I broke down by each position and tweaked the formula some more this is what I came up with.

Hitting
Sum= (Contact*1.5+Power+VL+VR+Eye*1.5+Speed*.6)

Fielding SS,2B,OF
Sum= (Range*1.5+Glove+ArmS+ArmA)

C
Sum= (Range*.5+Glove*.5+ArmS+ArmA+Pitch Calling*1.5)

1B, 3B
Sum= (Range*.75+Glove*1.25+ArmS*.75+ArmA)

Pitching

=sum(Vs L + Vs R + Control * 1.5 + Velocity *.75 + P1*1.25 + P2*1.25 + P3*.75 + P4*.5 + P5*.25 + Stamina*.10

I compared my rankings to the rankings provided by mrauseo and they were fairly close.

If I take a couple of different ranking to compare with one another and all of them say a guy should be a stud then it's safe to say he has some value.

At least one part of your formulae lacks face validity (ie, fails the eye test).  There are almost twice as many RHP as LHP in HBD-- if you're valuing VsR and VsL equally in the hitting formula you'll build a team that has trouble against righties.

Posted by eric1214 on 9/26/2011 1:01:00 PM (view original):
This might be a stupid question - but does the overall rating have a significant impact on the player quality or development versus the other ratings (e.g., contact, power, VsL and R)...

No. Overall is skewered by stamina/durability.

Take some of the players from last season in your world and test your formula.    If they guys who produced the best don't show up at the top, you've got some tweaking to do.

A few notes that may or may not have been covered (I only skimmed all the posts)

- I value vRH twice as much as vLH due to the fact that there are more righties

- It is important to think about your math works. For example, you are almost never going to consider a guy with splits in the 20s valuable. But a guy with single digit power can be valuable. I'd much rather have 50/0/60/60/50 than 50/100/10/10/50, even though they have the same gross total of ratings. That is overly simple because of course you aren't dong a straight add of ratings. But the point is that the first 40 points of splits almost don't matter because they are "threshhold" minimums, but power (and contact and eye somewhat) do have value all the way between 0 and 100. But even there, the difference between 90 and 100 power matters "more" than the difference between 0 and 10 power. I don't have a solution to this issue, just noting it as something to think about.

- for pitcher's pitches, I have taken to just summing up all the pitch ratings as a single "pitches quality" in my ratings. Of course, that makes a guy with 70/70/20 look as "good" (for that rating) as 80/80, but I can overcome that shortcoming with an "eye test" of bumping down guys with one horrible pitch

- for pitchers, I have a fomula that calculates potential innings that can be pitched based on STA and DUR. I use that as a modifier to my "raw" scoring and bump up the SPs (over 200 IP) by 20%, and knock down pure RPs (under 100 IPs) by 20%.

- when I have players in a sheet for rankings, I also color code the raw ratings for each category with green/red for high and low outliers. That way I can scan down the sorted "formula" ratings to find high ranked guys with an obvious "flaw" and "hidden gems" that may be mediocre but with one outlier talent (good for finding "empty power" bench guys and "defensive specialist" guys)

I used the color for different tiers and that deff helps eye ball everything easier.  I will use common sense between players.  If one guy is rated over another but the lower rated guys has 2 or 3 elite categories I will go with that guy over the guy that's average at everything.  I will post my updated formula tomorrow when I have a chance.

Your fielding ratings don't make sense.

For example, a shortstop rated 84/70/90/90 would be equal to somebody rated 80/85/85/86. I would take the second guy every time and I bet most other would too. For fielding it seems that the most important thing is to meet or be close to the recs in every category as opposed to being well below in one and well above in the other.

It also breaks down a lot worse on something like 2B. 80/75/60/60 is a good-fielding 2B. 65/72/75/63 is going to be a disaster.

Also, there's not going to be a great difference between a 1B who is a 65/65/60/60 and one who is 70/70/70/70. A few more plays yes, but there is diminishing returns when it comes to fielding. There is a greater penalty for being below the recs than there is a bonus for being above.

Like I said this is not something I will look at blindly.  What it will do is separtae the good and bad players for the most part.  For example, if I'm looking for a top notch fielder and my formula has all the ratings I will look at my colors and if I see a red which is 75 or below and the other guy has all greens 80 or above I will probably opt for the guy that has all greens over the one with the red.  The formula is just a tool that makes it a lot faster to sort through players rather than on the website.

Updated formula please poke holes in it improve it.  For those of you say that using a spreadsheet is a waste of time thank you for not using one.

Hitting
Sum= (Contact*1.5+Power+VL*.5+VR+Eye*1.5+Speed*.6)

Fielding SS,2B,OF
Sum= (Range*1.5+Glove+ArmS+ArmA)

C
Sum= (Range*.5+Glove*.5+ArmS+ArmA+Pitch Calling*1.5)

1B, 3B
Sum= (Range*.75+Glove*1.25+ArmS*.75+ArmA)

Pitching

=sum(Vs L + Vs R + Control * 1.5 + Velocity *.75 + P1*1.25 + P2*1.25 + P3*.75 + P4*.5 + P5*.25 + Stamina*.10)

 

I wouldn't group 2b or CF with SS.  Arm requirements are different.
F
or fielding what you should be doing is units from reccomended ratings.  Do you know how to see the reccomended ratings?  If you do, just use a vlookup versus position and calculate and sum the differentials. 

For batting vs L is more important than speed. 

Its also not clear to me that your premise is accurate "What it will do is separtae the good and bad players for the most part"

Have you tested the formula versus your world?

I wouldn't even bother with a fielding rating formula.  C and SS are unique.   2B and CF are almost interchangeable.   3B is slightly tougher than RF.   LF requires better range/glove than 1B.  DH carries a bat.   

But none of that is to say you can't put a LF in RF or a RF at 3B and avoid disastrous results.   A point here and there can be made up with another point here and there while 10 points at certain ratings are sheer death at some positions. 

I'm a bit of a D-freak.  But, as an example, I didn't feel Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Vic Cervantes was doing enough on D in RF to warrent "over-defensing" him out there.   So I traded him for Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Felipe Lee who isn't qualifed to play RF.   Lee has 5 negative plays, 3 errors and 6 assists in 872 innings with a RF of 1.37.   Cervantes had 2 assists, 1 plus play and a RF of 1.49 in 709 innings.  Despite the massive reduction in ratings, Lee isn't that far off in the field.   There's a point of diminishing returns.   

Posted by mrauseo on 9/27/2011 9:57:00 AM (view original):
I wouldn't group 2b or CF with SS.  Arm requirements are different.
F
or fielding what you should be doing is units from reccomended ratings.  Do you know how to see the reccomended ratings?  If you do, just use a vlookup versus position and calculate and sum the differentials. 

For batting vs L is more important than speed. 

Its also not clear to me that your premise is accurate "What it will do is separtae the good and bad players for the most part"

Have you tested the formula versus your world?

I updated by vsL made that .6 made vsr 1.2 and speed .4

Its also not clear to me that your premise is accurate "What it will do is separtae the good and bad players for the most part"

It's a lot easier to look at a spreadsheet and see who is not even worth my time than to look at the list provided on the site.  I can sort through my information really fast on the ss and on the site it's nice and slow.