Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCity
Having played OOTP for many many seasons like many of you, you tend to see things now and then that aren't critical - but feel "off" somehow.
A few years back I noticed there seems to be too many "ties" each season for Pitcher Wins, so I decided to start tracking all my various played seasons and can now summarize my results as follows....
MLB:
212 seasons (AL+NL*106 years) have had 59 seasons with one or more pitchers tied for Wins.=28%
My various OOTP leagues:
189 seasons have had 87 seasons with one or more pitchers tied for Wins.=46%
As I said, this isn't critical, but it does suggest that in OOTP the pitchers "overall" are not as dominant as they have been in real life. The issue might be a few pitchers need to dominate more or it might be the vast majority need to dominate a little less = not sure which.
Since this is an OOTP14 thread and we are throwing ideas out to improve the game as well as new ideas, I thought I would throw it out for conversation  |
I don't think pitchers tying for wins correlates in any way with pitcher dominance. Pitcher wins are not always indicative of dominance, ask Felix Hernandez.
Your conclusion is the opposite of my observations. Pitchers in OOTP appear to be more dominant to me because they (the good ones) pick up more wins/start than real life pitchers. I have speculated that SP in OOTP are too healthy and in general get more wins when on and less losses because the AI pulls them early when they are down.
Many real life pitchers play at less than 100% for significant parts of the season. This probably accounts for a lot of no decisions. In OOTP pitchers are essentially binary. They pitch at 100% or they don't pitch.
Check decisions per start in MLB (recent years) vs a similar OOTP league. I'd bet there is a noticeable difference.