Catcher Overall Rating Problems [Fixed 9.43]

[HoustonGM]

It seems almost impossible to make a catcher's overall rating go below 70. I saw this while editting my rosters, and I can't figure out the cause. And to add to this, while testing rookies.ini files, I noticed what's attached below. All the top overall guys in the draft (even with Catcher set to 62 in rookies.ini) are catchers. Due to an unrelated problem of the AI overvaluing overall, the AI tends to draft all these catchers in the 1st through 3rd rounds, even those who peak only 1 or 2 points higher than their current rating, and those who's peak is equal to overall.

This is what makes it even more weird. I'll post the individual ratings of the three 75 rated catchers in the attached draft photo. They're listed as Contact, Power, Speed, Eye, Arm, Handling, Fielding, Health

Omar Benitez: 56/62/58/61/85/53/64/78
Marc Lane: 55/64/53/60/86/57/72/77
Julio Jure: 56/64/55/63/84/49/65/81

This leads me to my final conclusion as to WHY this is happening: the arm rating of catchers is taken into account way too heavily when calculating overall. There's no way a guy who's only two ratings above 70 are arm and health should have a 75 overall.

If this can be fixed for the next patch, that'd be great.

[HoustonGM]

This looks like it's been fixed for 9.42O.

[PLA]

It's still occuring in my version 9.42p in the 5 seasons I simulated. These 70 rated catchers also get drafted in the first round mostly and higher than other players with higher peaks.

[HoustonGM]

Yup. Thats the draft AI though that needs to be fixed. =\

[ohms_law]

I'm leaning twords disagreeing with this entire thread...
first, the draft: it seems to me that the amature draft engine will fill with a certain minimum number of each prospect at each position, and then it will fill with what's needed most league wide. so, if your league is short on catchers, then the first round is probably going to have more catchers selected since more are generated. here's a test you guy can run: sim a season until free agent filings, enter commish mode and retire a bunch of the top position players at one position, then go through the amature draft. there will be a larger percentage of players at that position than anyone else.

As for Catchers ratings, im not sure that their really off. I mean, a catcher must have a string arm. I'm willing to concede that it probably went too far in .42N, but it still appears to be fine in .42O to me.

[PLA]

The catchers being drafted has the highest current ratings, but their peak is the same as their overall ratings in the 70's. (None of the overall is under 70 it seems) Meanwhile, players at other positions with slightly lower overall ratings but much higher peak ratings are being left to the 2nd and 3rd rounds. Plus, this happens year after year in the sims so it's not based on need as you described.

In terms of catcher ratings, Just because you have a strong arm doesn't mean you're a good catcher. When you're handling, defense, speed, range, and hitting are all in the 60's and 50's, you shouldn't have a 70's rating just because of a good arm. Plus, it's funny to read the scouting reports for all these 1st round catchers where all say that they won't amount to anything more than a career minor leaguer at best.

[HoustonGM]

I'm leaning twords disagreeing with this entire thread...
first, the draft: it seems to me that the amature draft engine will fill with a certain minimum number of each prospect at each position, and then it will fill with what's needed most league wide. so, if your league is short on catchers, then the first round is probably going to have more catchers selected since more are generated. here's a test you guy can run: sim a season until free agent filings, enter commish mode and retire a bunch of the top position players at one position, then go through the amature draft. there will be a larger percentage of players at that position than anyone else.
Like PLA said above, there's simply no way any team should draft a 70/70 catcher over a 60/90 pitcher. If the AI places less value on current rating and more on upside/peak, theyll end up getting those catchers in the late rounds if they really need it.



As for Catchers ratings, im not sure that their really off. I mean, a catcher must have a string arm. I'm willing to concede that it probably went too far in .42N, but it still appears to be fine in .42O to me.
You are pretty much correct.

[ohms_law]

well, i'm going to hold off judgement for now and play a few more seasons today to see what happens. I just don't see it as bad as yall are describing right now.

[HoustonGM]

well, i'm going to hold off judgement for now and play a few more seasons today to see what happens. I just don't see it as bad as yall are describing right now.
You'll have to take a look at each team's draft picks

Here, i'll do a quick test and show you the results.

This is with Amateur Draft Talent set to -30% and rookies.ini of:

Pitcher,94
Catcher,90
First Baseman,94
Second Baseman,94
Third Baseman,94
Shortstop,94
Left Fielder,94
Center Fielder,94
Right Fielder,94
Designated Hitter,94

In the Pool:
Players With Peak > 90: 31
Players With Peak in the 80s: 75
Players With Peak in the 70s: 83
Players With Peak in the 60s: 16
Players with Peak in the 50s: 5

22 Catchers are in the pool, all with an overall 72 or greater. 16 have a peak in the 70s. 5 have a peak in the 80s, and one is over 90.


Round 1:
Players With Peak > 90: 13
Players With Peak in the 80s: 10
Players with Peak in the 70s: 7

Of the 80s, two were catchers. Of the 70s, ALL seven were catchers. See the problem? No way should 1/3rd of the first round be catchers, and no way should 7 players with ratings in the 70s (both peak and overall be drafted in the first round), when theres tons of 90s left. The problem is definitely rooted in the AI valuing overall too much, and with catchers givin a 75 rating despite only an arm rating and health above 70, theres problems.

Round 2:
Players With Peak > 90: 5
Players With Peak in the 80s: 16
Players with Peak in the 70s: 9

6 of the 70s guys were catchers, and all 9 also had an overall of at least 70.

Starting to see the problem?

After 60 picks, theres still 13 90 peak guys left.

The rest will be posted this afternoon



After looking at the catchers in the draft pool, I'd have to say actually that my first post still stands as a problem.