Power ratings - Page 12 - Hardball Dynasty

Posts: 2238 (0)

Hall of Famer

323 219

Pro

I can't get the table to quote here-- but I looked at the S5/6 ISO's compared to each other.

Players with power > 85 lost 70 points or so of ISO

Players with power 70-85 lost 44-62 points of ISO

Players with power < 70 lost 25-35 points.

If you look at ratios, players with power >70 lost 23-30% of their ISO-- but players with power < 70 lost much less than that.

BOTH phenomena are occurring-- there is an across the board drop in HR, but it is greater in players with power > 70.

1/1/2010 5:23 PM

antonsirius

Posts: 2567 (0)

Hall of Famer

167 135 9 20

Prospect

I just threw together a few scenarios to try and explain that 32 point OPS drop using the theory that only "upper echelon" hitters were affected (which directly contradicts the data trsnoke posted earlier from your own world, mark). These are purely hypothetical, and I have no idea how realistic the numbers are. I did this only to illustrate what kind of drop-offs you'd have to be looking for:

Scenario 1:

Hitters are divided into five groups. The top group (the "upper echelon") accounts for 25% of the world's plate appearances, scaling down to 15% for the bottom group (since better hitters should get more PAs). The OPS average for each group ranges from 850 down to 660, to produce a world average of 780.

In this scenario, that top group would have to see their OPS collectively drop to 740 (a 110 point drop) to produce a new world average of about 752. 740 falls between the averages of the third (780) and fourth (720) groups.

Scenario 2:

Same five groups, same PA weights. OPS averages now range from 900 at the top down to 660, skewed more heavily towards the top (next-best group averages 800). OPS of the top group would have to drop to 785 (a 115 point drop) to drag the world average down to 752.

Scenario 3:

Ten groups this time. PA weights range from 12% at the top down to 8% at the bottom. OPS averages range from 930 at the top down to 625 at the bottom. The top group would now have to see their collective OPS drop to 695 (a 235 point drop, and just below the eighth group's average of 700) to drag the whole world down to 752.

Generally speaking, mark, the more narrowly you define "upper echelon", the more massive their drop is going to have to be to account for the entirety of that 32 point OPS loss. Are you really seeing elite hitters now hitting like defensive specialist shortstops? Because that's about what you'd have to be seeing for your theory to explain what happened.

1/1/2010 5:30 PM

hartjh14

Posts: 468 (0)

Hall of Famer

165 8 1 147

Prospect

Quote: Originally Posted By mark3313 on 1/01/2010Anyway, I think this post has run it's course.

There isn't enough data to disprove or prove administration's claim as, I don't think, any one league has finished a complete season with the update.

How many leagues are there? There is plenty of data out there. The data pretty clearly shows a decline in HRs. The question is did they intend it to happen the way it is happening. History says no - they tend to always make things worse before they get better.

1/1/2010 5:39 PM

mark3313

Posts: 1648 (0)

Hall of Famer

125 14 220

Prospect

Quote: Originally posted by antonsirius on 1/01/2010I just threw together a few scenarios to try and explain that 32 point OPS drop using the theory that only "upper echelon" hitters were affected (which directly contradicts the data trsnoke posted earlier from your own world, mark). These are purely hypothetical, and I have no idea how realistic the numbers are. I did this only to illustrate what kind of drop-offs you'd have to be looking for:
Scenario 1:

Hitters are divided into five groups. The top group (the "upper echelon") accounts for 25% of the world's plate appearances, scaling down to 15% for the bottom group (since better hitters should get more PAs). The OPS average for each group ranges from 850 down to 660, to produce a world average of 780.

In this scenario, that top group would have to see their OPS collectively drop to 740 (a 110 point drop) to produce a new world average of about 752. 740 falls between the averages of the third (780) and fourth (720) groups.

Scenario 2:

Same five groups, same PA weights. OPS averages now range from 900 at the top down to 660, skewed more heavily towards the top (next-best group averages 800). OPS of the top group would have to drop to 785 (a 115 point drop) to drag the world average down to 752.

Scenario 3:

Ten groups this time. PA weights range from 12% at the top down to 8% at the bottom. OPS averages range from 930 at the top down to 625 at the bottom. The top group would now have to see their collective OPS drop to 695 (a 235 point drop, and just below the eighth group's average of 700) to drag the whole world down to 752.

Generally speaking, mark, the more narrowly you define "upper echelon", the more massive their drop is going to have to be to account for the entirety of that 32 point OPS loss. Are you really seeing elite hitters now hitting like defensive specialist shortstops? Because that's about what you'd have to be seeing for your theory to explain what happened.

I am seeing some MVP caliber hitters slugging 200+ points lower than their career average and wanted to know if other people were seeing the same thing. When I take what administration says about upper echelon being changed and look at the drastic decline in OPS in all leagues since the change, it leads me to believe they overcompensated in that select group to reduce overall HRs.

You bring up an interesting point, though, regarding what is an "upper echelon" hitter. Is it simply the best hitters or do they group all players and the "upper echelon" are x % of the most prolific HR hitters in each group ?

1/1/2010 6:06 PM

mark3313

Posts: 1648 (0)

Hall of Famer

125 14 220

Prospect

Anyway, some interesting points discussed here.

Happy New Year everyone and go Giants

1/1/2010 6:13 PM

tecwrg

Posts: 18997 (0)

Hall of Famer

4 1 166 32 129

Prospect

I'll say again what I said yesterday, becaue it's been lost in the noise.

My casual observations about the impact of power has always been that extreme power ratings have traditionally had far too much of an impact on productivity than it should have. It was as if the closer to 100 the power rating got, the more exponential the productivity curve was. That was just wrong.

Now, they've made a change which cuts down on the top end. It's silly to think that it only affects the top "x" power-point guys. It's much more reasonable to think that the power algorithm was adjusted such that the high end was less exponential. Everybody is affected, but it's the "upper echelon" guys who are impacted the most because the far end of the exponential-like curve has flattened to something more reasonable.

Mark's been focusing on one (of many) statements, the one that is misleadingly written to indicate that it's ONLY the upper echelon that's affected. He's also been cherry picking certain guys in an attempt to back up his argument. ("Look at this 90 power guy that had a bad year!"). In the meantime, others have provided examples of (a) players who have had extreme productivity swings from year to year prior to this change, and (b) players who do not seem to be drastically affected by the change. As well as differing responses from ADMIN with respect to the change itself (i.e. only the "upper echelon" guys vs. everybody).

The bottom line: the power rating now works more in-line with the way the other ratings work. Extreme power no longer over-compensates for poor or mediocre ratings elsewhere. Offense is down. Pitching and fielding now have more importance. The game is now more about having a well rounded team in all three aspects (hitting, pitching and fielding) in order to achieve maximum success.

1/1/2010 6:21 PM

kingjohndevi

Posts: 5 (0)

Veteran

7 2 21

Prospect

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 1/01/2010

I'll say again what I said yesterday, becaue it's been lost in the noise.

My casual observations about the impact of power has always been that extreme power ratings have traditionally had far too much of an impact on productivity than it should have. It was as if the closer to 100 the power rating got, the more exponential the productivity curve was. That was just wrong.

Now, they've made a change which cuts down on the top end. It's silly to think that it only affects the top "x" power-point guys. It's much more reasonable to think that the power algorithm was adjusted such that the high end was less exponential. Everybody is affected, but it's the "upper echelon" guys who are impacted the most because the far end of the exponential-like curve has flattened to something more reasonable.

Mark's been focusing on one (of many) statements, the one that is misleadingly written to indicate that it's ONLY the upper echelon that's affected. He's also been cherry picking certain guys in an attempt to back up his argument. ("Look at this 90 power guy that had a bad year!"). In the meantime, others have provided examples of (a) players who have had extreme productivity swings from year to year prior to this change, and (b) players who do not seem to be drastically affected by the change. As well as differening responses from ADMIN with respect to the change itself (i.e. only the "upper echelon" guys vs. everybody).

The bottom line: the power rating now works more in-line with the way the other ratings work. Extreme power no longer over-compensates for poor or mediocre ratings elsewhere. Offense is down. Pitching and fielding now have more importance. The game is now more about having a well rounded team in all three aspects (hitting, pitching and fielding) in order to achieve maximum success.

The bolded item isn't really fair tec, the statement you are talking about was very specific and came from an admin as an answer to a very specific question in a dev chat. There isn't anything misleading about admin's statement, it is what it is.

1/1/2010 6:26 PM

tecwrg

Posts: 18997 (0)

Hall of Famer

4 1 166 32 129

Prospect

KJD, I disagree, particularly when you look at some of the other Q & A's in the the aforementioned dev chat that specifically asked about the power change that Mark conveniently ignored in his arguments:

Q: so about the end of the "steroid era." does this mean that Home Runs will go down across the board, or leaning towards players with more power? (wetherjenius - Pro - 3:01 PM)

A: The change will affect the truly elite power hitters in HBD. The variance will have a much less significant impact on those player's that do not fit that category.

Q: Why was there a need to reduce the number of HRs? How large a factor will extreme hitter parks play into the "Max" HR figures (dherz_263 - Hall of Famer - 3:18 PM)

A: 90+ HRs in a season wasn't realistic, that was the major reason. Elite power guys playing in extreme hitters parks will be the guys that I alluded to earlier in the chat. They will be the player's who have the most variance in the max number of HRs they hit. In other words, instead of hitting 50 in a non-extreme hitters park they might hit 60-65 in an extreme hitter's park.

Q: I have not seen an abundance of HRs hit by players in my leagues, will all HR totals across the board be coming down? (dherz_263 - Hall of Famer - 3:49 PM)

A: Yes, the change affects all worlds and all players

Q: Does the end of the steroid era merely shift stats down, or do you forsee sluggers being reduced in overall value? (mainou - All*Star - 4:45 PM)

A: They shouldn't have reduced value, they will still hit more HRs than other player's just not with the same frequency as before. So, I guess it's just a stats shift coming back to normalcy.

Q: Can we expect HR Hiutters Batting Average to drop off 10-20% with the drop in HR's. If not, approximately what percentage drop will there be? How will it effect OBP? (7Yankees7 - Hall of Famer - 4:46 PM)

A: The other stats won't see a significant increase or decrease. The only change is that they won't hit as many HRs.

Q: Does the end of the steroid era mean that balls that used to be HRs will now be outs? Or will they be other hits? Mainly doubles and triples based on speed? (bjb2378 - Hall of Famer - 12:07 PM)

A: The reduction in home runs will be appropriately broken down into triples, doubles and singles.

1/1/2010 6:57 PM

kingjohndevi

Posts: 5 (0)

Veteran

7 2 21

Prospect

only the first 3 seem to support that it will effect all players, and one of those was directly after admin said it would ONLY effect elite HR hitters.

I'm just saying don't blame the guy for the Admin's different answers to the same question.

Also, I'd be interested to know the dates of those quotes in the dev chats, and the admin answering, just to see where the statement in question stands in comparison.

1/1/2010 7:13 PM

kingjohndevi

Posts: 5 (0)

Veteran

7 2 21

Prospect

Q: Does the end of the steroid era mean that balls that used to be HRs will now be outs? Or will they be other hits? Mainly doubles and triples based on speed? (bjb2378 - Hall of Famer - 12:07 PM)

A: The reduction in home runs will be appropriately broken down into triples, doubles and singles.

I'd also wager to guess that this answer is wrong too, I'm seeing to big a dip in average to think that none of the HRs are now outs, which they seem to say up there they would not be. Although I guess it could have been a 'single' that my fat ***** were thrown out on and not fly balls.

1/1/2010 7:15 PM

tecwrg

Posts: 18997 (0)

Hall of Famer

4 1 166 32 129

Prospect

All those Q & A's, including the one that Mark was focusing on, were from the 11/9/2009 dev chat.

Question 4 directly addresses Mark's claim that after the update, a guy with 90 power was now worth less than a guy with 80 power, and that the ratings should be adjusted to reflect that.

The last two questions address where all the home runs went. ADMIN says they're not becoming outs.

1/1/2010 7:20 PM

kingjohndevi

Posts: 5 (0)

Veteran

7 2 21

Prospect

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 1/01/2010
All those Q & A's, including the one that Mark was focusing on, were from the 11/9/2009 dev chat.

Question 4 directly addresses Mark's claim that after the update, a guy with 90 power was now worth less than a guy with 80 power, and that the ratings should be adjusted to reflect that.

The last two questions address where all the home runs went. ADMIN says they're not becoming outs.

I think we are focused on whether or not the update cuts HRs for all players of just elite HR hitters, 4-6 do not address that. And again, I don't believe that none of the lost HRs are becoming outs.

Again, I think the evidence supports that it is effecting all players, but just don't jump on someone about admin's confusing message. Looking at all those statements the one in question is a more definitive statement than any of the others, so thats on admin.

1/1/2010 7:26 PM

mark3313

Posts: 1648 (0)

Hall of Famer

125 14 220

Prospect

If the update is impacting ALL players, then I have no issue with it. I'm saying, and said, that's not what customer service told me the other day. They said, without any editing,

"When we developed the original power formula in HBD, Bonds was hitting 73 HR / season. All our data and formulas were based on a time period that is no longer valid in the MLB, so we brought the upper end down. The change we put in place only impacts the upper echelon of HR hitters and only impacts HR. We, and many users, did not like seeing players blast 70,80,90 HR in a season."

If they are wrong, I'm happy. If they are correct, then I think it was the wrong way to correct the problem.

I have seen examples of players' HRs definitely just becoming outs. Maybe that's an exception to the overall rule, who knows. Maybe slow runners are losing HRs to outs while faster runners are seeing them become more 2bls and 3bls. I posted on here to see if others had seen similar examples.

** The 90 being better than 80 was an illustration to say if you only change one group, and not all the others, their ratings become misleading and inaccurate compared to all other hitters. **

1/1/2010 7:35 PM

mark3313

Posts: 1648 (0)

Hall of Famer

125 14 220

Prospect

Anyway, it seems this post has run it's course.

Take care, good luck and happy holidays.

1/1/2010 8:09 PM

kingjohndevi

Posts: 5 (0)

Veteran

7 2 21

Prospect

Ok, so now we have 2 parts admin saying it only effects the elite hitters, and 3 of them saying it effects all. Anyone expect any different from them?

1/1/2010 8:09 PM

Forums

Power ratings Topic

Search Criteria