Can someone help me figure this out?

[bigMatt]

Just had OOTP since June, and have probably left it alone no more than 2 days in a row since I got it. Love the game.

But I am confoundedly confused.

Have tried the manual, which I find helpful in the games mechanics, but bewilderingly sparse in the general philosophy of it.

Here's some context:

- I am using the Gambo DB.

- I am playing a historical scenario. I've done this 3 times now. I've started as an expansion team. The first time I went from 1969 until about 1975. Then I started a new solo effort starting as the expansion Angels in 61 then jumped to the Colt 45's in 62.

My questions surround the accuracy as a sim, and the general idea of scouting and, well, really what to believe regarding my scout's assessment of talent.

I've posed variations of my questions and have yet to get any kind of response that makes sense to me. Here goes, all in one shot:

I've played strat-o-matic for years. I've played historical leagues, and have drafted with an eye toward peak performance years. So I might snag, say, a Bill Faul knowing he has one killer year and keep him reserved until the year he busted out in real life.

This doesn't work at all in OOTP. Guys don't seem to follow their career spikes much at all, especially if they were mediocre in the majority of their careers. OTOH, some guys manage to super-exceed their historical performances. Both Bud Zipfel and Don Dillard, scrubs at best in real life, have had 30 homer seasons approaching a 1.000 OPS.

On the one hand, I like the unpredicatability. I don't want a straight sim.

On the other hand, I can't figure out any way to logically EXPLAIN it. My scouts tell me a guy like Jim Roland is a half-star performer during the peak of his career when he went several seasons with a WHIP around 1.20 and an ERA under 3.00. And, interestingly, he performs pretty much as he should. Since my scout is a 20 across the board, shouldn't he predict better value than what he's indicating? And Dillard? He finishes his 30 homer season only to be benched by his team throughout the following season - not even getting the chance to recreate the previous season's unlikely magic.

OOTP obviously isn't a sim. But if I look at it as generally fiction with some historical context sprinkled in, it still doesn't quite make sense since my scout seems generally clueless overall.

Oh, and the whole minor league thing. Everyone promotes guys to the regular lineup almost immediately after they are drafted, even guys who took a couple of years to pay off in real life. And they are performing as all-stars. For instance, Lou Brock is hitting over .300 with 15 homers the very season after he's drafted, despite the fact that reality would dictate a much more modest result.

Don't exactly want to prevent all these things from occuring, per se. I just want to understand why they happen so I can manage more effectively.

Can anyone enlighten me?

[f.montoya]

Originally Posted by bigMatt

My scouts tell me a guy like Jim Roland is a half-star performer during the peak of his career when he went several seasons with a WHIP around 1.20 and an ERA under 3.00. And, interestingly, he performs pretty much as he should. Since my scout is a 20 across the board, shouldn't he predict better value than what he's indicating?

Kinda like the scouts in real life that didn't put much value on that guy that, some time ago, was drafted in the 500th round...I forgot his name...uh..um...

Oh yeah, Albert Pujols!!

In all seriousness though, scouts are created with different degrees of quality in the game but that doesn't mean a straight, across the board leves of accuracy. It more means that the better scouts have a better chance at being accurate. Even the best scouts will blow chunks with evaluations of players and the less established a player is, the less likely any scout will be totally accurate.

[RchW]

Are you using recalc? Your examples suggest not.

[f.montoya]

Originally Posted by bigMatt

I've played strat-o-matic for years. I've played historical leagues, and have drafted with an eye toward peak performance years. So I might snag, say, a Bill Faul knowing he has one killer year and keep him reserved until the year he busted out in real life.

This doesn't work at all in OOTP. Guys don't seem to follow their career spikes much at all, especially if they were mediocre in the majority of their careers...

As RchW asks about recalc, I thought I'd better differ with you here in that OOTP does follow real career development ups and downs if you enable the recalc option. But sounds to me that you don't really want to play that way and simply want better scouting.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by f.montoya

As RchW asks about recalc, I thought I'd better differ with you here in that OOTP does follow real career development ups and downs if you enable the recalc option. But sounds to me that you don't really want to play that way and simply want better scouting.

Well the problem, though not for me, is that if you don't use recalc, development is realistic but random. That means the real life scrub can end up with 30HR and Joe DiMaggio can be a mediocre left fielder.

[f.montoya]

As far as scouting goes, are you saying that you do not want any of these guys?

ESPN - Baseball Tonight Clubhouse: Delgado's turnaround - MLB

[bigMatt]

Originally Posted by RchW

Are you using recalc? Your examples suggest not.

3 year recalc

Edit - which incidentally really throws things out of kilter, in that an unknown guy is going along at a wonderful pace for a couple of seasons and all of a sudden he is unrosterable.

[bigMatt]

I want to make sure you understand I'm not complaining. I just want to understand what's going on a little better. I don't understand, for instance, how Luis Tiant could be a lousy pitcher his entire career, even with recalc on. And yet he is terrible in my league. It's not that I necessarily want accuracy. I just want to understand what's happening. It's obviously not a sim in the truest sense of the word. Guys who perform a certain way in a certain season just don't do it in OOTP. How else to explain guys who took several years to develop becoming superstars their rookie season (Lou Brock, for one). If I can't rely on history, and I can't rely on scouting, I don't really understand at all how to evaluate these guys.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by bigMatt

3 year recalc

Edit - which incidentally really throws things out of kilter, in that an unknown guy is going along at a wonderful pace for a couple of seasons and all of a sudden he is unrosterable.

That does confuse me. The whole point of recalc is to give an element of "replay" to that type of historical.

When you started the league there are two ratings questions based on AB for hitters and IP for pitchers. Adjust and weaken I believe. Is there any chance you didn't weaken enough players that had few AB?

[bigMatt]

Originally Posted by RchW

That does confuse me. The whole point of recalc is to give an element of "replay" to that type of historical.

When you started the league there are two ratings questions based on AB for hitters and IP for pitchers. Adjust and weaken I believe. Is there any chance you didn't weaken enough players that had few AB?

I don't think so. Put it this way, I didn't consciously adjust those settings at all.

Maybe an every year recalc makes the game a true sim? Then again, it doesn't answer the over-producing rookie conundrum.

I have to admit, I do like the occasional Bud Zipfel career year phenomena. I guess I just wish I could translate it into something I recognize from potential ratings or other data so I can adjust my management strategy for it. Chances are, a Bud Zipfel on my team will never have opportunity to perform his ahistoric heroics because I can't divorce myself from the knowledge of true historic performance. If I understood the game better, it would liberate me from my current (misplaced) dependence on historic data.

[Greatgrampa]

Originally Posted by bigMatt

I don't think so. Put it this way, I didn't consciously adjust those settings at all.

Maybe an every year recalc makes the game a true sim? Then again, it doesn't answer the over-producing rookie conundrum.

I have to admit, I do like the occasional Bud Zipfel career year phenomena. I guess I just wish I could translate it into something I recognize from potential ratings or other data so I can adjust my management strategy for it. Chances are, a Bud Zipfel on my team will never have opportunity to perform his ahistoric heroics because I can't divorce myself from the knowledge of true historic performance. If I understood the game better, it would liberate me from my current (misplaced) dependence on historic data.

This is the reason that I use fictional players even with a historical league. It is just too easy when you know the players who are good and not good. And sure, even with recalc on, one cannot expect a game to be able to be so accurate that it duplicates ever players stats. Just impossible to do, IMHO. I can understand your frustration though, but try a fictional player league and see if you don't enjoy it more!

[bigMatt]

Originally Posted by Greatgrampa

This is the reason that I use fictional players even with a historical league. It is just too easy when you know the players who are good and not good. And sure, even with recalc on, one cannot expect a game to be able to be so accurate that it duplicates ever players stats. Just impossible to do, IMHO. I can understand your frustration though, but try a fictional player league and see if you don't enjoy it more!

This sounds like a good plan. Thanks - I may abandon this league for a venture out into the world of fiction.

[Raidergoo]

Originally Posted by bigMatt

Maybe an every year recalc makes the game a true sim? Then again, it doesn't answer the over-producing rookie conundrum.

Recalc will drive you crazy, especially combined with scouting and Baseball-Reference.com - Major League Baseball Statistics and History.

[bigMatt]

Originally Posted by Raidergoo

Recalc will drive you crazy, especially combined with scouting and Baseball-Reference.com - Major League Baseball Statistics and History.

So how do you maintain OOTP sanity? Do you avoid historical replay altogether? Or is there a better way and I just haven't landed on it yet?

[Raidergoo]

Originally Posted by bigMatt

So how do you maintain OOTP sanity? Do you avoid historical replay altogether? Or is there a better way and I just haven't landed on it yet?

I play 21st Century baseball, with real teams, largely fictional players, and with scouting. See sig for link.

What is your objective?

[bigMatt]

Originally Posted by Raidergoo

I play 21st Century baseball, with real teams, largely fictional players, and with scouting. See sig for link.

What is your objective?

I've played sims for years, and enjoy especially historical replays. I really like the manager/GM capabilities of OOTP, and the unpredictability is fun but I'd like to nail down a bit better understanding of why things happen the way they do.

Objective? To sim a solo universe from 61 to probably the early '90's - a time I enjoyed baseball the most. With a somewhat controlled unpredictability to it.

[Raidergoo]

In you case,I'd start the sim in 1954, run it for to 1960, turn OFF recalc, and I'd hesitate to use scouting. Take over your team as normal in 1960.

I'd start in 1954 (I started in 1871 for my 2020 league), because the way the DB imports players a little early, you may miss a couple players if you start the sim the same year as you start to play. The only real way to avoid this is to start at the beginning, then sim 60 seasons, but that may take too long.

Recalc is off. It will enhance unpredictability. Mays may flop, and the other Aaron brother may hit 500 HR, but it should give a good resemblance to reality. Players will age differently, too. You can see that in Pete Rose, who ususally hangs it up in the late 1970's with 3000 hits or so. If you use recalc, it is a straightjacket. Players should perform as expected.

Since you are very familiar with the era, any scouting report you get may cause heartburn.

[Greatgrampa]

Originally Posted by Raidergoo

In you case,I'd start the sim in 1954, run it for to 1960, turn OFF recalc, and I'd hesitate to use scouting. Take over your team as normal in 1960.

I'd start in 1954 (I started in 1871 for my 2020 league), because the way the DB imports players a little early, you may miss a couple players if you start the sim the same year as you start to play. The only real way to avoid this is to start at the beginning, then sim 60 seasons, but that may take too long.

Recalc is off. It will enhance unpredictability. Mays may flop, and the other Aaron brother may hit 500 HR, but it should give a good resemblance to reality. Players will age differently, too. You can see that in Pete Rose, who ususally hangs it up in the late 1970's with 3000 hits or so. If you use recalc, it is a straightjacket. Players should perform as expected.

Since you are very familiar with the era, any scouting report you get may cause heartburn.

Actually I use historical leagues but fictional players. I just could never be comfortable using recalc. That's not what I want in a league I play, even if it is a real historical team.

Anyway, I concur with your analysis of recalc. Who wants to give your league a straitjacket? I suppose some do but I would find that totally boring. I would turn scouting off as well and just go by stats. Scouting is a part of this sim that just isn't very accurate IMHO, no matter how good your scouts are..

[bigMatt]

Originally Posted by Raidergoo

In you case,I'd start the sim in 1954, run it for to 1960, turn OFF recalc, and I'd hesitate to use scouting. Take over your team as normal in 1960.

I'd start in 1954 (I started in 1871 for my 2020 league), because the way the DB imports players a little early, you may miss a couple players if you start the sim the same year as you start to play. The only real way to avoid this is to start at the beginning, then sim 60 seasons, but that may take too long.

Recalc is off. It will enhance unpredictability. Mays may flop, and the other Aaron brother may hit 500 HR, but it should give a good resemblance to reality. Players will age differently, too. You can see that in Pete Rose, who ususally hangs it up in the late 1970's with 3000 hits or so. If you use recalc, it is a straightjacket. Players should perform as expected.

Since you are very familiar with the era, any scouting report you get may cause heartburn.

Part of the reason I enjoy starting in '61 is I love the idea of drafting, so building from an expansion team has appeal.

If I have recalc off and no scouting, seems I'd be flying totally in the dark. Which is fun until I get fired midway through the season because I had no way of knowing true value of guys.

Then again. Sounds like a tightrope walk. I like it...

[bigMatt]

Dola, very much appreciate the suggestions her