List of Classic Seasons & Historical Specialty Rosters MLB The Show

[Armor and Sword]

Quote: Originally Posted by bostongahden

My classic roster project is complete and all sets now in the vault. Check my thread for teams and enjoy!

I will update the OP here as well. Love your work Boston. Super high quality stuff.

[Armor and Sword]

Quote: Originally Posted by baumy300

Over half done, 14 1/2 teams remain. Updates SOON!

Baumy...yer a legend. Amazing sets this cycle!!! Simply awesome.

[bostongahden]

Quote: Originally Posted by Armor and Sword

I will update the OP here as well. Love your work Boston. Super high quality stuff.

Thanks, Armour. Nice to know the effort is appreciated. Enjoy!

[baumy300]

Quote: Originally Posted by Armor and Sword

Baumy...yer a legend. Amazing sets this cycle!!! Simply awesome.

Thanks, I'm glad you're enjoying them man. You'll enjoy 1999 as well, it was such a good year for baseball.


I'm going to spoiler it, but I'll post my 1996 Franchise simulation review in here along with thoughts and analysis on it.

Spoiler

1996 Franchise simulation results

All stats are from one simulation of the 1996 set in Franchise mode. Injuries are turned off.



Standings





The good:



*All team records in ( ) are actual official record followed by my simulation





The AL East standings in general



Yankees (92-70 Division champs) - 107-55 Division champs
Orioles (88-74 2nd place division) - 82-80 2nd place division
Toronto and Boston finished tied at 80-82 in my simulation but Boston won the real life battle for third at 85-77 over Torontos 74-88.

Not included in the sim is Detroit, a former AL East member who finished 53-109 in 1996 to take last in the division. They finished 57-105 in the sim to also finish last.









The AL Central


Granted Milwaukee wasn't included in the sim and Detroit was absent everything shook out satisfactory.


Cleveland (99-62 Division champs) - 96-66 Division champs
Chicago White Sox (85-77 2nd place division) - 85-77 2nd place division

Royals otherwise beat the Twins for 3rd instead of it being Milwaukee, Minny, and then KC but otherwise alright. Sick about Chicago.












AL West


Texas (90-72 Division champs) - 91-71 2nd place division
Oakland (78-84) - 81-81
California (70-91 last in division)- 77-85 last in division












NL East


Atlanta (96-66 Division champs) -91-71 4th in division
Montreal (88-74 2nd place division) - 96-66 Division champs













NL Central


Chicago Cubs (76-86) - 74-88











NL West


San Diego (91-71 Division champs) - 90-72 2nd place division
Los Angeles (90-72 2nd place division) - 87-75 3rd in division
Colorado (83-79) - 85-77













The bad:


AL West


The Mariners going 15 wins over their real life tally to hit 100 maybe isn't exactly bad when you consider they had A-Rod on a 30 HR+ year hitting .358 with Griffey, Buhner, and Edgar Martinez to back him up but their pitching isn't exactly amazing either. To be fair they did finish 2nd place with an 85-76 record but man oh man it just goes to show that when you have 4 absolute bashers, some with speed, and some hitting 330's+ you can do a lot of damage.




NL East


Atlanta taking fourth and missing the playoffs is a bummer even though they won 91 games. Montreal, Philly and the Mets did some work this sim despite only Montreal having a winning record between the three. New York and Philly actually were pretty bad (71-91 and 67-95) but no injuries may have helped these two clubs.


NL Central


Cincy was a good team on paper, they really were. Pitching was good, bullpen was nasty, and Eric Davis, Barry Larkin, Reggie Sanders, etc... etc...made for a good lineup. They finished .500 in 96 at 81-81 for 3rd but won it here with a 96-66 record. A stretch, but a justifiable one for a sim.


The Cardinals also had good pitching and won the Division in real life with an 88-74 record but went 75-87 in the sim for 4th.



NL West


The Giants finished last in 1996 with a 68-94 record but won the division in my sim with a 93-69 record. Matt Williams only played 100 games that year but I imagine with him and Barry Bonds fully healthy could pose major problems over a season. Pitching is good too, lineup has some weak spots but still nothing that made me think they would hit 93 wins.





Stats



One good thing is there 47 batters who hit .300 or better in 1996. In my simulation exactly 50 did. The bad thing however is that only 12 players in the NL hit for .300 while 38 in the AL did. There is a little disparity there but the DH is a hell of a drug I suppose.



I will get into this later, but I really nerfed the Tampa and Arizona teams in here. I mean bad. A lot of guys in the 40's and 50's rating category starting. This lets other teams beat up on them and pad stats, or at least is my theory. Arizona's 22-140 and Tampa's 30-132 records should back this up. This must be fixed.


Like with any simulation, numbers will vary every time you run it. There are always some surprises, some good and some bad, that pop up but the same thing would happen if they replayed the 1996 season over and over as well.


Home Runs in the AL weren't too bad stat wise with Brady Anderson finishing second in the sim with 53. He finished 2nd in real life with 50. Mo Vaughn was the leader with 56 in the sim and hit 44 in actuality. Kind of a leap but could be worse. McGwire was the real leader with 52 but had 44 in the sim. Still not too bad. One good one however is Albert Belle. He hit 48 shots in 1996 and exactly 48 shots in the sim and Juan Gone drilled 47 shots in real life but had 49 on the sim. Sweet.



Bonds in the NL hit 42 that year but 36 in the sim.



I'll post screens of other stat shots to look at as well.



It's also worth noting some of the averages may have been inflated by not only poor competition a few times per year (Tampa/Arizona) but by progression as well. The stats are set to reflect a general average, but if progression kicks in a guy can go from 83 in contact to 90+ and therefore have a bigger disparity in their sim numbers. It can and does happen, but I am not adjusting this. Nature of the beast I suppose, but if there were ever an option to turn progression off like injuries and just have the rating stick, that would be cool.



















Playoffs



Real life ball featured New York, Baltimore, Cleveland and Texas in the AL Playoffs while Atlanta, St. Louis, San Diego, and Los Angeles made it for the NL. The Yankees would beat the Braves to win the World Series.


In my set the AL had New York, Cleveland, Texas, and Seattle make it in. Cleveland defeated New York to make the Series in 7 games. I am totally cool with this. Cleveland was an incredible team and that is not far fetched at all in my book. They also lost the World Series, but this is where the wheels fall off...


My set had Philadelphia, New York, San Francisco, Cincy and Montreal represent the NL. Montreal making it isn't bad and maybe, maybe Cincy isn't a big stretch but that's it. The other teams had no business in the Playoffs in 1996. Then to top it all off Cincinnati wins the thing!


To make their case, they did have solid pitching with John Smiley (3.64 era) Dave Burba (3.83 era) and Mark Portugal (3.98 era) Jeff Shaw (2.49 era) and Jeff Brantley (2.41 era) produced an incredible set up and closer duo that was complimented by Hector Carrasco and his 3.75 era. Legend Lee Smith also was serviceable with a 4.06 ERA out the bullpen.


Joe Oliver and Ed Taubensee offered two catchers with some pop and seen Taubensee bat .291 in 108 games. Hal Morris hit .313 with 16 HR's while Barry Larkin knocked 33 HR's in hitting .298 with 36 stolen bases on top of Gold Glove defense. Reggie Sanders and Eric Davis shored up the outfield with Davis hitting .287 and 26 HR's and Sanders batting a .251 with 14 HR's in only 81 games. With no injuries, that's about a 30 HR pace.



Overall still a stretch, but what can you do.















What I can do

I have been thinking of a way to remedy the easily ignored, bland created players for the 95-97 expansion teams. It's bump the ratings a bit to make them more competent to play/sim against or bust pretty much.


Seeing as I have to do that anyway, I had the idea of making the teams more enjoyable to play against or just use in general. A fun way I thought to do this was making players we would recognize from baseball movies somewhat era relevant. Movies I was thinking of using are the Major League series, Little Big League, Rookie of the Year, The Sandlot, and Angels in the Outfield. I will probably throw in someone on the bench like Michael Jordan or something as filler just because they played.



I think it would be more fun to see players we recognize over generics. Thinking of using guys like Cerrano from Major League and taking advantage of their strengths and weaknesses. Cerrano will probably get like an 80 in Power but a 0 in Vision and a low average. Wild Thing and Henry Rowengartner will bring heat but will also have poor control. This should make them decent enough but not overpowered or a league leader. Stars like Lou Collins and Bennie 'The Jet' Rodriguez will hit in the 280's with either a little bit of pop or some speed. Should be a fun way to make due with two teams not needed for early set Franchises and simulations.

[Culture Rot]

Quote: Originally Posted by baumy300

Over half done, 14 1/2 teams remain. Updates SOON!

Silver Lining of the generic teams dilemma in pre 1998 rosters: You can use those generic filler teams to enhance the realism and accuracy of sim stats without having to worry about emulating individual real life players. Home run numbers too low? Set the generic pitchers HR ratings in the 25-50 range. Strikeout numbers too low? Put the pitchers K ratio at 90 and above. And so on. Personally, I simulate those games, and I don't really care to have big name fictional players mixing in there, or having someone from a movie battling McGwire and Sosa for the home run crown

But that's whats great about the 1998 and 1999 set...no generic/fictional teams.

[baumy300]

Quote: Originally Posted by xlatinoheatx

I simulate those games, and I don't really care to have big name fictional players mixing in there, or having someone from a movie battling McGwire and Sosa for the home run crown

Well yeah, I don't want that either lol. Fact is, generic players or not, they need a little rating increase, so by my logic, they can't be such an easy win that bad teams (or 3 of them) can gang up on to pad wins and crash the playoffs. It doesn't matter to me if it's a fake name or movie star but the lack of talent on those teams hurts records for the others. Not doing anything with those teams for a while anyway but do need to remedy them.

Also making decent progress on 1999, adding in 25+ players takes a tad longer but worth it. Will update on that project later as well.

[Caulfield]

The worst thing is the nl west pre-Rockies/D'Backs. Thats 40% of one entire division totally out of whack. What I prefer to do is populate Tampa Arizona Colorado & Miami with whichever year roster I may be using with recently retired players.

[Lilly Of The Valley]

I have the 2001 file about 80% done, and have not touched it since August 2018, LOL. I think I should get it completed. Should I port it to MLB 19 as a future year file, like 2004 ? It has real service time, career stats, and the whole-sha-bang.

Thoughts fellas ? I finna get this done b/f Armaggedon hits !!