Milton Bradley a 5 star player??

[CubbyFan23]

And to clarify further, "stars" are based off of both the position the player plays (I believe thats the setup in that screenshot) as well as numbers. Injury risk has nothing to do with it. That being taken into account, it would be pretty hard to argue that Soriano, Bradley and Harden should not be 5 star (or darn close) players.

Also, Zambrano's periphs are way down and he's on the verge of falling apart. Shouldn't be anything more than what he is in the roster set now, and even that might be a bit generous.

[damientheomen3]

a couple of things i disagree with are:

ted lilly being a 2.5 star guy (should be better)
aaron heilman being 3 stars (too much)
big z being 3.5 stars (a little too low)
soto being 4.5 stars (too high)
fontenot being 4 stars (too high)
micah hoffpauir being 2.5 stars (a little too high)

then again, the most recent copy i own is 6.5, so my judgement of star ratings is probably different from OOTP 9 owners

[Theonlystd]

Originally Posted by damientheomen3

a couple of things i disagree with are:

ted lilly being a 2.5 star guy (should be better)
aaron heilman being 3 stars (too much)
big z being 3.5 stars (a little too low)
soto being 4.5 stars (too high)
fontenot being 4 stars (too high)
micah hoffpauir being 2.5 stars (a little too high)

then again, the most recent copy i own is 6.5, so my judgement of star ratings is probably different from OOTP 9 owners

I think they are pretty solid as long as stars are based vs other players at said position .

Tho Soto isnt looking to good.. Tho not really the fault of the roster set maker since im guessing it was finished before we got this far along into the season .

[CBLCardinals]

Originally Posted by CubbyFan23

If you guys think I base my ratings off things like wins and losses, you're going to be kind of upset with the roster set.

Cubby will your default OOTP X roster have college / high school feeder leagues?

thanks!

[JWay]

Originally Posted by CubbyFan23

If you guys think I base my ratings off things like wins and losses, you're going to be kind of upset with the roster set.

Which is why I love it so much, its so damn good.

As for Soto, 4.5 stars may be high, however the star ratings compare him against other catchers and there's many variables effecting star ratings. To name a few:

Scouts, current ratings, current stats, last year stats, stats from 2 years ago, probably more.

If you're not solid on the ratings of this set, fine, however don't base any opinions on a scouted roster that only shows stars. That's like if you had to estimate how much the five bills added up to in a diamond covered wallet.

As easily as it could be $5, it could be $500.

Depending on the other catchers in the league and how bright your scout is a 5 star rating could be be anything. Heck the catchers pool may be so bad that a .600 OPS catcher begins to look salty.

Star ratings are good for quick scouting and opening doors for further looks.

Star ratings are bad for judging.

[udbacker58]

Originally Posted by JWay

Which is why I love it so much, its so damn good.

As for Soto, 4.5 stars may be high, however the star ratings compare him against other catchers and there's many variables effecting star ratings. To name a few:

Scouts, current ratings, current stats, last year stats, stats from 2 years ago, probably more.

If you're not solid on the ratings of this set, fine, however don't base any opinions on a scouted roster that only shows stars. That's like if you had to estimate how much the five bills added up to in a diamond covered wallet.

As easily as it could be $5, it could be $500.

Depending on the other catchers in the league and how bright your scout is a 5 star rating could be be anything. Heck the catchers pool may be so bad that a .600 OPS catcher begins to look salty.

Star ratings are good for quick scouting and opening doors for further looks.

Star ratings are bad for judging.

QFT

People are putting way too much into star rating in this thread.

Ratings also don't take injuries into account. Bradley has been a top player when healthy and not attacking broadcasters.

[jbergey22]

Over his career he averages .278 20 home runs 78 rbis OBP+ 117 per 162 games. Not sure if Id go 5 star on that but Ive never had any problems with cubbys roster sets so I wont complain except about Gregg cause he sucks

[Markus Heinsohn]

Friends, this screenshot has scouting enabled.

Anyway, Bradley would get 5 stars from me, he led the AL in OPS last year. Same with Soto, one of the top 2 catchers in the NL last season.

[kq76]

I wish the game had a visible injury rating. Yes, I realize you can comb through a player's history to see injuries, but I much preferred it when you could quickly see it. Even if it's a scout rating that could easily be off from the truth, that'd be fine. It'd just be nice to quickly see what the generally held opinion is. I get why they wanted to make it more complicated, but I don't get why they felt the need to not show even an opinion of it. It's not like these opinions aren't out there in real life.

Call it durability or something and throw it in the health status section.

[RyzinEnagy]

I don't think proneness to injury should be factored into his talent ratings, but I do think an injury rating should be made visible rather than hidden.

[JWay]

A 5 star player who can only get 400 at bats regularly is still a 5 star player. There's no rule that says he will automatically get injured. And there shouldn't be.