can also change in the course of a franchise season.

Too bad it seems that there occur problems regarding my first thought of transfering RF/9 into a range rating. If I did it this way then I would get players like Scutaro having a way higher range rating than Brandon Crawford. Or Dexter Fowler having a way smaller fielding rating than Hunter Pence. But I think the RF/9 stat is pretty good to rate a players primary, secondary, and so on position. Perhaps I got to find a formula which translates speed and instincts into the range rating? Something like: the higher the speed of a player and the better his instincts the more range he gets?