I must have clear a understanding...please!!!

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Bingo. I would never play my solo league without scouts. I would also never play my solo league with star ratings, just never really cared for them. I much prefer using the 20-80 scale.

The problem still exists with the 20-80 scale as well. I think you need to play with no overall ratings whatsoever.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

The problem still exists with the 20-80 scale as well. I think you need to play with no overall ratings whatsoever.

If you're talking about a player being 75 current and 40 potential I don't see that as a problem. It is caused by a player outperforming his ratings and showing how the AI rates him based on the evaluation setting from the game setup.

When I look at a player like this I can instantly see why the 20-80 shows the way it does. Just pulling numbers out of thin air but the 75/40 guy will be a player hitting .350+ with good OPS when he should be hitting .260 with average to below average OPS. No issue with it at all, YMMV.

[Chomps]

Markus,

This scouting/ratings issue is obviously quite confusing. I think it would be very helpful if you would provide more detail in the scouting reports, such as which group of players (Starting Pitchers, Relievers, etc..) the scout is using, to compare with the scouted player.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Sweed

If you're talking about a player being 75 current and 40 potential I don't see that as a problem. It is caused by a player outperforming his ratings and showing how the AI rates him based on the evaluation setting from the game setup.

When I look at a player like this I can instantly see why the 20-80 shows the way it does. Just pulling numbers out of thin air but the 75/40 guy will be a player hitting .350+ with good OPS when he should be hitting .260 with average to below average OPS. No issue with it at all, YMMV.

No, I'm talking about the contradiction of ratings. It still exists with 20-80

[marc420]

I know if I was a real GM, I'd fire the scout who tried to tell me a player's 'potential' was somehow less than what he really was today. Either he can't evaluate potential, or he can't evaluate current ability. Or he's just plain lacking in common sense.

Whatever the cause, I'd prefer that he work in some organization other than mine.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by marc420

I know if I was a real GM, I'd fire the scout who tried to tell me a player's 'potential' was somehow less than what he really was today. Either he can't evaluate potential, or he can't evaluate current ability. Or he's just plain lacking in common sense.

Whatever the cause, I'd prefer that he work in some organization other than mine.

I take it he's saying "the kid is just on a streak like anyone else can have. IMHO he's going to come back down to earth." In this case I'd certainly keep this scout around.

[PSUColonel]

This part I have no trouble with. It's guessing what position the scout is comparing x player to, and the different ratings between the profile and scouting pages. I just think the whole scouting system needs to be reworked.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

This part I have no trouble with. It's guessing what position the scout is comparing x player to, and the different ratings between the profile and scouting pages. I just think the whole scouting system needs to be reworked.

Yeah, I see what you are saying and I do see some differences with the 20-80( I don't think it's as stark a difference as the stars but then it is a more precise scale) but have never really spent any time dwelling on it. I guess I have always taken it in context with the statistics and actual attribute values the scout provides me.

Whole system reworked? I don't know IMHO getting it to be consistent between the two views and letting you define the position would do it for me. Maybe that's what you mean by "reworked" and we're only talking semantics?