IMPORTANT! - OSA Scouting Reports Showing Pitcher Stuff Incorrectly

[Ted]

Okay, so what I thought was going on was that the game was listing stuff in the OSA scooting report as relievers when people were set as starters. The reasoning was that Luis Gracia was showing 9/8/7 instead of 7/8/7, ever since the ratings change. That IS his relief ratings, even though it says SP in the scouting history by the numbers. Ditto for Jaime Mercado. Then I looked at my relievers. Augusto Cardenas still says 9/7/9, which was his pre-change ratings. He's 7/7/9 now.

What is actually happening is that the game is showing relative ratings for control and motion, and actual/absolute ratings for stuff, except for the most current report, which shows relative for all. I have no idea why this is happening. Is it just me? The ratings look good in the StatsPlus dev reports by the way. But this is tremendously confusing for scouting development in game. If it's a bug, it's probably too late to do anything for 19, but some of you beta guys for 20 might want to look.

[jiminyhopkins]

Yep noticed that too. DOn't know if anything can be done about it tho.

[Ted]

READ AND UNDERSTAND THIS. IT's CRITICAL, AND IF YOU DON'T YOU WILL BE VALUING YOUR PLAYERS INCORRECTLY.

[agrudez]

So is this in the in-game player page under the scouting reports tab only? The in-game player page and HTML Reports are still correct?

[Ted]

So is this in the in-game player page under the scouting reports tab only? The in-game player page and HTML Reports are still correct?

Yes, it is ONLY the in game scouting report tab. If you want to test it yourself, look at an pitcher on your team whose stuff rating you are certain you know. Pick like a guy who had a 9 or 10 pre ratings change. You will see he is still listed as 9 or 10 up until today's date, and then a sudden drop by one or two points. He's had that "new" rating since the ratings change. The in game OSA scouting report is just wrong for stuff.

[Ted]

Let's look at an example you and I both know, Kyle. Heinrich Peithner. He was 9/7/7 when you traded him to me. Ratings change occurred, and he went to 7/7/7. The scouting report associate with that was 6/23/2037. But if you look at the "archived" report for 1/1/2038, it shows 9/7/7. That's not right. He was 7/7/7 on 1/1/2038 with relative ratings. It's show "absolute ratings" stuff. The report for "today", hilarious also 1/1/2038 shows 7/7/7.

[Ted]

If you want an example that shows how only the "stuff" rating is being goofed, look at Jaime Mercado on my team.
1/1/2038 (current) 6/8/7
1/1/2038 (archived) 8/8/7
11/7/2037 8/8/7 <- this is after the ratings change
11/10/2036 8/8/8 <-pre ratings change


So with the ratings change, his control dropped, like most players did. Motion was unchanged (and I remember that as accurate from the time). Btu stuff is still displayed as "8" on 11/7 and 1/1 (Archived) This is the glitch. That's his absolute ratings stuff. The "today" 1/1 shows the correct rating.

[Ted]

Just wanted to add, when podcasting today and drooling over Jim Armstrong (which is just a wonderful name for a dominant flamethrower), we noticed that the development reports are incorrect on the scouting page in game as well. So the scouting history tab is wrong about stuff. The development reports have Armstrong stuff development wrong. He did NOT go from 7 to 9 this offseason. Checking against StatsPlus backs this up. I looked at a few players on my team, and they look okay, so I don't know what the pattern on the development report box errors is. It makes me wonder if anything on this page is reliable right now. I sure hope this gets fixed in the next version, because it is potentially a huge problem.

[RonCo]

Just another in the issues with using relative ratings.

[jiminyhopkins]

Just another in the issues with using relative ratings.

Yeah so stop already.

[Ted]

There's no guarantee that it will be fixed if we go back to the old ratings. It's a glitch. The default OOTP setting is to use relative ratings and this isn't happening in default MLB leagues.

[RonCo]

The use of relative ratings has historically resulted in several oddities due to the way OOTP calculates and presents them. I've not seen the actual code base, so I can't say exactly how it's happening. But, yes, I'm willing to bet a virtual lunch that this is related in come fashion to how, when, and where the game calculates and presents its relative ratings.

[RonCo]

There are also oddities to how the game presents starter vs. reliever ratings in different places.

[RonCo]

I should probably note that I don't see anything in my game view to suggest Armstrong (10/7/5 Ratings, 12/7/6 Pot) went from 7 to 9 in Stuff anywhere. It does say he went from 7 to11 as a reliever.

But in game and on the main scouting report he's just at 10.

-----

There have been people on the beta boards pulling their hair out about this aspect of relative ratings since, well, forever. I should have said something earlier, but to be honest it's one of those things that's so ingrained in my view of the world that I consider it to be like breathing. So it just never crossed my mins. Sorry about that.

My understanding is that this will be fixed in v20, but then it was my understanding it would be fixed in v19, and v18, and v17, and ... my point here is not to rag on OOTP devs, but to note that it seems clear that the coding approach they've used is not particularly robust, so the problem keeps whack-a-moling itself back up to existence. Bottom line: scouting history is a little hard to follow or trust when relative ratings are in place.

-----

In that vein--and noting that Matt or someone else can tell me I'm wrong here, but--it's also my understanding that while using relative ratings, a player's ratings can change merely because other players have changed. For example...my understanding is that if the league has a big chunk of "bad" rating development, those players will fall in ratings (naturally), but guys who haven't been affected at all will be provided ratings increases because, relative to other players in the league, they are now better. Assuming my understanding is correct, this is another way that OOTP differs from the real world--wherein real scouts are rating players relative to an expected performance norm, OOTP relative ratings are basically working "true" math, so the "league average" will change based on who is in the league.

Seeing as I track development after every sim, I've seen this kind of behavior in a lot of my players, especially in hitters, this off-season. Their ratings are often gently bumping 5-10 points on the overall scale. I'm interested to see how they regress back as free agents take their spots back on rosters. My working theory is that "league average" does not include free agents. But I admit I do not know anything for sure here. High likelihood I'm wrong.

[Ted]

I get your point about the actual player ratings changing, but we do have a pretty big sample an I think it would take a big shift to move it in any notable way. In regards to the 5-10 points bumping of overall rating, yup, that just happened this offseason, but I feel like that was happening back with the old ratings too. Every offseason a bunch of my guys would go from 4 starts to 5 stars, or 2 to 2.5 or 3. Then back to normal early in the season. Doesn't really seem much different now.

Good catch on the Jim Armstrong RP stuff versus starter stuff on the development report.

You do know what the solution is here, right? Stop letting us change guys from SP to RP at all. That's always been silly. They have the same pitches. Everyone knows some starters play up in the bullpen. Some don't. If you have to include something, maybe just a line in the scouting report that says something about thinking stuff would play up as a reliever. You don't have to change the number. This would solve so many problems if they just flat out did away with it.

[RonCo]

You do know what the solution is here, right? Stop letting us change guys from SP to RP at all. That's always been silly. They have the same pitches. Everyone knows some starters play up in the bullpen. Some don't. If you have to include something, maybe just a line in the scouting report that says something about thinking stuff would play up as a reliever. You don't have to change the number. This would solve so many problems if they just flat out did away with it.

The game itself now seems to change pitchers from SP to RP depending on how you slot them into your rotation or bullpen usage. I find that as annoying or moreso that people modifying them on their own. In context of this problem, it just means the scouting reports will probably oscillate all on their own.

But, yes, the game should just give us the base ratings of each pitch and whatnot and let us figure out how to use them. We know guys, by genreal default, will be better as relievers than as starters. It's a similar thought that makes me wonder why we still need RP conversions, given that the game already improves pitchers as relievers. But that's a discussion above my pay grade.

[RonCo]

I get your point about the actual player ratings changing, but we do have a pretty big sample an I think it would take a big shift to move it in any notable way. In regards to the 5-10 points bumping of overall rating, yup, that just happened this offseason, but I feel like that was happening back with the old ratings too. Every offseason a bunch of my guys would go from 4 starts to 5 stars, or 2 to 2.5 or 3. Then back to normal early in the season. Doesn't really seem much different now.

Yes. That's because stars and the 20/80 ratings are overalls, so by definition have always been relative. Assuming I'm right, the process is more noticeable now because the 20/80 scale has 13 gradations where as the stars had only 10 (counting the half stars). The point here is that you'll see the same thing in the components now, assuming I'm right.

[mikeb41]

Just wanted to add, when podcasting today and drooling over Jim Armstrong (which is just a wonderful name for a dominant flamethrower), we noticed that the development reports are incorrect on the scouting page in game as well. So the scouting history tab is wrong about stuff. The development reports have Armstrong stuff development wrong. He did NOT go from 7 to 9 this offseason. Checking against StatsPlus backs this up. I looked at a few players on my team, and they look okay, so I don't know what the pattern on the development report box errors is. It makes me wonder if anything on this page is reliable right now. I sure hope this gets fixed in the next version, because it is potentially a huge problem.

Newb alert... "When podcasting"?

[Ted]

Just wanted to add, when podcasting today and drooling over Jim Armstrong (which is just a wonderful name for a dominant flamethrower), we noticed that the development reports are incorrect on the scouting page in game as well. So the scouting history tab is wrong about stuff. The development reports have Armstrong stuff development wrong. He did NOT go from 7 to 9 this offseason. Checking against StatsPlus backs this up. I looked at a few players on my team, and they look okay, so I don't know what the pattern on the development report box errors is. It makes me wonder if anything on this page is reliable right now. I sure hope this gets fixed in the next version, because it is potentially a huge problem.

Newb alert... "When podcasting"?

I don't know if I've been and old guy using words wrong here, or if you are asking about a supposed podcast you can't find. If it's the latter, it's not posted yet. I'm hoping to have two new ones up in the next 24 hours. Still have to record one and edit both. If I'm using the lingo incorrectly, well, that won't be a first.

[mikeb41]

Sorry, yes I know what a.podcast is ha. Wasn't aware we had an active one. Can't wait to hear it.