Player Ratings Explained
4/23 /2023 Update:
After receiving almost universally negative feedback to my ratings for Louisville's 2-0 loss to Portland on 4/22/2023, I wanted to provide some logic around why I gave such low scores because you may be likely to see more like them in the future. In the first couple of seasons, I did not let a loss or magnitude of a loss impact individual ratings. This year, if Louisville loses by multiple goals, expect to see scores lower than 6. Also, my scores are opponent agnostic. I highly doubt if Louisville had lost to a bottom half team by multiple goals that I would have many complaints. I’m not saying that the opponent doesn't matter, but rather baking that into the rating. Portland forced Louisville into those ratings as much as Louisville “earned” them. In essence, I won't be rating players as “6 considering the opponent was Portland” or a “7 considering the opponent was Orlando”, but rather a “6 considering the result”. There are plenty of other player rating systems that do simple math and if that is more your speed, feel free to ignore my opinion as it is just that: my opinion.
Due to popular demand, by which I mean that Bekki Morgan asked, I thought it would be a good idea to explain how the player ratings on this site work.
If you are familiar with how player ratings tend to work around European matches, then my ratings system should mirror that system pretty well. Here are the basics:
A rating of 6 is the typical default rating. I don't really know why other than on a scale of 1 to 10, there are 5 integer ratings below and 4 integer ratings above 6, so it is in the relative middle. You could use 5 as a starting point, but most systems use 6 as the starting point, so that is what I use as well. I only use integers, but others give half points and the statistical ones like Fotmob give ratings down to the tenth.
The distribution of scores typically has a farily even split between sixes and sevens for a draw. A win is more likely to gain a player a point than a loss is likely to lose a player a point. This is somewhat arbitrary, but that I what I tend to do. Eights are more commons than fives and anything outside of those is rare.
This begs the question: Why not just use a 4 or 5 point scale? That is an astute observation, but player ratings are traditionally done on a 10 point scale, so why should I be any different?
Goals typically bump the player up a full rating point, and an assist is a good tiebreaker if I am on the fence. Multiple goals might bump a performance rating up even higher.
I base my ratings on more of a personal feel for the match, but I do sometimes check the stats or Fotmob's ratings as a reality check. Most of the time I am in line with the statistics and almost never off by more than a point.
I tend to rate differently based on the player as well. For example, if Emily Fox is her usual self, she gets a 7. I expect her to perform above average compared to everyone else, so even if she has a typical performance she gets a 7 because a typical performance from her is more valuable than a typical performance from most other players. A six for her would be an average performance for most other players, but a step below what I would expect from her.
Strikers (especially number 9s) and goalkeepers are more difficult to rate due to the reduced number of touches they get during matches, so many times their performances can only be greatly influenced by outstanding contributions.
Everyone's (Bekki's) favorite question to ask is “What would a player have to do to get an ‘insert number here’ rating?” Here is a handy guide. These are not the only ways to achieve these ratings, but serve as examples.
1: Commit a “The Last Boy Scout” type on the pitch atrocity.
2: Come on as a sub and play poorly enough to be subbed off for a reason other than injury.
3: Start the match and be subbed off before halftime due to performance.
4: Be solely responsible for giving up a goal to the opposition while adding nothing of value.
5: Be responsible for the actions leading to an opponent’s goal (giving away a penalty) and having a neutral impact otherwise.
6: Average performance
7: Above average performance that contributes to winning points or keeping a match close.
8: Outstanding performance worthy of a Player of the Match designation in a draw or win.
9: Rare performance that is seen only a handful of times in a season (brace, hat trick, goal and an assist) that almost single handedly leads to 3points.
10: A performance that is transcendent, like scoring 4 goals in a match from open play or making 20 saves and keeping a clean sheet.
Like I said, these aren't the only examples and other factors could move a performance listed above up or down.
Most importantly, the purpose of the ratings is to get the reader thinking about whether they agree or not with my ratings and to do their own ratings which I hope enhances their experience.