When will players ability to play other positions be expanded?

[TuckerDuckson]

So, I was watching the Tigers lately, and they have Willi Castro playing some Left Field this season, even though he's commonly a shortstop.

This had me thinking: why doesn't every player have the ability to learn any position in this game?

Like there are limits, like Prince Fielder would never be a shortstop, but think about it, I'm wondering what's stopping a guy who has the range and arm to play short stop from playing OF? Like he doesn't magically lose his ability to throw a baseball, but in this game, it appears like he does.

Obviously, guys are guys who already have this ability too, there are the super utility guys who are created, there are even starters who have full ability to play, but really I feel not enough. I have a guy on my roster who has near 70-80 rating in every infield stat (20-80 scale), but is 20 in every outfield defensive stat. In real life, he could be transitioned to the outfield, easily. He wouldn't immediately be transitioned to the outfield, nor be good at but I feel like he should have at least a 40-45 rating possibility in the outfield. No? Like you can allow him to take reps in spring training over a couple years and he eventually starts learning the position.

I was thinking this mainly for catchers too. A lot of players are transitioned off of catching into different positions if their bat is palatable enough. I feel like maybe players who have poor catcher ratings could maybe have better ratings in different spots? And maybe even (this should be more rare), good position players may have the chance of having decent catcher ratings. Yet, I feel like this will just cause problems with the AI just playing them as the positions they would be better at defensively, but isn't that major league teams do anyways?

Examples are like Josh Donaldson, Brett Lawire, Johnny Bench and Brandon Inge were all catchers who moved to 3B at the MLB level. Carlos Delgado, Dale Murphy and Raul Ibanez all used to be catchers. We all know about Bryce Harper, Kyle Schwarber and Craig Biggio. There are countless others. Heck even my high school and college battery mate was a kid who moved from shortstop to catcher his junior year of highschool, mainly because were such great friends but he found he was good at it, and he happened to get a college scholarship out of it. Even so, I feel like if a guy has the range to play short stop at a high level, he can also play LF, at least.

The balancing part of this is that even if they have such high IF range, and such to play short-stop, you wouldn't play them there due to their abilities at other positions. I can see this not being feasible though with AI limitations, but if it is possible I'd like to have more of a positive ability to have versatility out of my players.

I feel like the current ability of a player being able to play positions is quite restrictive, when a decent amount of catchers or other positions could play other positions. (and even position players too could play the position, Kyle Farmer was a shortstop before transitioning to catcher, and now he's a shortstop again, Buster Posey was a shortstop before transitioning to Catcher). I just want to see the opinion on this topic.

[MathBandit]

My experience is that a lot of players can actually very easily transition to other positions. Bo Bichette can become an above-average CF, for example. I don't think I've seen many players who are elite defensively in either the IF or OF but can't transition to become at least passable in the other one.

[SirMichaelJordan]

This is somewhat simulated in this year’s version better. You will notice that positions have somewhat of a potential rating now. Players are generated a little more realistically in fielding ratings. You'll get some SS that have OF ratings. But at the same time, you won’t see a 1basemen get generated with SS quality ratings.

The fielding ratings themselves will determine where a player may play, with premium defensive players like SS having not only a glove in the infield but also the outfield in some cases, even if their potential SS rating is low. The problem now is that generated players get created with low fielding ratings at the moment, so the chance of even seeing players who have versatile gloves in the OF/IF is minimal.

It’s also important to know that some positions are easier to learn because the threshold for ratings isn’t high, for example, 1B and LF. You can teach almost anyone to play those positions at a competent level. 1B must have height, though.

Nonetheless, I agree that catchers could not only use some help in their ratings, but it would be nice to see some of them able to field other positions.

[TuckerDuckson]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

This is somewhat simulate in this year’s version better. You will notice that positions have somewhat of a potential rating now. Players are generated a little more realistically in fielding ratings now. You’ll get some SS that have OF ratings. But at the same time you won’t see a 1basemen get generated with SS quality ratings.

The fielding ratings itself will determine where a player may play at. With premium defensive players like SS having not only a glove in the infield but also the outfield. The problem now is that generated players get created with low fielding ratings at the moment so the change of even seeing players who have versatile gloves in the OF/IF is low.

It’s also important to know that some positions are easier to learn because the threshold for ratings isn’t high. Like 1B and LF. You can teach almost anyone to play those positions at a competent level. 1B must have height though.

I find this not to be true in created players, what the dev team does well is that IRL when a player is considering or is transitioning to a new position (Willie Calhoun for example), they add in their ability to play in each update.

But I am past that point in my current save (post 2035's), and there's a decent amount of guys who are high in infield ratings, who simply can't transiton to the outfield (even in the most basic sense).

I feel like if a guy is created with high (and I mean high, like 65+ ratings in the infield, he should maybe have half (30-40 ratings), in the applicable and traversable outfield ratings too. I also feel like catchers as a whole should have more position ratings as well. I feel like most, if not all catchers playing on a big league roster can play 1B at the major league level.

Like heck, Alex Avila played 1B for the tigers a few years ago, (and h'es only 5'11) even though he never had played it before. If I try that in this game it's a nightmare, and that defense can solely lose me a game.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by TuckerDuckson

I find this not to be true in created players, what the dev team does well is that IRL when a player is considering or is transitioning to a new position (Willie Calhoun for example), they add in their ability to play in each update.

But I am past that point in my current save (post 2035's), and there's a decent amount of guys who are high in infield ratings, who simply can't transiton to the outfield (even in the most basic sense).

I feel like if a guy is created with high (and I mean high, like 65+ ratings in the infield, he should maybe have half (30-40 ratings), in the applicable and traversable outfield ratings too. I also feel like catchers as a whole should have more position ratings as well. I feel like most, if not all catchers playing on a big league roster can play 1B at the major league level.

Like heck, Alex Avila played 1B for the tigers a few years ago, (and h'es only 5'11) even though he never had played it before. If I try that in this game it's a nightmare, and that defense can solely lose me a game.

Well atm, the fictional players get created with lower ratings so that is one reason you may not be seeing it. In my long term sims while sing default PCM and edited PCM, I've frequently seen SS/2B with OF ratings, 1B/3B are created with corner OF ratings. 2B/3B aren’t usually created with super high OF ratings because they are meant to be able to transition to corner OF positions.

BTW a shorter player can perform at 1B especially if his infield ratings are good enough (mainly error) but all things even, a 6’0 guy is going to have the better position rating at 1B than the 5’8 guy.


Edit-

I randomly came across this catcher. He have rating in the OF & IF, this was not a thing in prior versions. They are a bit low but fielding ratings are low across the board at the moment. Although there could be improvements, this type of player is meant to transition to 1B or LF with 1B looking like more of an option because of the higher error rating. But keep in mind, staffs can have an effect on TCR dice rolls so his ratings defensively can improve if you have a great coaches in charge of teach IF/OF.

[Bobfather]

Players tend to get better ratings by playing that position. Best done in spring training or minor leagues.

[KBLover]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

I randomly came across this catcher. He have rating in the OF & IF, this was not a thing in prior versions. They are a bit low but fielding ratings are low across the board at the moment. Although there could be improvements, this type of player is meant to transition to 1B or LF with 1B looking like more of an option because of the higher error rating. But keep in mind, staffs can have an effect on TCR dice rolls so his ratings defensively can improve if you have a great coaches in charge of teach IF/OF.

I'm happy to hear that and see your player in the game. These artificial barriers between infield and outfield and catcher always made little sense to me in terms of real baseball. Guys don't stop having physical ability to cover X amount of ground in Y time and throw at Z velocity based on where they stand (or crouch) on the field.

Nice to see the game moving towards breaking these barriers down.

[wallewalls]

Players only get a potential rating at a position if they have experience at said position right?

I'm not worried about not realizing where my players can play, I'll always look at their ratings, but the AI still won't move a CF to LF if they don't have experience, even though they should be more than capable of playing there, which is the real issue IMO.

Fictional players should have experience at multiple positions out of the gate (not 100+ experience outside of perhaps their main position), just so that the AI will be able to move them around in the future. I hate seeing teams stick with a poor fielder and not realizing that they can easily move them elsewhere and solve that problem.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by wallewalls

Players only get a potential rating at a position if they have experience at said position right?

I'm not worried about not realizing where my players can play, I'll always look at their ratings, but the AI still won't move a CF to LF if they don't have experience, even though they should be more than capable of playing there, which is the real issue IMO.

Fictional players should have experience at multiple positions out of the gate (not 100+ experience outside of perhaps their main position), just so that the AI will be able to move them around in the future. I hate seeing teams stick with a poor fielder and not realizing that they can easily move them elsewhere and solve that problem.

They come with experience. Players that are created at certain positions come with experience at other positions that make sense. You’ll see 3B it’s experience in LF/RF with a bit of OF ratings. However you’re not going to see players created with high experience in other positions.

This have been improved for this year version. You will rarely see old guys stuck at positions they shouldn’t be playing at. AI does a good job moving players around this year.

[BarneyRubble]

Originally Posted by wallewalls

Players only get a potential rating at a position if they have experience at said position right?

I'm not worried about not realizing where my players can play, I'll always look at their ratings, but the AI still won't move a CF to LF if they don't have experience, even though they should be more than capable of playing there, which is the real issue IMO.

Fictional players should have experience at multiple positions out of the gate (not 100+ experience outside of perhaps their main position), just so that the AI will be able to move them around in the future. I hate seeing teams stick with a poor fielder and not realizing that they can easily move them elsewhere and solve that problem.

This is the first thing that needs to be addressed regarding OOTP. Either fix the AI managers so they have a clue, or fix the players entering the league to have at least some time at the appropriate positions. When I draft a player who is a 35 at CF (and will NEVER play CF in the MLB) and has no other positions, I go into commissioner mode, and add a 1 to LF, RF, 1B (whatever is appropriate) just so the AI will use him there. I shouldn't have to do that and sadly the AI GMs don't do it. Another option is to have them graded at every position. I ended up with a very good 1B that the AI released. I signed him to a minor league deal, go into commissioner mode and give him a 1 at 1B. By the time he got to the majors, he was a 55 at 1B.

[BarneyRubble]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

This have been improved for this year version. You will rarely see old guys stuck at positions they shouldn’t be playing at. AI does a good job moving players around this year.

I hope this is the case, I haven't noticed it as of yet.

[md40022]

IMO this is a little bit of a slippery slope. I agree with the OP as far as a good defensive SS can usually transition to the OF as needed.

However, if it's added into the game that every single good defensive SS can become a good defensive OFer with relative ease, things might get a little "broken" in regards to natural SSs all of a sudden being all over the OF all the time.

I'm going to use Tim Anderson as an example here. Granted, he's a mediocre defensive SS - but the computer's AI seems to love moving him to 2B despite the White Sox not really having a great SS sitting behind him. They still opt to play him at 2B a lot, for whatever the reasoning might be. If every single SS was given ratings in the OF and 2B, because IRL a true SS should be able to play those other spots, I could see the AI running absolutely wild with that. I could see just a year or two into a sim the 30 starting SS from year 1 of the sim are allllll in different positions now. While I agree with your point when talking about IRL - I just think the AI could turn this into fantasy-world real fast.

[md40022]

Originally Posted by md40022

IMO this is a little bit of a slippery slope. I agree with the OP as far as a good defensive SS can usually transition to the OF as needed.

However, if it's added into the game that every single good defensive SS can become a good defensive OFer with relative ease, things might get a little "broken" in regards to natural SSs all of a sudden being all over the OF all the time.

I'm going to use Tim Anderson as an example here. Granted, he's a mediocre defensive SS - but the computer's AI seems to love moving him to 2B despite the White Sox not really having a great SS sitting behind him. They still opt to play him at 2B a lot, for whatever the reasoning might be. If every single SS was given ratings in the OF and 2B, because IRL a true SS should be able to play those other spots, I could see the AI running absolutely wild with that. I could see just a year or two into a sim the 30 starting SS from year 1 of the sim are allllll in different positions now. While I agree with your point when talking about IRL - I just think the AI could turn this into fantasy-world real fast.

and to take that even a step farther.... how many drafted SS would change positions in the minor leagues? I could see a scenario where 90% of position players in the minor leagues ended up being OFers because so many IFs were converted over by the AI.



I get the OP's point. Specifically in my sim from OOTP22 I had a corner IF who I really wanted to try in the RF or LF but was a little handcuffed with being able to tinker with that. I think it would be a super cool feature to expand on for the actual users, buttttttt I see so many issues with the AI going crazy with it that it might not be practical.

[WyattGOAT]

For all minor leaguers I often use the 'force player at position' feature so they accumulate experience at a new position. Sometimes I'll start them out with 1 experience to get the ball rolling.

For major leaguers moving down the defensive spectrum, I 'cheat' by using the editor and giving them 25-100 experience depending on age, difficulty of transition, etc. For example, an above average CF that I'm moving to left or right I'll usually give 100 since this would not be too challenging IRL. Moving a shortstop to the outfield I'll give them 25 and see if it goes up quickly by organically playing them.

For major leaguers moving up the defensive spectrum, such as second base to shortstop, I don't touch the editor.

[MathBandit]

Originally Posted by md40022

and to take that even a step farther.... how many drafted SS would change positions in the minor leagues?

To be fair, the RL answer to that question is "Almost all of them."

[KBLover]

Originally Posted by md40022

and to take that even a step farther.... how many drafted SS would change positions in the minor leagues? I could see a scenario where 90% of position players in the minor leagues ended up being OFers because so many IFs were converted over by the AI.

Why would that be a problem?

Especially if they have good OF ratings? Not like they would lose their IF ability.

If anything, they are developing a good utility guy, especially if its a "where can he get more playing time to keep developing" situation.

I would rather him move to another spot than get blocked from playing time because the team at the next level already has someone like him at "his position". Move him to where else he might could play so he can keep getting ABs.

I would be more mad if the AI did NOT do that but instead left my solid prospect on the bench because 2B and SS have equally rated players and the AI can't move him to 3B where there's a hole. Move the kid to 3B so he can play (or move someone else, either way move SOMEONE so all three prospects can play). Learning 3B or LF or whatever is a nice side benefit and opens more options for if/when he makes to the highest level.

[md40022]

Originally Posted by MathBandit

To be fair, the RL answer to that question is "Almost all of them."

Yeah. Probably.

[md40022]

Originally Posted by KBLover

Why would that be a problem?

Especially if they have good OF ratings? Not like they would lose their IF ability.

If anything, they are developing a good utility guy, especially if its a "where can he get more playing time to keep developing" situation.

I would rather him move to another spot than get blocked from playing time because the team at the next level already has someone like him at "his position". Move him to where else he might could play so he can keep getting ABs.

I would be more mad if the AI did NOT do that but instead left my solid prospect on the bench because 2B and SS have equally rated players and the AI can't move him to 3B where there's a hole. Move the kid to 3B so he can play. Learning 3B or LF or whatever is a nice side benefit and opens more options for if/when he makes to the highest level.

You can already kinda / sorta do that with some of the "force" rules for the AI to abide by for your top prospects.



And I'm not saying it's a problem. Overall, I agree with the OP's point here. I just simply worry about the AI getting too carried away with it. If there is a way to fine tune this to handcuff the AI a bit, great. Sign me up. But if every SS in the game is going to have a "potential" rating of 90+ for all 3 OF positions than the AI is going to be moving every single SS in the game to the OF, and all of the existing OFers with 40-70 ratings at their positions are going to be sitting on the bench.


I know guys change positions all the time IRL. I know that every MLB 2nd baseman was a minor league shortstop and every minor league 2nd baseman was a college shortstop and every college 2nd baseman was a high school shortstop and every high school 2nd baseman was a little league shortstop.... I know that. I just have concerns that if we open up all positional possibilities like that, the AI could have 95% of players in different positions than they started in 2 years into your sim.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by md40022

IMO this is a little bit of a slippery slope. I agree with the OP as far as a good defensive SS can usually transition to the OF as needed.

However, if it's added into the game that every single good defensive SS can become a good defensive OFer with relative ease, things might get a little "broken" in regards to natural SSs all of a sudden being all over the OF all the time.

I'm going to use Tim Anderson as an example here. Granted, he's a mediocre defensive SS - but the computer's AI seems to love moving him to 2B despite the White Sox not really having a great SS sitting behind him. They still opt to play him at 2B a lot, for whatever the reasoning might be. If every single SS was given ratings in the OF and 2B, because IRL a true SS should be able to play those other spots, I could see the AI running absolutely wild with that. I could see just a year or two into a sim the 30 starting SS from year 1 of the sim are allllll in different positions now. While I agree with your point when talking about IRL - I just think the AI could turn this into fantasy-world real fast.

IRL virtually every right handed hitter drafted out of high school is a shortstop, not because they project to play shortstop in the major leagues but because that’s where you put your best athlete. Even into college, lots and lots of players come out at stronger defensive positions than they can maintain in the pros because of athleticism.

I’m okay with infield and outfield range, arm, etc. being decoupled because they are at the end different skills, but there probably should be a lot more correlation than there is now. A guy with a strong enough arm to catch will have a strong enough arm to play the outfield or third base. He may not have much range but he’ll have a gun. A guy who can play short should usually be able to switch to other positions pretty easily. Robin Yount transitioned into CF as his range eroded at short, for instance. Perhaps OF range should be a function of both a “first step” (which would be a huge component of IF range) and speed but over the years there have been way too many good infielders who’ve been just plain trash in the OF in OOTP.