Simulated ERA's Out Of Control...

[dregos]

Re: Simulated ERA's Out Of Control...

Default rosters or the most recent rosters? Not sure if that matters but just curious.

I was using the latest rosters as of like May 7th or 8th.

[HILLTOPPER3339]

Re: Simulated ERA's Out Of Control...

I used OSFM rosters, the updated ones.

And I didn't notice anything about interleague play, to whomever asked.

[KMRblue1027]

Re: Simulated ERA's Out Of Control...

Maybe they just think the growing trend in strikeouts will continue? We're past the 20% mark this season IIRC.

[merchant1874]

Re: Simulated ERA's Out Of Control...

Since you've simmed several seasons, have you noticed whether Interleague schedules rotate or do you get the same Interleague opponents every year?

No they don't which is dissapointing.

[woody2goody]

Re: Simulated ERA's Out Of Control...

Wasn't it the other way round in MLB 13? I'm sure I remember most pitchers having an ERA of 4 or higher when you got 5 or so seasons in?

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

[zzfzhen]

Re: Simulated ERA's Out Of Control...

Are there any sliders which might normalize these stats?

[tabarnes19_SDS]

Re: Simulated ERA's Out Of Control...

Strikeouts and ERA leaders stats do get a little off in future seasons, but the team averages maintain pretty close to current levels. Team batting averages, eras all seem within the deviation.

I think it's a product of mlb having so many good young pitchers right now. The progression system needs to work for All players. So young players that are throwing up stats in 2013 that we would expect, progress in future seasons.

Like someone else mentioned, I would rather have lower eras then inflated 5 eras for every team. I am curious if increasing the contact ratings and vision of some of the A potential prospects will help bring up the league leaders batting averages in the future, while lowering k ratings for some pitchers?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[HILLTOPPER3339]

Re: Simulated ERA's Out Of Control...

Strikeouts and ERA leaders stats do get a little off in future seasons, but the team averages maintain pretty close to current levels. Team batting averages, eras all seem within the deviation.

I think it's a product of mlb having so many good young pitchers right now. The progression system needs to work for All players. So young players that are throwing up stats in 2013 that we would expect, progress in future seasons.

Like someone else mentioned, I would rather have lower eras then inflated 5 eras for every team. I am curious if increasing the contact ratings and vision of some of the A potential prospects will help bring up the league leaders batting averages in the future, while lowering k ratings for some pitchers?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If this is the case, and if generated future rookies don't succumb to the same fate, then that seems like a good fix.

It would get tedious to have to edit rookies EVERY year though.

I'll try this when I have the time and will post results.

[dregos]

Re: Simulated ERA's Out Of Control...

Yeah I'm like 8 seasons in and one of my pitchers wins the MVP every other season. The runner-up in this season was a generated player with 295 STRIKEOUTS!

[dregos]

Re: Simulated ERA's Out Of Control...

Is it due to inflated potential? See if lowering guys' potential slows the rate that they progress. It sounds like a problem with pitchers' potential being too high, thus leading to crazy ratings.

After simming several more seasons I noticed it did start to even out a little once all the modern day pitching prospects started to regress / retire.

I don't have any solid numbers for you but when I skimmed over the pitching rotations I noticed that the majority of pitchers we're throwing high 3s / low 4s (4.00 ERA's we're more common).

This could be an effect of high number of potent hitting prospects generated over time as well as the CPU's poor handling of pitching rotations, prioritizing hitting over fielding ability etc...

On another note: The game generates way too many skinny midget prospects. I don't want the 5'7" 160 pounder even if he does have 98 potential. CPU will swoop him up though.