Historical Replay Question

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Historical Replay Question

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 >> Historical Replay Question

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Historical Replay Question - 11/27/2007 3:44:25 AM

modred

Posts: 64
Joined: 8/19/2005
Status: offline

I've seeded a league with real player from 1939 and the pitchers' ratings just seem too good. This is one of my first forays into the historical side of things having to date primarily played with fictional players.

16 batters from 100 to 80 in contact.
12 batters from 100 to 80 in power.
14 batters from 100 to 80 in eye.

25 pitchers from 100 to 90 in stuff, in fact the top 25% of pitchers only takes me down to 82.
Similarly the top 25% for control takes me down to 75.

The average pitcher in the AL in 1939 3.9 BB/9, 3.6K/9, 9.8 H/9 and in the NL 9.5 H/9, 3.1 BB/9, 3.5 K/9.

A random pitcher Pete Appleton gave up 104 hits in 102.2 walked 48 and struck out 50 (9.2 H/9, 4.2BB/9, 4.4 K/9) and got ratings of 89 stuff, 48 velocity, and 76 control. It seems odd to be that far below the league in control and still get a 76 in rating.

I may have answered my own question in that this may be how the engine needs to simulate the pitching to contact of the era. However, the shape of the curve still doesn't seem right to me.

What determines velocity on the import? 45 year old Fred Johnson struck out 2 in 14 innings while allowing 23 hits and got a 100 in velocity? Most of the guys with 100 in velocity pitched a very small number of innings.

Is there a way to configure the minimum number of at bats and innings when importing players into a draft pool rather than a strict replay?

Post #: 1

RE: Historical Replay Question - 11/28/2007 5:54:03 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

You are using the latest edition of the game? (1.70f?) Look, I have set up several historical templates, and this is what you must keep in mind: (1) the players are extracted through the Lahman plater database; (2) Players that get picked are rated on a curve, and some anomalies can occur. In my current 1941 league, I've got several guys who are rated at 5 in velocity. The association ERA is over 4.25, which is definitely ahistorical. The actual numbers were 3.63 (NL)/4.15 (AL).

Jeez. There are SO many factors that can contribute to this -- the park dimensions for one. I checked this out, and even for so many of the "classic" parks, they changed over the years they existed.

Then there's the weather, which is randomized by region in the game -- this has a profound effect on the game. I really don't think this is fully appreciated. You only see it if you are managing games individually. Do I like it? YES. One cannot mess with mother nature, but she sure can affect the flight of the ball.

These factors affect each game, but there's so much more. We've talked about it ad nausaeum. Just do a forum search.

(in reply to modred)

Post #: 2

RE: Historical Replay Question - 11/28/2007 10:38:43 PM

modred

Posts: 64
Joined: 8/19/2005
Status: offline

Latest version yes. And what I am saying is that there is not much of a curve for pitchers' control and stuff when compared to the curves for the batters and against fictional pitchers.

I'm not sure what weather has to do with how players are rated.

(in reply to KG Erwin)

Post #: 3

RE: Historical Replay Question - 11/30/2007 2:38:18 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

Modred, I was speaking of ballpark/weather effects on player performances, not ratings. Sorry I didn't make myself clear.

As for the pitcher rating curve, I agree that it needs to be tweaked. Somewhere along the line, the dropoff between good & average pitchers is too steep. This has profound effects in a long-term association and developing the minor-leaguers.

I sign an 18-year-old guy with, say, 25-30 ratings in stuff/control and high potential. How many years will it take before he reaches a major-level minimum of 65-70? Would I expect a sudden off-season jump of 10 or 20 points in any rating for 2 or 3 years in a row?

That being said, the ratio of BB/SO in some of these developing players is atrocious. 100 BBs and 20 SOs? Can't win a game? Something is amiss, methinks.

Edit: perhaps I'm totally out of line. Maybe it DOES take 6-8 years of development in the minors. For associations with all three levels existing, I could see that. For the present historical career replay 35-man rosters, it doesn't encourage utilizing the 10-man farm system to its fullest.

< Message edited by KG Erwin -- 11/30/2007 2:46:00 AM >

(in reply to modred)

Post #: 4