Existing User? Login here!


Back to Boards

Rank


Rank

I do not think Rank is working very well.
1.The numbers used to create the rank number are not all inclusive.
2. It was supposed to simplify understanding who was good vs bad for our avg users on the site; it does a poor job of that. Veteran owners do trades based on stats and trade your high rank players away for better players who have lower ranks but better stats.
3. most users do not understand that rank is based on the group of players in the league. So when they see rank stay, go up or go down they assume their player has improved or worsened or done nothing... When in fact they have had stats change.

It might be a good idea for only commissioners of the league to see ranks for stat adjustments and overall league maintenance. beyond that it really is not helping the way I think it was intended.

Re: Rank

I agree with you, not necessarily for the same reason.
What’s wrong with rooks learning this complex game just like everyone else did? So much more satisfaction when you learn and apply what you learn to your strategy.

Would it be fun to pick your team by ignoring the players name and stats, just going straight to the Rank?
I don’t think many people would find that fun and intriguing. Especially all the stat-heads, fantasy sports lovers, poolies, like me

#GoExpos 😉

Re: Re: Rank

I understand what you are saying... but by putting a rank on players it is deceiving them into thinking a player is better than what they are. When there was no rank people looked at the stats... even the newbies. Rank is used as a summary to how good the player is by comparison to others. If it is wrong and not being interpreted correctly it should be removed.

Re: Rank

I think most vets would disagree that newbies were evaluating players properly before rank, or that vets were not fleecing newbies in trades before rank. So while your points may be correct, I don't think it has made either of those situations worse.

Now, what I have heard it has made worse is people using rank to avoid legit trades.

Re: Re: Rank

Part of the problem with basing your draft selections strictly on RANK is that RANK ONLY addresses a players Offensive abilities, it ignores Defense, you could have a High Average, good power, -1.95DWar SS get an 88 Rank while an above average hitting, medium power hitting, 9 SP, 2.78DWar SS ranked 68

I would prefer if Rank included Defense as well - then you would have an easier time evaluating players.

BUT then a monkey could pick a team, there should be SOME advantage available for owners able to see the whole picture.

Re: Rank

I agree with you sincity, it's already becoming too easy - there has to be some reward for doing your homework.

- The Sheik

Re: Re: Rank

Ummm wait... a few things here.

1. Rank... this is something that is supposed to be a general evaluation of the player. It does not do that. It is based on avg, obp and ops. Should be O rank but that would be inaccurate.

2. Rank does not include power numbers outside of ops. But yet gives double credit to obp. Formula makes no sense. Slg should be part of the formula not ops.


Re: Rank

and just where can the RANK formula be found?

Re: Re: Rank

Actually, you have a good point vipjoe - it's some combination of Ave, OBP & OPS - OBA being half of OPS, which meens that OBP is worth twice as much as SLG in the formula. That's why I only use it as a "rough sort". What I do like is that players who had really good offensive #'s, but didn't perform, since the advent of rank seem to be performing much better. Slow RHB still seem to suck no matter what. Look, no matter what, you have to do research, pay attention to what the sim is doing and do your homework!!

- The Sheik

Re: Rank

#RemoveIt

If anybody doesn’t like analyzing stats and trying to build a winning team, this (unfortunately) probably isn’t for them.
The generous, patient, kind Mr Bacci has allowed anybody to run 20 teams right away, seems easy to pay attention (if the interest level is actually there) and learn who performs in the different leagues. Just have to check the “Compiled Stats” or Leaderboards and Awards lists!

I’m saying this bcuz I believe I got hooked on this game as I was (incrementally) improving and learning the ropes. I want the same for others, I have nothing against newbies, just people that want (EXPECT) to be an expert right away

Re: Re: Rank

Yeah, has anyone noticed the "okay, what's the secret"/"what gives"/"what am I doing wrong ?" posts have stopped since advent of Rank ?

Re: Rank

This entire thread contradicts itself. VIP says rank doesn’t help anyone, others are saying it does help newbies which is what they don’t like about it. As with most things, the truth is shades of gray.

Rank was never intended to be some sort of absolute number. I said many times when rank came out, it doesn’t replace doing your homework. But there’s no debate that it gives you a better idea of who the stronger players in a particular pool are. From what I gather the people who don’t like it enjoyed their leg up on knowing how all the players did in this sim. I get that, but you can still learn the new tendencies and have a leg up on everyone.

Re: Rank

Guy just exposed everyone with one message.

Re: Re: Rank

Lol, true Jay

I think I clearly stated that I didn’t like Rank either, “but for different reasons”. I don’t think that’s a contradiction or anything to be exposed about.

Although I wouldn’t mind getting EXPOS’d !
#GoExpos

MrBacci, i very much appreciate and respect the work you’ve put into creating the PC community , I don’t want everything to come across as a complaint.

I just think that all those “hidden tendencies” are being systematically stripped away from the “experienced” PC’ers every time a change is made.

Obviously I could be (am) way off base here,(bcuz obviously you make changes to PC to improve it, for nothing else), ....... seems like a lot of the frustration over the changes was bcuz people (anybody) would go on the boards and compain about how their team sucks, and demand changes to the game. Then when changes were made, the peeps doin well were like WTF?

I know it’s getting long, (entering Raging’s territory)
so ✌️out.

Re: Re: Rank

I needed to get off the app to type this up.
Ok... I am getting messages from owners all the time about how players rank. The issue with rank is it should be a general assessment of the player and it is not. It is misleading and not a true representation of what the players rank is. This is confusing new people to the site because they don’t understand how a player with a high rank can perform poor consistently.
Rank = the Avg rank of the player in 3 categories: BA (avg), OBP and OPS (OPS isn't perfect, because it values on-base and slugging percentage equally)
This equation is not what people would expect Rank to reflect and is deceptive to the meaning of the word. Rank is to {give (someone or something) a rank or place within a grading system. "rank them in order of preference"}
This system needs to be adjusted to be a true reflection of what the player is or is needs to be hidden or removed.
Something like this would make way more sense and you have the ability to do with with all the current tools and numbers in place.
O- Rank = Avg Rank of the player in BA, OBP, SLG
D- Rank = Avg Rank of the player by position in FLD%, dWar,
Rank = Avg Rank of O-rank and D-Rank

Guy I love you and the site; sorry if this is a headache to read but this would be a much better guideline for all owners; especially new ones to use while they learn the site. I respectfully disagree with you that this thread is a contradiction. If it is coming off that way it may be due to confusion over what “rank” is. The way “rank” is used currently is a contradiction as I have displayed in this response.

Re: Rank

No headache, I'm just trying to understand the issues... I say it's a contradiction because what Colin and Patrick are saying seems opposite to what you are saying. One complaint seems to be Rank has made it too easy for new people to quickly know the strength of players. Your stance is the opposite, you're saying Rank is deceptive and throwing new players off entirely.

The game is still driven off stats so people are always going to have to figure out the game. I realize Rank could be throwing a curve or a "false promise". It's really no different than playing Madden - you see an overall Rating, but good Madden players know that means nothing because high scores in individual skills are just as important.

Unlike Madden though, this is a baseball sim where no two seasons are going to be the same. In ATG, Ted Williams is going to hit .240 sometimes, and other times he's going to hit .330 - there's a wide range of outcomes, but it's about understanding players' floors and ceilings.

The feedback is important - I don't want it to seem like you shouldn't be vocal, but I also want to address what Colin said about reacting to a few board posts - I definitely don't do that. You guys don't see the private messages, private emails, and data that I look at regarding new user retention, etc.

I'm obviously not trying to make the game worse, but like any "business" costs go up and you need more volume to offset the cost - I just want to see PC get better as a game to retain more users. I am not saying the changes made it better, but I'm just saying the old way was not working, and there are a variety of reasons why.

Re: Re: Rank

Here's how I view Rank.

It's a baseline to get started, nothing more.

Some high ranked players aren't worth their weight in screen pixels because of high errors, and some low ranked players play far better than others with double the rank.

I have played players ranked in the 30's as DH (for one example) because of the simple fact they could hit. They were useless anywhere else, but they drove in runs.

So, rank IS important, but is it the END ALL of factors in choosing players? Not in the least.

It gave me a bit of a stepladder up when I first began playing, but I quickly learned that relying on Rank alone equals disappointing seasons.