so what if, instead of tiering pokemon based on usage, we were to rank pokemon based on a sort of "meta score" like having high base stats is good, but having good stats in the right places can also be good despite low BST. abilities can also make or break a pokemon. but what if we actually put a number to how "good" an ability, type combination, or movepool would be? how would you go about putting a "meta score" to the components of a pokemon?

>base stats
BST, bulk stats(hp/def/sdpef), speed tiers, physical vs special, mixed attacking? speed is probably the most important stat, followed by primary attacking stat, then the bulk stats. but what exactly constitutes a "bulky" mon? how would you score speed tiers vs bulk? mixed attacking would obviously have the lowest score

>type
which types are good offensively vs deffensively? can a monotype be better than certain dual type combos? would have to rank every type combo and assign a score to each.

>ability
does it grant an immunity? boost stats? can it be countered? this would probably the most varied scores.

>movepool
what sets can it run? what sets are "meta"? (sub + protect + toxic?) does its signature move actually have a use? moves could be scored individually or as sets, if they have low acc, if they cause statuc, etc. scald would have a high meta score but something like dig is garbo.

example: slacking
highest BST of any non legendary, good physical bulk, good speed,but it has a mediocre movepool, normal type is meh, and its ability basically would halve its effective score.