Is there anyway to alter how much emphasis on prior years?

[TRanger]

I hope this is the right forum for this question...

I'm a veteran at playing OotP 6.5 and really liked the way you can alter the player ratings by putting different emphasis on past years of play. I was just wondering if there was a way to do this in OotPBB 2006, because so far it looks like the ratings are only based on the year before the season you start... For example by using the Lahman database for the 2005 players David Dellucci (who in his whole career only had last year as a good year) is a monster, while a player such as Brad Wilkerson who struggled in 2005 completely sucks. Is there any way to remedy this?

[battists]

Originally Posted by TRanger

I hope this is the right forum for this question...

I'm a veteran at playing OotP 6.5 and really liked the way you can alter the player ratings by putting different emphasis on past years of play. I was just wondering if there was a way to do this in OotPBB 2006, because so far it looks like the ratings are only based on the year before the season you start... For example by using the Lahman database for the 2005 players David Dellucci (who in his whole career only had last year as a good year) is a monster, while a player such as Brad Wilkerson who struggled in 2005 completely sucks. Is there any way to remedy this?

Sorry for the brief post, but check out the Game Guide, in the section on importing historical leagues. There are some options for this during the import process.

[TRanger]

Well I looked over it but I still don't see an option for any emphasis on previous years, so I'm probably out of luck for this in this version. Hopefully it'll be included in

In case you might have misunderstood what I meant. I'll use Brad Wilkerson as an example because he was the first player I noticed it with. Using the Lahman database, in 2003 at age 26 he batted .268 with a .380 OBP with 19 HR. Two years ago at 27 years of age he hit .255 but kept a similar OBP with .374 and blasted 32 homeruns. Last year he was troubled by his new ballfield and had a couple of injuries and fell back down to .248 BA .351 OBP, and 11 HR. Now when I imported him over in 2005 his stats are only based on that last year, so at age 29 he's pretty much washed up as a player since his homerun power is pretty much nonexistant. Now if this was an older player I can understand tons of emphasis on the year before, but with a young player who just might have had a couple of injuries the year before there should at least have some emphasis on the past couple of years before that.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by TRanger

Well I looked over it but I still don't see an option for any emphasis on previous years, so I'm probably out of luck for this in this version. Hopefully it'll be included in

In case you might have misunderstood what I meant. I'll use Brad Wilkerson as an example because he was the first player I noticed it with. Using the Lahman database, in 2003 at age 26 he batted .268 with a .380 OBP with 19 HR. Two years ago at 27 years of age he hit .255 but kept a similar OBP with .374 and blasted 32 homeruns. Last year he was troubled by his new ballfield and had a couple of injuries and fell back down to .248 BA .351 OBP, and 11 HR. Now when I imported him over in 2005 his stats are only based on that last year, so at age 29 he's pretty much washed up as a player since his homerun power is pretty much nonexistant. Now if this was an older player I can understand tons of emphasis on the year before, but with a young player who just might have had a couple of injuries the year before there should at least have some emphasis on the past couple of years before that.

The game has never used stats from any other year than the year you import to determine current ratings...you can change settings to tell it what to base his potential ratings on, but the current ratings have always been from that specific season unless you are using a modified database.

There did used to be an option to have the AI evaluate a player based on some percentage of stats and ratings, but that was only in regards to creating lineups/making trades, etc...it never had anything to do with the creation of the player.

[JimG]

Originally Posted by andymac

There did used to be an option to have the AI evaluate a player based on some percentage of stats and ratings, but that was only in regards to creating lineups/making trades, etc...it never had anything to do with the creation of the player.

That confused me too, for a long time I thought it set which years to base ratings on but then I figured out that it just tweaked what scouts said about players.

[BaseballMan]

So far i think the game seems to do a better job than in the past. I created a historical league using the lahman database 5.3 just to see how Cobb would do. I didnt make an ychanges to default settings and Cobb batted .329 and 677 steals and .313 and 450 steals in another. In both he played from 1905 until i ended each league around 1919. Of course thats just one player but usually he would do poorly unless you edited his ratings or used a modified database. I would like to get a 19th century league going so i can see how Cy Young does from the start. For me the game has never quite figured out what to do with Cy. First 3 years hes a starter, next 5 a reliever, then a starter, then a reliever. Someitmes he even went to closer and back to reliever or starter.

[SC_Dawg]

Originally Posted by BaseballMan

So far i think the game seems to do a better job than in the past. I created a historical league using the lahman database 5.3 just to see how Cobb would do. I didnt make an ychanges to default settings and Cobb batted .329 and 677 steals and .313 and 450 steals in another. In both he played from 1905 until i ended each league around 1919. Of course thats just one player but usually he would do poorly unless you edited his ratings or used a modified database. I would like to get a 19th century league going so i can see how Cy Young does from the start. For me the game has never quite figured out what to do with Cy. First 3 years hes a starter, next 5 a reliever, then a starter, then a reliever. Someitmes he even went to closer and back to reliever or starter.

I believe a large part of the starter to reliever and back problem is in the fact that the game in the past really did not handle the reliever role correctly in the very early days of historical baseball. When you go back and see pitchers would start 40+ games and complete an overwhelming majority of them by default then relievers would rarely be used. In a large part IMO this was largely due to the game not using anything but the 25 man roster we are used to seeing in modern day.

For instance in 1892 the Cleveland Spiders used a total of 17 players the entire season. Their pitching staff had 140 complete games in a 153 starts. As a matter of fact the entire league had 1,623 complete games in 1,842 total games. For a 12 team league this would be an average of 86.8% of the time the starter finished the game. Compare this to 189 complete games last year in 4860 starts or 3.9%.

I would be curious to see if someone set the game up with more accurate roster sizes and more accurate team strategies, i.e. don't pull the starter unless his arm was about to fall off, what would happen.