Quote:
Originally Posted by thehef
Hindsight: I should have also selected two pitchers with 100+ AB's - one a good hitter and one not-so-good - to also test... maybe I will go back and do that at some point...
|
Curiosity got the best of me so I did a quick test of two good-hitting pitchers from 1930: Red Ruffing of the Yankees (.374, 37 hits in 99 AB's, 4 HR's) and Frank Shellenback of the PCL Hollywood Stars (.279, 36 hits in 129 AB's, 4 HR's). Unfortunately, regardless of adj/wkn settings, they import as anywhere from poor-to-mediocre-at-best hitters.
This is concerning because both of these guys were used almost 20 times in 1930 as pinch-hitters. Not having them available (well,
available as the good-hitters they were) is a break from the realism that we're all generally hoping for... I'm pretty sure from what Markus wrote on this topic like 3-4 years ago -
"Pitcher ratings are adjusted to sample size, so a pitcher with 100 AB in a season, even if he performed good, will be rated lower than a position player with 600 AB and the same stats" - that this is by design. However, I'm not sure the intent is for these guys to be as poor hitters as they are... I mean, they are not good hitters at all if not adjusted/weakened, but once they fall below the thresholds, they are
bad. And that's not realistic.