I believe in patient player development but...

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

I believe in patient player development but...

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 >> I believe in patient player development but...

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

I believe in patient player development but... - 9/19/2009 1:01:33 PM

Orcin

Posts: 162
Joined: 7/6/2009
Status: offline

could someone please tell me why this guy is still in the AI's pitching rotation? His 1947 season has not started well. Check out the batting average against.

Ok, maybe he just had a great year last year, and we need to let him work through his troubles?

Uh, no. Well, let's look at it game by game... maybe he just had a couple of bad outings...

I hate to tell you this, but these are not bad relief appearances... these are all starts!

I think almost any manager/GM in history would have sent this guy to the minors (deeeeep minors) by now, right? This player had a decent career, but a strange one in that he made the majors in 1946, then not again until 1949, then another break until he finally came up to stay in 1952. So he is way early in his development and his ratings don't reflect his ultimate talent at all.

Still, you would think the AI would just leave him in the minors.

Post #: 1

RE: I believe in patient player development but... - 9/19/2009 4:28:39 PM

Jabez54

Posts: 76
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Los Lunas, NM
Status: offline

OMG,Orcin!!!

... that's very very comical ... I hate to see the rest of the team's stats - I had never ever seen that type of stats in my PureSim's Association unless of course, it's in the minors ... So, what did u do - put him out of his misery?

_____________________________

Red Sox Fan since 1967

(in reply to Orcin)

Post #: 2

RE: I believe in patient player development but... - 9/19/2009 7:38:52 PM

KG Erwin

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

Using 5-man rotations and the modern closer option in the 40s is anachronistic, so this is probably why you're having this anomaly. This is not a criticism, Orcin, but historical parameters for any season before 1960 should probably be adhered to. In other words, the AI routines choked on these modern-era settings.

Soapbox rant: let this be a lesson for new players of the game. If you want historical results, then you must use historical settings. In PureSim, you run risks if you go too far "outside the box". One can experiment to a certain extent, but there IS a breaking point, and one can only find it through trial and error.

< Message edited by KG Erwin -- 9/19/2009 7:48:48 PM >

(in reply to Jabez54)

Post #: 3

RE: I believe in patient player development but... - 9/20/2009 3:19:02 PM

Orcin

Posts: 162
Joined: 7/6/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

Using 5-man rotations and the modern closer option in the 40s is anachronistic, so this is probably why you're having this anomaly. This is not a criticism, Orcin, but historical parameters for any season before 1960 should probably be adhered to. In other words, the AI routines choked on these modern-era settings.

Soapbox rant: let this be a lesson for new players of the game. If you want historical results, then you must use historical settings. In PureSim, you run risks if you go too far "outside the box". One can experiment to a certain extent, but there IS a breaking point, and one can only find it through trial and error.

I could agree with this, except that Grissom is the only pitcher in my association with this type of result. My next-worst pitcher is relief pitcher Fred Sanford (yes, that's his real name) who has a 10.00 ERA and 2.52 WHIP in 27 innings. That's bad, but it's easily possible in real life.

All of my teams are using the closer effectively. I have 15 of 18 teams with closers who have 12 saves or more in half a season.

A sampling of five-man rotation performance:
Boston Braves: Spahn and Sain have 18 starts, #3 has 13 due a brief DL appearance, #4 has 17, and #5 has 11.
NY Giants: Top 3 starters have 16-17 starts, #4 has 14, and #5 has 13.

Starter #5 gets skipped in the rotation where possible, and the AI uses different guys (relievers) to start second games of double-headers. It seems like pretty normal usage to me.

Here's the Chicago White Sox rotation:
Lopat 17 starts, 7-5 2.78
Grove 17 starts, 5-7 3.57
Papish 17 starts, 6-10 3.97
Smith 11 starts, 3-3 2.97 (spent time on DL)
Grissom 0-12, 35.07 (he lost another blowout since my last post - gave up 19 and his ERA went down!)

The White Sox are 37-48 in sixth place, and their primary problem is Grissom. Their closer hasn't been great... 21 appearances, 15 saves, 5 blown saves, 3.79 ERA... still better than Brad Lidge so I don't see a big anomaly there.

In summary, I don't think it's the settings. If you are saying that the AI doesn't understand he needs to send down Grissom because he is in the #5 starter role and #5 starters didn't exist in 1947, well... maybe that's possible and I just don't have any other teams with #5 starters that are noticeablely bad. However, I see the AI adjusting the rotation and closer in the same manner as my Replay_1963 league. The AI has actually changed closers in my 1947 league without sending the pitcher down, so he "sees" the position.

Jabez... yes, I've decided to "help" the AI in this case and send him down. Mostly, I am curious to see if the AI brings him back up.

< Message edited by Orcin -- 9/20/2009 3:26:08 PM >

(in reply to KG Erwin)

Post #: 4

RE: I believe in patient player development but... - 9/20/2009 11:32:17 PM

Wrathchild

Posts: 817
Joined: 10/12/2007
From: Reading, PA
Status: offline

What is the actual job of the 5th starter? If they get skipped a lot when do they get to play?

_____________________________

J.G. Wrathchild, Manager, St. Louis Cardinals (1900-1906), Brooklyn Superbas (1907, 1908)

(in reply to Orcin)

Post #: 5

RE: I believe in patient player development but... - 9/21/2009 1:54:55 AM

Orcin

Posts: 162
Joined: 7/6/2009
Status: offline

They pitch 60-75% of their turns. They just don't pitch every time they are due. I think they keep the other four starters from pitching when they are tired.

(in reply to Wrathchild)

Post #: 6

RE: I believe in patient player development but... - 9/21/2009 10:14:54 PM

motnahp

Posts: 1837
Joined: 8/22/2005
Status: offline

Orcin, I've been moaning and groaning about this for a couple years now. Pitchers with STUFF and CONTROL of 5 are simply poison for most any association with real players. Usually, those players import with such low ratings because they had just a few appearances in their initial season of MLB.

As is the case with your Marv Grissom, they give up tons of hits and ridiculous numbers of walks. Once upon a time, Shaun changed something on these seldom-used players to where they import at the level of 5 and don't ever seem to get better. I did some tinkering with the ratings and got things to "normalize" a little. Your options:

1) Force retire the guy and move on. Probably not your first choice, since he did actually have a decent length career in real life. What caused this was that he played a few games in 1946 and not again until 1949. You could also force retire the 1946 version and import the 1949 version. The only drawback to this would be that you'd end up with two of him in your Almanac, as if they were two separate players.

2) Go into "Edit Bio" on his card and make him a reliever. This will force the AI to put someone better (if available) in the rotation. If you insist on bucking reality and using 5-man rotations for this era, this is likely your best option. Check those other teams out. I'll bet most of them have only four guys labeled as (Starter) on their card.

3) Go to your association's player database and make the following changes to all of your scrub pitchers: Add 30 to their STUFF, 40 to their VELOCITY and 30 to their CONTROL. I arrived at these figures after dozens of tests. The drawback of doing this is that you will make the former "5-point scrubs" better than some other pitchers in the assn. I recommend this somewhat drastic step only if you are mirroring actual MLB and making roster moves as they were actually made in real life. In this case, someone like Grissom likely came up in September (or earlier due to injury), made his few (four) appearances, then went back down.

FYI: Whatever type association I'm running, I'm now in the habit of occasionally going into the Stats area, clicking on "Sortable Pitching", then double-clicking on ERA. I can find out pretty quickly if any of those 5-point scrubs are causing problems for any of the teams. A quick fix with #1, #2, or #3 above and it's solved.

(in reply to Orcin)

Post #: 7

RE: I believe in patient player development but... - 9/21/2009 11:01:20 PM

Orcin

Posts: 162
Joined: 7/6/2009
Status: offline

Thanks for the suggestions. Great reply. I appreciate the veteran help.

Regarding #3, couldn't I just go into Grissom's "Edit Bio" screen and make the changes to him there? Maybe that's what you meant and I just didn't understand it correctly.

(in reply to motnahp)

Post #: 8

RE: I believe in patient player development but... - 9/22/2009 1:00:44 PM

motnahp

Posts: 1837
Joined: 8/22/2005
Status: offline

Of course. I use #3 when there are many of those 5-point scrub pitchers. I'll just go into the database and double click on STUFF to sort them. Then, I go into each "Edit Bio", make the changes, and click on "Next". Repeat until association is cleansed.

(in reply to Orcin)

Post #: 9

RE: I believe in patient player development but... - 9/30/2009 7:05:37 PM

Orcin

Posts: 162
Joined: 7/6/2009
Status: offline

Update: I made the adjustments to Grissom's rating exactly as suggested by motnahp. It is now one year later in my association. The AI lowered the ratings just 1 or 2 points between seasons. Grissom's performance has certainly improved. He has a 8.38 ERA and 2.68 WHIP in 18 innings of relief work this season. While not great, it is a big improvement over his lifetime 29.91 ERA coming into this season.

(in reply to motnahp)

Post #: 10

RE: I believe in patient player development but... - 9/30/2009 10:32:22 PM

motnahp

Posts: 1837
Joined: 8/22/2005
Status: offline

Glad to hear things are better. I would seriously consider changing this version of Grissom to a reliever, if you haven't already done so.

Also, are there others in your association with similar issues?

(in reply to Orcin)

Post #: 11

RE: I believe in patient player development but... - 10/1/2009 12:50:08 AM

Orcin

Posts: 162
Joined: 7/6/2009
Status: offline

Yes, Grissom should certainly be a reliever. I'll do that.

No other problems, my worst pitcher this year is Cot Deal with a 11.00 ERA in only 9 innings. He has ratings in the 30's and is early in his development, so I think it is just an ordinary case of the AI rushing him to the majors.

Thanks for the tip on how to quickly check for this with the sortable pitching screen. I am using it a couple of times per season.

(in reply to motnahp)

Post #: 12