Has anyone else noticed

[muns]

The experiments that are taking place in Valdosta?

Take a look at his rosters and then some of his guys in the minors that have nice contact ratings and no position ratings......

Im very interested in seeing how this goes as it could mean new possibilites in the FA market

Nice job spotting this and getting the jump on everyone if it does work out. It shows Alan is always on the cutting edge, and there is a reason he has won all those Fool rings.

Hats off to you my friend and good luck with those guys.

[kaosfere]

Aha! I know it all along!

For some time now, I have suspected that Alan had a secret plan for generating his next unstoppable dynasty. I have smelled strange goings-on, seen certain jealous glances at the Republic League. But I have been unable to make sense of it. With this last bit of information, though, it's suddenly become clear.

Alan is going to be the first CL manager ever to start a designated hitter. For every game. In all 9 positions.

Brilliant!

[ekcut]

Alan has some voodoo going on that's for sure.

He can squeeze blood from a stone!
I compared my lineup to his lineup last season....not in a scientific way at all, just adding up ratings and comparing to simular positions on my team and we were so close that the only possible exclaimation for his 23 game lead over me is a signed blood oath with the underworld boss...
That, or a superior knowledge of creating lineups and and a mastery of knowing which players tend to play above thier ratings....but I think it's option A..

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by muns

The experiments that are taking place in Valdosta?

Take a look at his rosters and then some of his guys in the minors that have nice contact ratings and no position ratings......

Im very interested in seeing how this goes as it could mean new possibilites in the FA market

Nice job spotting this and getting the jump on everyone if it does work out. It shows Alan is always on the cutting edge, and there is a reason he has won all those Fool rings.

Hats off to you my friend and good luck with those guys.

Man... first the whole thing with using MR as Starting pitchers and now this.. two of my various things I've been playing with for the last several years revealed all in one week! Luckily no one has figured out my secret strategy using only American players yet! oh oops.

[muns]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Man... first the whole thing with using MR as Starting pitchers and now this.. two of my various things I've been playing with for the last several years revealed all in one week! Luckily no one has figured out my secret strategy using only American players yet! oh oops.

Microscope!!!!!! When your the best I gotta pay attention at least right

[ekcut]

If anyone cares, this is the quicky summary I did for my own entertainment.
The rating is hardly scientific, I just used 1 x con + 1 x gap + 1 x pow + .5 x eye + .5 x k + .25 x sp + .25 x st + .10 x def
For pitchers I just added straight across.

 
 
Pos
Name
Con
Gap
Pow
Eye
K
SP
St
Def
Rating

 

C
Long
81
59
27
51
64
6
2
100
251.5
VAL
1B 
Arnold
85
58
78
63
50
28
24
29
297.75
VAL
2B
Sampson
79
88
29
50
71
25
20
93
291
VAL
3B
Inman
92
93
69
71
77
40
8
81
360.25
VAL
SS 
Hayes
85
71
9
23
55
60
91
95
265.5
VAL
LF
James
81
83
39
55
47
66
71
89
310.5
VAL
CF 
Garcia
91
45
44
56
65
73
49
92
294
VAL
RF
Pagan
81
78
71
78
51
24
38
94
333.5
VAL
Total

 

675
575
366
447
480
322
303
673
2404

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

SP
Gonzales
95
80
85
260

 


 


 


 


 

VAL
SP
Hernendez
85
84
47
216

 


 


 


 


 

VAL
SP
Oneal
94
68
86
248

 


 


 


 


 

VAL
SP
Wilson
85
77
69
231

 


 


 


 


 

VAL
SP 
Garner
84
60
62
206

 


 


 


 


 

VAL
Total

 

443
369
349
1161

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

C
Jenkins
86
62
71
60
45
19
31
100
309
Bal
1B 
Roberts
98
66
59
59
48
7
2
58
293.25
Bal
2B
Higman
88
86
65
84
55
10
2
73
329.75
Bal
3B
Taylor
84
82
73
29
39
94
88
100
343.5
Bal
SS 
Cole
69
84
81
68
54
61
94
100
358.75
Bal
LF
Belanger
73
72
86
59
16
84
79
78
328.75
Bal
CF 
Ewing
90
90
43
45
50
100
100
88
342.5
Bal
RF
Sequra
67
69
75
68
39
80
100
65
325.75
Bal
Total

 

655
611
553
472
346
455
496
662
2631.25

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

SP 
Flores
100
74
80
254

 


 


 


 


 

Bal
SP
Lewis
74
83
77
234

 


 


 


 


 

Bal
SP
Morris
63
74
98
235

 


 


 


 


 

Bal
SP
Lott
73
66
82
221

 


 


 


 


 

Bal
SP
Pate
81
68
72
221

 


 


 


 


 

Bal
Total

 

391
365
409
1165

 


 


 


 


 


 

[muns]

Thats interesting. Thanks for sharing that. Would like to know more about what goes on under the hood with OOTP sometimes.

[Alan T]

Well, you all know me.. I'm pretty open about things I do or strategies I try. Some of them work and some don't... my thinking with your rating system though is that it doesn't really show players true values.

For starters, I guess arguably there is some value to a player's K rating.. but I have yet to figure out any value for it at all. Sure Striking out is worse than getting a hit, or walking... Striking out is also worse than say a Sacrifice bunt, or a sac fly.... Striking out however is much better than hitting into a double play..

I'm not Markus, so maybe something happens behind the scenes that I am not aware of, but in my testing, K rating doesn't have any impact on whether or not someone gets a hit.. it seems to me (through my testing) that the game decides if you get a hit or not first and then decides if the out is a K or a ball put into play somewhere or what... So yeah, I've found the K rating for hitters to not be worth as much as you have it rated for above. (Note this is only in regards to hitters.. pitchers are different).

There are other changes I would make to your rating scale probably but I would literally have to write a book to give all of my thoughts on it, some of which may in fact even be wrong so wouldn't want to mislead anyone.. I think the rating thing is a good idea though, I used to do that back when I had more time 5-6 years ago in my two OOTP leagues, but my ratings were based more on OBP, Total bases achieved, etc stats wise that I then reverse engineered into a ratings version of it.

FOOL moves way too fast, and I just don't have as much time so I don't really do that here anymore.. I usually just eyeball players now and give them a run in my system. Usually by the time that they hit AAA I can figure out if they're going to follow the formula or not.. If they don't seem to fit into my system, I usually try to trade them. That doesn't mean they won't be a good player, it just means my ability to predict their performance is much smaller and they are a bigger question mark for me.

[ekcut]

Agreed...I actually think this is a great feature....ratings shouldn't mean everything...Some players have all the skill in the world, but they can't put it together.

I have swiched my focus to pitchers with higher stuff, over high control (I have the "pitch around" option set the to highest setting, yet am still usually near the best at fewest walks allowed which makes me wonder if that feature even works) and I am focusing on batters with better avoiding K ratings. (those are the ratings in which Alan's team surpases mine)

Question...does anyone know how the avoid K and Contact ratings work?
I wonder if the K rating identifies how likely a player is to hit the ball, and THEN the contact rating determines how likely that batted ball goes for a hit, or is it the other way around? Does the contact rating determine if the batter gets a hit, and if it doesn't, does the K rating then determine if it is a batter ball out, or a strike out....this would make a HUGE difference.

Inquiring minds want to know!

***edited*** I just noticed you previous message... we sort of covered the same bases

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by ekcut

Agreed...I actually think this is a great feature....ratings shouldn't mean everything...Some players have all the skill in the world, but they can't put it together.

I have swiched my focus to pitchers with higher stuff, over high control (I have the "pitch around" option set the to highest setting, yet am still usually near the best at fewest walks allowed which makes me wonder if that feature even works) and I am focusing on batters with better avoiding K ratings. (those are the ratings in which Alan's team surpases mine)

Question...does anyone know how the avoid K and Contact ratings work?
I wonder if the K rating identifies how likely a player is to hit the ball, and THEN the contact rating determines how likely that batted ball goes for a hit, or is it the other way around? Does the contact rating determine if the batter gets a hit, and if it doesn't, does the K rating then determine if it is a batter ball out, or a strike out....this would make a HUGE difference.

Inquiring minds want to know!

***edited*** I just noticed you previous message... we sort of covered the same bases

Well I'll probably be removing more and more of my strategy hold in answering these questions, but who cares I guess...

From what I feel, the most important thing to look at for a hitter is if they are going to get on base. That is controlled as far as I can tell by only two things.. Their Contact and their Eye rating. That will by far affect their OBP the most. If you load up a team full of Contact and Eye guys, you likely will have a very high OBP.

Now you can't neglect the other numbers or you'll end up with an entire team of Willie Mcgees or something along those lines. Even the best hitters only get a hit 1 in 3 times, or on base 2 out of every 5 times.. You also need guys who can get total bases in the form of doubles, triples, home runs.

The GAP and POWER ratings have no effect on if someone gets a hit or not though, it only effects what type of hit is made. There have been some changes to how these work over time with newer OOTPs though, so I believe baserunning speed (not stealing ability) also plays in some part with the GAP rating, but power I think is really only impacting home runs.

I think the key then is trying to mold your understanding of how these all play together into what type of team you want to play.. Are you the small ball type club, where you get people on base, move them over, etc.. Or the Earl Weaver type where small ball be damned, you live for the 3 run homer... Understanding your park and your main opponents also help there.

[muns]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Well I'll probably be removing more and more of my strategy hold in answering these questions, but who cares I guess...

From what I feel, the most important thing to look at for a hitter is if they are going to get on base. That is controlled as far as I can tell by only two things.. Their Contact and their Eye rating. That will by far affect their OBP the most. If you load up a team full of Contact and Eye guys, you likely will have a very high OBP.

Now you can't neglect the other numbers or you'll end up with an entire team of Willie Mcgees or something along those lines. Even the best hitters only get a hit 1 in 3 times, or on base 2 out of every 5 times.. You also need guys who can get total bases in the form of doubles, triples, home runs.

The GAP and POWER ratings have no effect on if someone gets a hit or not though, it only effects what type of hit is made. There have been some changes to how these work over time with newer OOTPs though, so I believe baserunning speed (not stealing ability) also plays in some part with the GAP rating, but power I think is really only impacting home runs.

I think the key then is trying to mold your understanding of how these all play together into what type of team you want to play.. Are you the small ball type club, where you get people on base, move them over, etc.. Or the Earl Weaver type where small ball be damned, you live for the 3 run homer... Understanding your park and your main opponents also help there.

My thinking has switched over the past 4-6 seasons with all the trades i was making. I usually liked the guys that could hit the bombs, and like a lead off guy to get on base. That got me nowhere, So now I have and am going after High contact guys, and have a couple of guys hit bombs and ill see how we do. There might be 2 guys on my team this year that have a rating under 80 as contact.

I cant seem to figure out how OOTP does things, so more and more choices im making about guys are based on consistant stats and their history. Everything else if they dont have that is a gamble.

I could always field a good team in 6.5 but still cant seem to get the feel for this one. Maybe if I played more single player, but i cant seem to get myself to leave this FOOL universe, even with the single player FOOL.

[Young Drachma]

I've learned a lot about my own developmental game in this league. The pace is perfect for me, because it gives me time to tinker, but also makes me more likely -- because of the pace -- to stick with a core of players on my squad and ride things out in a way I never would've in past leagues (solo and otherwise.)

It's been a good time and the success I've had with Chicago has surprised me, if only because I didn't suspect my moves would be that successful, but things have fallen into place.

Somewhere along the line, I started to become a much better evaluator of prospects and knowing which ones to jettison and which ones to keep. Something I never used to be so good at, too.

It's an interesting exercise. One thing I've learned from a few of the GMs here is the idea of filling your minors with depth players who are youngish. I wasn't doing that for a while and I found it left me a lot more barren in the depths of my minors than I liked.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by muns

My thinking has switched over the past 4-6 seasons with all the trades i was making. I usually liked the guys that could hit the bombs, and like a lead off guy to get on base. That got me nowhere, So now I have and am going after High contact guys, and have a couple of guys hit bombs and ill see how we do. There might be 2 guys on my team this year that have a rating under 80 as contact.

I cant seem to figure out how OOTP does things, so more and more choices im making about guys are based on consistant stats and their history. Everything else if they dont have that is a gamble.

I could always field a good team in 6.5 but still cant seem to get the feel for this one. Maybe if I played more single player, but i cant seem to get myself to leave this FOOL universe, even with the single player FOOL.

Well, the single most important thing for me to figure out that helped me become better at OOTP was understanding one piece of information... Even with the best ratings in the world, some players just don't seem to ever live up to them. They might not even be close, and you'll sit there looking for hours for some reason why they aren't, but you can never find it...

I learned that following several years of stats for a player is a far better indicator of what someone is capable of than their ratings as long as you understand the environment in which they got those stats... ie: Did they do it primarily in a pitcher's park?. A Hitter's park? Did they platoon only against Rightys, only against leftys? Was it a pitcher used in specific relief type of roles?

Stats don't seem to lie.. you might get variation in a player's stats where they have an up or down year, but 2-3 years of similar stats usually means either they wern't used the correct way, or that is pretty much what they are capable of.

A FOOL example of this that I'll use is Mark Taylor, whom actually grew up in my system before I parted with him in a trade. Later on at one point I tried to acquire him from several different teams, but couldn't work out a deal. The reason I wanted him was entirely for his defense... At that point he had turned into what I was convinced would never be more than a .250-.260 hitter, and I said as much to the owner I was trying to trade for him from. I got the feeling that they thought I was trying to play them or had some inside knowledge that he would suddenly blossom and was trying to get him for a steal, which wasn't ever my intentions.. I try to be a pretty straight shooter in trade talks, and was pretty upfront.. I just wanted a defense sub for the position I felt most important defensively (Shortstop).

Anyways, it didn't take long before I decided to stop trade talks before the other owner got insulted or felt I was trying to strong arm them or anything.. but after a few more years, Mark Taylor really is what I said I felt he would be. He is a very good example of a player that just doesn't live up to his ratings.

The scouting report of course would lead you to believe that he is a .330 hitter with 35 HR a season, but the scouting report is on crack... Well technically his ratings also suggest that he should be capable of that as well, but for some unknown reason he just never did.

I wish I knew how to predict which players were going to do that type of thing, as it would make it much easier to draft, but I am just as likely to get a player like that as anyone.. I guess the key is to know when to give up on someone though. Going off of ratings alone will likely end up with a lineup full of players that underachieve, with possible good years every now and then.

[ekcut]

Too funny....Mark Taylor is EXACTLY the player I think of when we talk about not producing up to the level of his ratings. I have a mental deficiancy though.... I can't give up on him ...perhap this is the season he lives up to the hype and his 85 con 73 pow translates to more then a .255 average and 14hrs.

[Alan T]

Taylor isn't the only one, he was just the most recent one for me. Sam Harmon is another example of a guy that looked like he should end up some day being better than Tanaka.. It just never happened for him.

[ekcut]

Originally Posted by muns

My thinking has switched over the past 4-6 seasons with all the trades i was making. I usually liked the guys that could hit the bombs, and like a lead off guy to get on base. That got me nowhere, So now I have and am going after High contact guys, and have a couple of guys hit bombs and ill see how we do. There might be 2 guys on my team this year that have a rating under 80 as contact.

I cant seem to figure out how OOTP does things, so more and more choices im making about guys are based on consistant stats and their history. Everything else if they dont have that is a gamble.

I could always field a good team in 6.5 but still cant seem to get the feel for this one. Maybe if I played more single player, but i cant seem to get myself to leave this FOOL universe, even with the single player FOOL.

I am the same...I did very well in every 6.5 league I was in..to the point where it stopped being fun. I am OOTP 9's bitch though, I'm still figuring it out. I think it's because I never played any of the games in between, so I am still un-learning the old way.
My biggest change has been like Alan suggested. I started focusing more on contact and eye. I've also started paying more attention to the development of prospects...those prospects 22yrs old only improving by 3 pts a season you might as well try and pawn off on someone! My first few seasons I didnt even know that was tracked and based decisions soley on potential ratings...which players hardly ever reach (which is so cool)

[Alan T]

I actually have used the same fundamental philosophy in OOTP since OOTP2, with various tweaks (some major and some minor) since then. I think my own personal team style that I try to build was actually just as effective in 6.5 too, just some things have obviously had to be adapted for changes in the game.

I actually trust prospects more now than I used to in older versions. In the past development was so hit or miss based on spikes here or there, that it felt like playing russian roulette with every prospect that you drafted. I actually used to feel in ootp 4 and ootp 6.5, that it was worth it to try to trade every single prospect for a slightly lesser valued major league ready player that was youngish and still affordable salary wise. I felt you got your most bang for the buck there, and waiting for a prospect to development was just asking for trouble.

In ootp 9, I actually trust prospects more, to the point I'm willing to give them a chance, but it is important to watch their progress, as some still just never develop (Such as my recent super-prospect flame out Roberto "Tank" Gomez who once was a top 40 prospect but never really got out of AAA ball)

[ekcut]

Originally Posted by Alan T

Taylor isn't the only one, he was just the most recent one for me. Sam Harmon is another example of a guy that looked like he should end up some day being better than Tanaka.. It just never happened for him.

I know him well too!
Spend four years with the 'pins with between a -18 and a 10 VORP. Batted .204 in his last season here

[ekcut]

Originally Posted by Alan T

I actually have used the same fundamental philosophy in OOTP since OOTP2, with various tweaks (some major and some minor) since then. I think my own personal team style that I try to build was actually just as effective in 6.5 too, just some things have obviously had to be adapted for changes in the game.

I actually trust prospects more now than I used to in older versions. In the past development was so hit or miss based on spikes here or there, that it felt like playing russian roulette with every prospect that you drafted. I actually used to feel in ootp 4 and ootp 6.5, that it was worth it to try to trade every single prospect for a slightly lesser valued major league ready player that was youngish and still affordable salary wise. I felt you got your most bang for the buck there, and waiting for a prospect to development was just asking for trouble.

In ootp 9, I actually trust prospects more, to the point I'm willing to give them a chance, but it is important to watch their progress, as some still just never develop (Such as my recent super-prospect flame out Roberto "Tank" Gomez who once was a top 40 prospect but never really got out of AAA ball)

I was the opposite...I stocked up on prospects in 6.5. With the lumps and bumps, a 2 star prospect became a 5 star stud overnight. I tried to stock up on borderline MLB prospects, in particular say a prospect with "A" rated speed, but only 5 or 6 contact potential and wait for thier bump in ratings and almost immediate actual rating boost, and suddenly your midlevel prospect is the next Tim Raines. Players usually reached their potentials (of course if thier potential lumped, you were SOL, but at least you KNEW you were SOL) Here you just don't know that they are a bust until it is too late!
OOTP 9 is WAY mopre realistic in this regard, but I learned this too late making a few deals trading studs for prospects destined to bust.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by ekcut

I know him well too!
Spend four years with the 'pins with between a -18 and a 10 VORP. Batted .204 in his last season here

+1

I sent Rick Inman to Valdosta for him. I've become a much better talent evaluator since then...thank goodness.

[Alan T]

Originally Posted by ekcut

I was the opposite...I stocked up on prospects in 6.5. With the lumps and bumps, a 2 star prospect became a 5 star stud overnight. I tried to stock up on borderline MLB prospects and wait for thier bump in ratings and almost immediate actual rating boost. Players usually reached their potentials (of course if thier potential lumped, you were SOL, but at least you KNEW you were SOL) Here you just don't know that they are a bust until it is too late!
OOTP 9 is WAY mopre realistic in this regard, but I learned this too late making a few deals trading studs for prospects destined to bust.

Ok, I guess a clarification is in order.. I don't think that I really called the 2 star minor leaguers "prospects" in 6.5, so they didn't really fit into what I meant. What I was talking about is with the 4 or 5 star prospects, you often had no where to go but down, getting the most value out of them often meant trading them before they had time for that career destroying talent drop.

1 star or 2 star minor leaguers didn't really draw enough interest from anyone to trade, so the best option with them would be to just hold on to them and hope or pray for a suddent talent boost. The randomness in the player development back then was kind of like playing the lottery I guess and not very realistic.