The BBA Today #64 - Keepin' It Real

[RonCo]

Ted Schmidt and Ron Collins do a tip of the cap to the Landis and United Cup winners, then get down to brass tacks in discussing the big changes going forward: to Relative or Not to Relative, that is the question.

Get It Here

[RonCo]

Here's the histograms Ted and I talk about...

[bigmike13]

Thanks Guys!

[jleddy]

A must-listen...great job, gents.

[Jwalk100]

Great podcast.

[allenciox]

Thanks so much for your recording! I felt appreciated and flattered when you mentioned my name a few times.

A few reflections:

1. You talked a lot about PCM (player creation modifiers) and you are right that they have huge effects on things. There are also settings that you didn't talk about that interact a good deal with that. Particularly how variable players' development is. Last time I looked at the ratings, the development variability (and speed of decline later on) are tuned down quite a bit. That also has a strong effect on how "strong" your players are overall.

2. I don't understand why people would be worried about whether the underlying ratings for players are "blue" or "yellow" or whatever. Basically, if you have low ratings, then the LTMs will still make the statistics come out the same as if they are high. The real thing you want to strive for, I think, is having a lot of variability in your players, both within rating categories and also across categories. To that end, having a lot of variability in how things are created and developed is very useful --- and leads to interesting tradeoffs. For example, maybe you get a player who has low contact but a huge eye and good defense. That's where the real talent in managing your team comes in --- making the most of your team that consists of a bunch of people with good points and bad points.

[Lane]

In addition to the fluctuations, I think one of the more disappointing aspects of relative ratings is that they weren't actually doing what they were supposed to do with stone of the ratings.

[RonCo]

1. You talked a lot about PCM (player creation modifiers) and you are right that they have huge effects on things. There are also settings that you didn't talk about that interact a good deal with that. Particularly how variable players' development is. Last time I looked at the ratings, the development variability (and speed of decline later on) are tuned down quite a bit. That also has a strong effect on how "strong" your players are overall.

Yes, the development settings make a bit of a difference. We actually adjusted those recently. Perhaps we can look at them again.

2. I don't understand why people would be worried about whether the underlying ratings for players are "blue" or "yellow" or whatever. Basically, if you have low ratings, then the LTMs will still make the statistics come out the same as if they are high. The real thing you want to strive for, I think, is having a lot of variability in your players, both within rating categories and also across categories. To that end, having a lot of variability in how things are created and developed is very useful --- and leads to interesting tradeoffs. For example, maybe you get a player who has low contact but a huge eye and good defense. That's where the real talent in managing your team comes in --- making the most of your team that consists of a bunch of people with good points and bad points.

I admit I'm not a big fan of LTM--perhaps I'm just too old school...they were put in place because people the average person just could never get their brain around what league totals do--but yes, I agree with you assessment of the goal.

[RonCo]

In addition to the fluctuations, I think one of the more disappointing aspects of relative ratings is that they weren't actually doing what they were supposed to do with stone of the ratings.

Right. The process seems to slide the scale, but not really that much else.