Quote:
Originally Posted by StyxNCa
This is probably true but my issue isn't as much how many players are out of whack as much as it is which players are. I expect serious deviations of little used players but not so much from starters who played most of the season.
I've mentioned a number, though not all, of the major players who ended off with fictional results. 1969 Camilo Pascual should not be among the best pitchers in the league while Seaver, Stottlemyre, Phil Niekro, Killebrew, and Gaylord Perry, to name a few, are among the worst. Montreal should not be winning the World Series. As I also said in the past, it isn't necessarily the stats that bother me as much as where players and teams are ranked at the end. I had no problem with Mike Epstein hitting 42 HR's. I looked at where he ranked in the league compared to where he ranked in real life and that was acceptable.
Simply put, I expect the best players to be among the best and the worst to be among the worst regardless of the stats they put up.
|
I definitely understand your frustration because the same thing annoys me sometimes. Unfortunately a star or regular player is just as likely to have stats out of wack as an unknown. In OOTP, a player with all 10 out of 10 ratings is just as subject to statistical variance as a player with all 1 out of 10 ratings. If about 68% of players are within 1 standard deviation from their real life perfomance (95% within 2, 98% within 3), then the OOTP engine is doing a pretty good job. In my brief examination of this in OOTP 10 (batters only), OOTP did a pretty good job in most catagories, but some (like triples) were farther from reality.