Currently in our league (More Cowbell) there are about 150 players on the DL (across all levels).
Of those players 34 of them (or over 20%) had health ratings over 80 prior to the injury.
The average training budget in the league is $16M so there aren't many teams really skimping in that category.
This is the first season I've noticed a lack of benefit coming from the health rating...I just got bored and started to do some counting.

Shouldn't the injuries be much more of a bell curve? If over 20% of the injuries are happening to the top 20% of the ratings...it seems that the random factor has more to do with injuries than the ratings.
It may not be worth trading off health rating against performance points when evaluating players..and the training budget may really not be buying you much in the way of avoidance. I guess the effect it has on player degradation as they get older could be considered.

That doesn't really look like a question but, yes, it does matter.   

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/19/2011 8:48:00 PM (view original):
That doesn't really look like a question but, yes, it does matter.   

What's the evidence to show that it does...and to what degree? (The question mark here indicates that it is a question)

78 seasons of experience.  

This has been discussed ad nauseum since the inception of HBD.   Lower health players are injured more frequently.  However, if you look at every player in your world, you'll find that the health ratings aren't distributed evenly.   While 20% of the players on the DL may have 80+ health ratings, I wouldn't be surprised is 50% of the players on BL teams had 80+ health.

What.

1/5 of the players on the DL have 80 health.   A much larger percentage of BL players have 80+ health.   It's not a 1/1 situation.

Short version.   I'm not a "Players have to have 80 health or I won't consider them" kind of guy.  Yet, on my 5 BL teams, I'm split almost completely down the middle with 78 over 80 and 79 under 80. 

Just using those numbers and kscho's 20%, 15.6 of my over 80 health players would be on the DL while 63.2 of my under 80 players would have to populate the rest of a world's DL.

I bet I could find teams that only have 1-2 players under 80 health.   If I had to guess, I'd estimate that 600 out of 800 BL players in every world have 80 health or better.

Players will high health are more likely to make it to the majors without a significant injury hampering growth.

Of COURSE they are going to be over-represented in the majors.

Also, Medical affects injury length and severity.  Not training.  Training helps recovery, so training budgets are irrelvant to the question asked.

If you want to test (in)effectiveness of something, try going medical/training at 8/8 and see the injuries you get.  You won't like it.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/20/2011 8:17:00 AM (view original):
Short version.   I'm not a "Players have to have 80 health or I won't consider them" kind of guy.  Yet, on my 5 BL teams, I'm split almost completely down the middle with 78 over 80 and 79 under 80. 

Just using those numbers and kscho's 20%, 15.6 of my over 80 health players would be on the DL while 63.2 of my under 80 players would have to populate the rest of a world's DL.

I bet I could find teams that only have 1-2 players under 80 health.   If I had to guess, I'd estimate that 600 out of 800 BL players in every world have 80 health or better.

This interested me to check my three teams as well.  I'm also split almost evenly at 80, with 41 players above 80 and 42 below 80.

My warning light goes off at 60.   The buzzer accompanies it at 50.   And my mom shows up and says "Are you sure you want to do that?" with players under 50.

That's why I'm not surprised at the almost 50/50 split at 80.   If you check Franchise rankings, you'll find that everyone is over 70 FOR THEIR ENTIRE 40 MAN ROSTER.   At least a third of them will be over 80 and you might find 1 or 2 over 90. 

80% of the DL being under 80 health sounds about right.

I didn't look at just BL players...I did all levels...and there were plenty of players there under 50.
I've also seen players with 100 health and capped training get hurt.
I'm not saying the ratings don't matter at all, but it may be that the ratings are a smaller percentage of the overall chance of a player getting hurt than they should be...if they're going to be balanced against other ratings.

The chance of a player with 65 health getting hurt over a player with 95 health may be so small as to not be worth trading off other rating points for when making evaluations.

There are, and have been, plenty of bugs in HBD...this also could be one of those.

It isn't.  I know of a few owners who medical budget 0 and only chase high health players.  There was a thread about it the other day. 

Bumped the thread for you.

What I think you want to believe is that injuries are just random and that budgeting doesn't matter.    No one will confirm that for you because it's not true but, if you'd like, feel free to go 0/0 training/medical and ignore health ratings when acquiring players.  I don't think you'll like what you get. 

These discussions come up shortly after someone gets hit with 2 or 3 "big" injuries in a short time frame.  It's frustrating.  It sucks.  But you still have to look at the aggregate rather than a small sample size that seems to put a big bruise on your season.