OS94 (MLB 15) Topic

[jermars666]

And I am not complaining Phil, I love this set for real. Just some things that open my eyes as I am doing a 2008 version of the Pirates and how the roster tools skew a bad or a good year for a player.

[Phil Parent]

Thought about editing both. Or offering a downloadable player to fix them.

I did fix Butch Henry who was WAY too good in the original data.

I've fixed the potentials of all the players in the game, so as to control how the game evolves the players over multiple season. My system is not perfect (Very old players shouldn't have A potentials, even though they had awesome career that would have earned them an A when they were young and even though that's how the default data does it... very old guys headed to retirement that had A potential should have their current OV as potential, max; this way they don't improve and overstay their welcome.

QUOTE=jermars666;2047380735]And I am not complaining Phil, I love this set for real. Just some things that open my eyes as I am doing a 2008 version of the Pirates and how the roster tools skew a bad or a good year for a player.[/quote]

Ha ha, I took it as constructive criticism.

[jermars666]

Quote: Originally Posted by Phil Parent

Ha ha, I took it as constructive criticism.

I am glad you took it as such. I personally think you should go and make this roster your own. Or ask Knight if you can roll with it as your own. It's been a long time since 2011 was out and lots have changed in how the game plays. Did they even have franchise mode back then? I can't remember. 1994 was the year I graduated HS so I was going to do a RTTS with your roster. But for RTTS or Franchise the ratings are definitely going to have to be looked over. Take McGwire as an example again. A 30 year old with a 68 OVR and A potential well he will probably never achieve that potential ever. Or barely reach it. There are a bunch of others, he is just one of the best examples that the ratings are purely for a single season experience. I just think some things need to be looked over. A great base for sure as it stands. But I can see the rosters getting filled with a large number of draftees in the first year or two. Maybe a three year average for the ratings would bring a bit of a better balance.

[Phil Parent]

I've made an experiment. Simmed a year and counted the draftees that made the MLB rosters in season 2.

First of all, my data is a bit different than v1 now. Tampa Bay is no longer full of generics. They now have a roster full of minor league scrubs that were free agents in 1994. They are all in their mid 20's and in the 50s and low 60s OV.

Not related, but Tampa did retain those guys in Year 2 and improved on that roster. They won around 35 games in Year 1, compared to Generic'd out Arizona 6 wins. This will improve realism for teams playing them.

Anyways. 6 draftees from year 1 made their MLB teams on year 2.

4 players from the real life 2014 MLB Draft have played in MLB already since the draft.

So, considering that there's still a bunch of generics rated in the 40's in there, including a team full of them designed to retire after year 1, I don't think the rosters are going to get filled up by draftees once it's done.

[jermars666]

Quote: Originally Posted by Phil Parent

I've made an experiment. Simmed a year and counted the draftees that made the MLB rosters in season 2. First of all, my data is a bit different than v1 now. Tampa Bay is no longer full of generics. They now have a roster full of minor league scrubs that were free agents in 1994. They are all in their mid 20's and in the 50s and low 60s OV. Not related, but Tampa did retain those guys in Year 2 and improved on that roster. They won around 35 games in Year 1, compared to Generic'd out Arizona 6 wins. This will improve realism for teams playing them. Anyways. 6 draftees from year 1 made their MLB teams on year 2. 4 players from the real life 2014 MLB Draft have played in MLB already since the draft. So, considering that there's still a bunch of generics rated in the 40's in there, including a team full of them designed to retire after year 1, I don't think the rosters are going to get filled up by draftees once it's done.

How do the stats sim out? I was going to make a 25-man of this and sim a few seasons to see how they compare to real life. Also the progression is something I am interested in. I have read some weird things on other threads on other roster sets.

[jermars666]

OMG I finally found the spelling error in the roster I was talking about a while back. Dave Winfield for Minnesota is spelled Windfield. Oh and the 1B for the pirates Brian Raynold Hunter is in the roster throwing Right and batting Right. He actually throws Left and Bats Right.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...untebr01.shtml

Minor I know but I am OSD and a perfectionist myself.

[Phil Parent]

Fixed!

Here's some results... I'll keep adding to this post.

First of all, Arizona gets beaten in the double digits pretty much every game and often in the 20's, so that affects all of this but at the end of the day, everybody beats them the same so the best remain the best, HOWEVER, the NL West players stats are inflated by the fact that they play them more often. And it shows in the results. They finished 2-160, 96 games behind the Rockies in first place. The no-longer generic'd out but still scrubby Tampa Bay finished with a 26-136 record. I'd like the two expansion teams to win around 50 games in the final version.

8 of my Top 10 Home Run hitters were in the real Top 10 for the shortened 1994 season (Griffey, Thomas, Galarraga, Bagwell, Belle, Williams, McGriff, Bonds). The two missing ones (Mitchell & Canseco) each batted 30+ homeruns anyway and were replaced by Mo Vaughn and Joe Carter, who were both near the real Top 10.

Speaking of the Arizona Factor: 4 NL West batters led the league for RBIs (Galarraga, Piazza, Williams, Bonds). The next best point producer? Bagwell, the best for RBIs in real 1994.

4 of the top 6 for Saves is the same, in the same positions. Smith, Franco, Beck & Wetteland. Real world top 10 Trevor Hoffman is 4th and John Hudek had a hell of a year and ended 5th.

Randy Johnson won the AL Cy Young, with Jimmy Key and David Cone as runner ups. In real life, Cone won, with Key and Johnson as runnerups. Saberhagen won in the NL, he was third in real life.

Bob Hamelin won the AL Rookie Of The Year award, both real life and in sim. Higginson and Pettite as runner ups. Mondesi won the NL Rookie Of The Year, both real life and in sim. Steve Trachsel (who finished fourth in real life) and Kevin Foster (who DEFINITIVELY needs a rating drop) were the runnerups.

Gallaraga won NL MVP. I'm saying Arizona Factor caused this. Bonds (who finished fourth IRL) and Saberhagen (who did get votes for it) were the runner-ups. In the AL, Griffey won it (real-life runner-up) and Thomas was the runner-up (real-life winner). Randy Johnson finished third.

Now, I'll sim 4 seasons so see where the game world is after 5 seasons.

Hideo Nomo won ROY in Year 2! Same as real life!

Not counting Tampa Bay's roster (which is gradually replacing its scrubs with draftees), only 6 draftees are on the starting lineups of their MLB teams to begin the third year.

Year 3 MVPs. Griffey & Thomas, the guys who finished 1st and 3rd in the AL MVP voting in 1997. N.L. runner-up is Mike Piazza, real-life runner-up in 1997. AL runnerups Vaughn and Sosa both got votes IRL.

[jermars666]

What sliders are you using? I am not 100% sure cuz it was like 6am and I didn't check against real life stats but I think there were a lot of complete games. Like I said not sure cuz it was so early or late LOL. I sort of did and expansion draft for TB and ARZ by moving free agents over to the ML teams, about 26-27 of them. both teams got about 25-28 wins or so in that season. Oddly enough when I did that "draft" It made Arizona ranked #2 in Power and Tampa Bay ranked #1 in fielding LOL. And I think the ROY was Bob Hamelin and Lee Stevens. I know it was Stevens for sure. And George Brett had 18 stolem bases LOL at 41 years old hahah.