Uh, I probably would have retired sooner

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Uh, I probably would have retired sooner

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Sports] >> PureSim Baseball >> Uh, I probably would have retired sooner

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/11/2006 5:26:15 AM

Nukester

Posts: 472
Joined: 7/3/2006
From: Newburgh, NY
Status: offline

I let an unattended sim run from 1903-1921 (took about 20 hours to get that far !!) and when looking at the sim stats, I noticed this guy lead the league in career losses.......

Attachment (1)

Post #: 1

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/11/2006 5:33:29 AM

PadresFan104

Posts: 1223
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline

(in reply to Nukester)

Post #: 2

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/11/2006 5:36:41 AM

Amaroq

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/3/2005
From: San Diego, California
Status: offline

0-99, with an ERA of 280.36!?!?!?

It takes *some* talent to manage to lose 99 games without ever winning *once*, even by accident!

In some ways, I think the most disturbing part of this is the AI implications: Brooklyn needed to realize that he was *abysmal* long before it got to the 78th appearance that first season ... (I wonder if there's a 'minimum IP' thing that prevented it from noticing that?) ... and he should have been the first priority to replace in the 1908-09 offseason. The fact that he played such a major role on the team for three straight years is really bothersome.

I love that his minor-league ERA is abysmal - but better.

< Message edited by Amaroq -- 8/11/2006 5:38:00 AM >

(in reply to Nukester)

Post #: 3

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/11/2006 7:17:20 AM

BauerPower

Posts: 41
Joined: 6/23/2006
Status: offline

That's the Curry dude that causes all the trouble with the ratings. He has ratings of 100 stuff 5 vel 5 control. He causes all the other pitchers' stuff in the league to drop to 50. Some AI GM sees his stuff rating and puts him in the rotation and he loses every game. The only way to deal with this guy is to force retire him at the end of the ammy draft and before spring training so he doesn't screw up your association.

(in reply to Amaroq)

Post #: 4

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/11/2006 7:30:42 AM

Nukester

Posts: 472
Joined: 7/3/2006
From: Newburgh, NY
Status: offline

Yeah this guys got bad numbers all over the place. In his 4 year major league career, he had 1480 wild pitches in 103.1 IP

1908 - 24 IP, 36 WP
1909 - 21 IP, 236 WP
1910 - 56 IP, 610 WP
1911 - 2.1 IP, 598 WP

(in reply to BauerPower)

Post #: 5

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/11/2006 8:33:19 AM

Woodruff

Posts: 176
Joined: 7/2/2006
Status: offline

I know why he didn't retire...he was trying to break 100!

(in reply to Nukester)

Post #: 6

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/11/2006 4:25:04 PM

JReb

Posts: 459
Joined: 9/18/2002
Status: offline

You guys are being too hard on Mr. Curry. His nickname is "soldier boy"; what, you expect him to quit after the first 30 or so losses?

Maybe the AI GM should have fired the AI manager for playing him so long...or maybe the AI owner should have fired the lot or at a minimum, suggested they get psycho counseling!

_____________________________

My shrink says I have anger management and conflict resolution issues....and I'LL FIGHT ANYBODY THAT DISAGREES!

(in reply to Woodruff)

Post #: 7

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/11/2006 4:33:29 PM

Nukester

Posts: 472
Joined: 7/3/2006
From: Newburgh, NY
Status: offline

Actually Im being too hard on the guy. I said he was the career loss leader. He's not. The 0-40 was the most losses in a single season though. I would suspect the 598 wild pitches in 2.1 innings is some kind of record too.

(in reply to JReb)

Post #: 8

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/11/2006 9:01:56 PM

Ankit

Posts: 15
Joined: 5/26/2006
Status: offline

The guy was amazing in real life too!

http://www.baseball-reference.com/c/curryge01.shtml

(in reply to Nukester)

Post #: 9

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/11/2006 10:25:21 PM

Nukester

Posts: 472
Joined: 7/3/2006
From: Newburgh, NY
Status: offline

I bet if I took him out of the game, my sim time would be cut in half. Do you know how long a game takes when there are 598 wild pitches in 2.1 innings ???

(in reply to Ankit)

Post #: 10

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/11/2006 10:28:55 PM

33sherman

Posts: 175
Joined: 8/22/2005
Status: offline

Yeah, you gotta force retire that guy. He also inflates the stats of the batters who hit against him.

(in reply to Nukester)

Post #: 11

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/12/2006 2:44:28 AM

Amaroq

Posts: 1100
Joined: 8/3/2005
From: San Diego, California
Status: offline

Okay, so if its happening repeatedly for this one player, perhaps Shaun should be looking for a bug in this player's import process.

(in reply to 33sherman)

Post #: 12

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/12/2006 3:07:18 AM

Beach23BoyP

Posts: 288
Joined: 8/20/2005
Status: offline

I've hit the same bug on more than one association.

(in reply to Amaroq)

Post #: 13

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/12/2006 3:48:55 AM

SittingDuck

Posts: 1166
Joined: 9/1/2002
Status: offline

So if they all drop to 50, look for a guy with 100 stuff?

(in reply to Beach23BoyP)

Post #: 14

RE: Uh, I probably would have retired sooner - 8/12/2006 5:34:44 AM

33sherman

Posts: 175
Joined: 8/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SittingDuck

So if they all drop to 50, look for a guy with 100 stuff?

Well, you might have players with legitimate '100' stuff ratings, i.e. Christy Mathewson, etc. As far as I know, the problem players have 100 stuff but '5' velocity and control.

(in reply to SittingDuck)

Post #: 15