Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad K
So now that you've provided a reason not to work on two of them, would you support prioritizing the other two?
|
I didn't address the other two because no offense, they're kind of vague. The 2nd one in particular, what is "appropriate", what are "different levels of talent", and... yeah, that kind of sums it up. For the first one, is the issue that good stealers get caught too often? I can understand how frustrating that is when what should be a big plus for a player seems like a net negative but if we're talking about historical play (which, again, stuff's vague) and you go back far enough, a. people had different ideas as to what constituted a success rate, and b. arguably you needed a lower percentage of success to break even due to the fact that you could force more errors by running a lot.
One thing that'd I'd consider adding is to increase caught stealings on hit and run plays and then figure out a way (I don't have an answer to how) to goose steal rates otherwise. Back when the hit and run was used a lot there were (probably) guys with bad looking percentages (we don't have good CS stats before like 1950) because they were left out to dry on hit and runs a lot. Even going into the 70s and 80s there were a few players on the Indians in the 70s and I specifically remember Will Clark going like 4-21 one season for similar reasons.
I *think* the game could handle that, essentially, by increasing the chances that hit and runs end in missed swings and near-automatic CSes and then just allow the LTM engine to do its job with leaguewide stealing percentages. I *think* that would also have a (possibly small) upward effect on stealing percentages for faster players, as you'd have essentially a baseline rate of getting caught which would result in fewer CSes per total attempts for good players than for bad ones.