Its not just a Pitcher Role problem

OOTP Rocks · 03-20-2002, 04:07 PM

I don't see why people are only complaining about just the "pitcher roles" lately. The primary position of the position players has a similar problem associated with it.

You can exploit the system by changing a player's primary position to an inferior one if he can play it. Thus you can cheat to get this player for less money in contract talks. So this exploit doesn't just apply to pitchers. "Inferior position" would be a position that the player can play, but he has a worse defensive rating on (Range rating). A player's contract demand is based on this defensive rating, but only on the defensive rating of his "primary position". So if you have a primary LF that can play CF as well, but he has a worse defensive rating at CF. By switching his primary position to CF, you can get him for cheaper in contract talks. This is about as much issue as the Pitcher role issue, but for some reason everybody seems to be just concerned with the Pitcher role.

Goody · 03-20-2002, 04:14 PM

So per my suggestion for pitchers, it would work the same way for postion players. The computer would just look at the most valuable skill they have, not what their primary is set at.

Perhaps it could be taken a step further and if they have an E rating at a postion it doesn't count unless that is the highest they have for any position.

OOTP Rocks · 03-20-2002, 04:27 PM

[quote]Originally posted by Portlander:
So per my suggestion for pitchers, it would work the same way for postion players. The computer would just look at the most valuable skill they have, not what their primary is set at.

Perhaps it could be taken a step further and if they have an E rating at a postion it doesn't count unless that is the highest they have for any position.<hr></blockquote>

I agree. That sounds like the most simplest solution to patch up this problem for now. Perhaps in a later release (if not later update, then perhaps OOTP5), they can work on having every position a player can play factor into his value (his best position obviously factoring in the most, while his "other positions" having very little factor into value). For now though, I think your solution would be fine.

[ March 20, 2002: Message edited by: OOTP Rocks ]

Goody · 03-20-2002, 04:37 PM

I like that too, every position they play factored in. Would work for pitchers too but might be a tad more complicated, middle relievers being as cheap as they usually are in comparison.

Don't use as an example: Seattle Mariners

Ben E Lou · 03-20-2002, 04:52 PM

I mentioned this when it was announced on March 14th that 4.0b would be released later that day. Amid all the fanboyism and Markus is Godism that was present in that thread, no one responded to or even acknowledged my post about this. Here's what I said then, and it still applies now: [quote]

posted March 14, 2002 02:58 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Markus,Developer:
- Changing pitchers role is no longer possible during the season or
the free agent bidding period!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Actually, I'm concerned about this. At first glance, this sounds great, but upon further thought, I can't help but wonder if this is a rather simplistic way of "fixing" something that is a symptom of a bigger problem. As we all know by now, you could exploit the AI by changing a pitcher's role at an opportune time, particularly if the guy has both starting and relief pitching endurance ratings. You could change a guy who has been used as a MR to a CL or SP right before trading him, and his value increases or change a guy from a SP to MR before renegotiating with him. This "fix" keeps you from being able to do that any longer. However, we all know that pitchers sometimes change roles during the season, particularly guys called up from AAA. They start in AAA, get used from the 'pen in the majors, then move into the rotation when someone gets hurt or falters. My strong suspicion is that the bigger issue is this: the AI doesn't recognize the secondary position(s) that a player can play across the board. This appears to be true in free agent signings, trade evaluations, money asked for in renegotiations, etc. It appears to only see a guy at his primary position. This is the bigger issue that needs to be addressed.<hr></blockquote>I do not think this is something that should wait for OOTP5. Pitcher roles DO make a difference when the AI manages the minor leagues for you. If I have 5 starters in AAA and call one up, the AI should recognize that a guy in a MR role who has SP ratings also needs to be moved into the AAA rotation. It was said somewhere else, but it bears repeating--it appears that rather than fixing a broken feature, the decision was made to eliminate the feature. The trading/FA $$$ issue with pitcher roles can *EASILY* be dealt with by just a little self-discipline. Whatever role the guy has played in the majors is the role you trade him in. Whatever role you intend to use the guy in the majors is the role you offer him FA money in. That part is simple. What NEEDS to be addressed is the fact that the AI doesn't appear to recognize multi-roled players, neither pitchers nor position players. This isn't a little thing, either. Guys who can play multiple positions IRL are obviously more valuable to the team.

bake mcbride · 03-20-2002, 05:05 PM

figuring that there are a fair number of baseball prospectus readers here, this topic is actually quite interesting. the BP guys are frequently pointing out that while mike piazza is an unbelievably valuable catcher, he's only an above average 1B, or, perhaps more pertinently, while alfonso soriano projects as a potential superstar 2B, as a LF he's of questionable value.

i think, if players' values are going to be tied to their ratings, then they should simply be valued by their most valuable position.

the real issue is that player salaries should be completely unrelated to their ratings. for major-league ballplayers, statistics are 95% of a player's salary value. of course, international players have some value related to their scouting reports.

e.g., todd pratt just got a $2M/3 YR contract to catch in 2003 in my first simulation. after hitting .215 with 7 HR. but his ratings are skewed a little high, so he gets the bucks. even in a world where mike matheny gets multimillions, this isn't terribly likely.

now, that said, i suppose it's possible that markus and clay dreslough have tried to compute salaries based on statistics and found it daunting. i can't imagine that it wouldn't be.

[ March 20, 2002: Message edited by: bake mcbride ]

03-20-2002, 04:07 PM	#1
OOTP Rocks Minors (Double A) Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 119	Its not just a Pitcher Role problem I don't see why people are only complaining about just the "pitcher roles" lately. The primary position of the position players has a similar problem associated with it. You can exploit the system by changing a player's primary position to an inferior one if he can play it. Thus you can cheat to get this player for less money in contract talks. So this exploit doesn't just apply to pitchers. "Inferior position" would be a position that the player can play, but he has a worse defensive rating on (Range rating). A player's contract demand is based on this defensive rating, but only on the defensive rating of his "primary position". So if you have a primary LF that can play CF as well, but he has a worse defensive rating at CF. By switching his primary position to CF, you can get him for cheaper in contract talks. This is about as much issue as the Pitcher role issue, but for some reason everybody seems to be just concerned with the Pitcher role.

03-20-2002, 04:14 PM	#2
Goody Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: South Korea Posts: 3,530	So per my suggestion for pitchers, it would work the same way for postion players. The computer would just look at the most valuable skill they have, not what their primary is set at. Perhaps it could be taken a step further and if they have an E rating at a postion it doesn't count unless that is the highest they have for any position. __________________ In the past: Laseron Baseball Association creator. Present: I am Rezulm on PT and OOTP Discord. Future: I wish it was the past.

03-20-2002, 04:27 PM	#3
OOTP Rocks Minors (Double A) Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 119	[quote]Originally posted by Portlander: <strong>So per my suggestion for pitchers, it would work the same way for postion players. The computer would just look at the most valuable skill they have, not what their primary is set at. Perhaps it could be taken a step further and if they have an E rating at a postion it doesn't count unless that is the highest they have for any position.</strong><hr></blockquote> I agree. That sounds like the most simplest solution to patch up this problem for now. Perhaps in a later release (if not later update, then perhaps OOTP5), they can work on having every position a player can play factor into his value (his best position obviously factoring in the most, while his "other positions" having very little factor into value). For now though, I think your solution would be fine. [ March 20, 2002: Message edited by: OOTP Rocks ]</p>

03-20-2002, 04:37 PM	#4
Goody Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: South Korea Posts: 3,530	I like that too, every position they play factored in. Would work for pitchers too but might be a tad more complicated, middle relievers being as cheap as they usually are in comparison. Don't use as an example: Seattle Mariners __________________ In the past: Laseron Baseball Association creator. Present: I am Rezulm on PT and OOTP Discord. Future: I wish it was the past.

03-20-2002, 04:52 PM	#5
Ben E Lou Front Office Football Central Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Souf Cackilacky Posts: 1,762	I mentioned this when it was announced on March 14th that 4.0b would be released later that day. Amid all the fanboyism and Markus is Godism that was present in that thread, <u>no one</u> responded to or even acknowledged my post about this. Here's what I said then, and it still applies now: [quote] posted March 14, 2002 02:58 PM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Markus,Developer: - Changing pitchers role is no longer possible during the season or the free agent bidding period! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Actually, I'm concerned about this. At first glance, this sounds great, but upon further thought, I can't help but wonder if this is a rather simplistic way of "fixing" something that is a symptom of a bigger problem. As we all know by now, you could exploit the AI by changing a pitcher's role at an opportune time, particularly if the guy has both starting and relief pitching endurance ratings. You could change a guy who has been used as a MR to a CL or SP right before trading him, and his value increases or change a guy from a SP to MR before renegotiating with him. This "fix" keeps you from being able to do that any longer. However, we all know that pitchers sometimes change roles during the season, particularly guys called up from AAA. They start in AAA, get used from the 'pen in the majors, then move into the rotation when someone gets hurt or falters. My strong suspicion is that the bigger issue is this: the AI doesn't recognize the secondary position(s) that a player can play across the board. This appears to be true in free agent signings, trade evaluations, money asked for in renegotiations, etc. It appears to only see a guy at his primary position. This is the bigger issue that needs to be addressed.<hr></blockquote>I do not think this is something that should wait for OOTP5. Pitcher roles DO make a difference when the AI manages the minor leagues for you. If I have 5 starters in AAA and call one up, the AI should recognize that a guy in a MR role who has SP ratings also needs to be moved into the AAA rotation. It was said somewhere else, but it bears repeating--it appears that rather than fixing a broken feature, the decision was made to eliminate the feature. The trading/FA $$$ issue with pitcher roles can EASILY be dealt with by just a little self-discipline. Whatever role the guy has played in the majors is the role you trade him in. Whatever role you intend to use the guy in the majors is the role you offer him FA money in. That part is simple. What NEEDS to be addressed is the fact that the AI doesn't appear to recognize multi-roled players, neither pitchers nor position players. This isn't a little thing, either. Guys who can play multiple positions IRL are obviously more valuable to the team.

03-20-2002, 05:05 PM	#6
bake mcbride Bat Boy Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 10	figuring that there are a fair number of baseball prospectus readers here, this topic is actually quite interesting. the BP guys are frequently pointing out that while mike piazza is an unbelievably valuable catcher, he's only an above average 1B, or, perhaps more pertinently, while alfonso soriano projects as a potential superstar 2B, as a LF he's of questionable value. i think, if players' values are going to be tied to their ratings, then they should simply be valued by their most valuable position. the real issue is that player salaries should be completely unrelated to their ratings. for major-league ballplayers, statistics are 95% of a player's salary value. of course, international players have some value related to their scouting reports. e.g., todd pratt just got a $2M/3 YR contract to catch in 2003 in my first simulation. after hitting .215 with 7 HR. but his ratings are skewed a little high, so he gets the bucks. even in a world where mike matheny gets multimillions, this isn't terribly likely. now, that said, i suppose it's possible that markus and clay dreslough have tried to compute salaries based on statistics and found it daunting. i can't imagine that it wouldn't be. [ March 20, 2002: Message edited by: bake mcbride ]</p> __________________ could it be possible that von hayes was an underrated player?