How long does it take to win a world series?

[TylerG30]

Was just wondering what some of you guys thought would be average, or what has happened in your leagues. I started with the White Sox in 2010(93 losses) and just won my first in 2018. I like the unknown factors in the game, but have yet to see any crazy injuries or stories like I have read here. Which I guess is good, because I'm only tracking messages from my organization

[damientheomen3]

In my main OOTP league, I have quite the story actually.

A member was complaining about how 'easy' the game was and that you can win 100 games easy, just get a bunch of 1 star players. So I called his bluff and did so on a new game. Lost 104 the first year, 128 the second. I was going to delete the league since it was just a whatever thing, but I decided to keep it since it'd be a fun rebuilding project. Next year, we lose 108, a 20 game improvement. Next up, I believe it was 96, so a 12 game improvement. Then I believe it was 88 losses, an 8 game improvement, before the next year we went 92-70 and tied for the division (8 teams, 4 per conference, only 1 makes playoffs). We lost the tiebreaker game to miss out, but I expanded the league by 4 teams to go up to 12 and made it so the top 2 teams per conference make the playoffs. We won over 100 the next year, but lost in the first round of the playoffs. The next year we won 88 and missed the playoffs, then 2 more years of 100 wins and first round exits. Then, we struggled into a 94 win season, and won it all, after being such a horrible team for so long. I'm now 19 seasons into this league, having won two championships (back to back) and just had a streak of like 14 consecutive winning seasons snapped after going 67-95 last year. This league has really grown on me.

[TylerG30]

wow, that is a great story....and stellar improvements! I just got my first 100 win sseason (100-62) last season, and was able to basically keep the team together. So, we will see how it turns out this year

[Chicagofan76]

in my 1871-2010 historical league with the Chicago White Stockings 1871-1881 i won 4? world Series...in 9 yrs with the Chicago White Sox i have had 1 winning sn... **** happens.

and ask the Cubs how long it takes to win a World Series.

[RamMan12]

As a New Englander who also loves the Cubs, I can tell you that it takes 86 years for one of your two favorite teams to pull off winning a WS.

However in OOTP, I usually build up my team for 3-5 years and then turn into a Yankees-esque dynasty. In 50 years in my main league, I have won 26 championships.

[Biggio509]

Maybe it is because I play the Astros in MMP but it seems to vary. I either "improve" the team by getting the free agent starter where the wheels fall off at 35 or the consistent low 3 ERA guy with good movement who suddenly pitches in the 4's or 5's for reasons I can't fathom while my 5th starter that had a 5 ERA last year is pitching in the 3s for ERA only to see him go to high 4s next year.

Lets not mention my young phenom whom the scouts said he had 14 CH current and potential in the first year who hit around .250 with decent power to be rerated to 7 CH with decent power the next year and drop to .230 or the guy hitting .300 with 30 HRs in the minors who hit .220 his first year in the ML. Although, he did very well from the sophmore year on. Yeah this game is way too easy. Maybe if you have financials turned off and play a quickstart with the Nationals or Marlins.

I have found starting with an AI drafted in the first year is pretty hard. Your scouting is still somewhat bad since scouts haven't seen the guys long. You are overstocked in some positions in the minors and completely anemic in others. Your first task is cutting a bunch or 30 yo+ players who the AI drafted because they had the best current ability that round and no real prospects were left.

On the other hand, if I draft the team I usually at least get close to the playoffs and sometimes win it all within 3 to 5 years. When the AI drafts, I am lucky to still be with the original team in 5 years. You just have so many more big moves to make and such bad information early on. Then on top of that most good FAs are old so you don't know if they are the next Nolan Ryan or if next year the wheels fall off eg., my late 30's Cy Yong winner who lost a pitch after getting injured in the second and due to aging too no doubt. He went from Cy Young to shouldn't be in the bullpen but we couldn't eat the contract.

It might be easier the way Markus does it to sim for a few decades and pick a team after that. Markus says he picks the worst one but you pick anyone you want. Doing the draft yourself seems almost a little too easy but still can be challenging. Letting the AI draft can be insanely difficult or just difficult if you are lucky.

[Curve Ball Dave]

It took me ten seasons, and a ton of money on a free agent who the best player in the game, to finally win the big one. And I only won the WS after a third place finish the year before.

[Malleus Dei]

I keep telling you guys: play stats only if you really want a challenge.

[Fircoal]

5 years in mah main league and still haven't gotten it yet. Last year went 97-65, so this year will be promising. :3

Sadly my rival team as won it twice though xwx;;;

[MizzouRah]

Glad you finally won one Tyler!

I'm excited for my club this season!

[TylerG30]

Thanks MizzouRah.....and yes, I resigned Pujols again lol. Heis 38 now, but wanted him to have a shot at the HR record. And he's a fan favorite, and wanted to keep my fan loyalty at 100/100

[damientheomen3]

Originally Posted by Malleus Dei

I keep telling you guys: play stats only if you really want a challenge.

It is a challenge to play stats only, but I prefer playing with real ratings. However, if a player with good ratings has a horrible statistical season, I'll do the realistic thing and trade him, release him or not offer him a contract. Really it's not that hard to have difficulties with ratings on; just don't sign big free agents (I only sign utility players or stop gap guys to 1 year deals, or relievers), never edit any players, and use the loyalty factor and keep your guys who have been performing great for you but are slowing down on your roster. That's the best way I've been able to replicate the natural cycle of good to bad for my team.

[tonymission]

i won one in 2014 with the braves... 103-59.. heyward was .343 / 40 / 134 and a gold glove.. the next season he got a career ending injury and i lost my urge to play until now.

just downloaded the mlb all in one mod and plan to restart the league from scratch... i cant play without my favorite player

[TylerG30]

Im still kinda new, what's the all in one mod?

[scott1964]

Started my league in 1871 and won in 1871, and lost in 1875.

[BusterKing]

Originally Posted by Malleus Dei

I keep telling you guys: play stats only if you really want a challenge.

So what do you base your assessment of players with? Just looking at the stats doesn't give you much information about a player so it's a total crap shoot. Specially when drafting, then what? Sure doesn't sound interesting to me. I like to see what talent players have, like having scouts in real life giving me their reports and findings about a player.

Sure you make the game harder playing it your way but I can't see the fun in that.

[Chicagofan76]

in drafting in my EBL league and the other fantasy league i deleted i always looked at stats 1st.....my teams r known for defense speed and pitching, so even if i draft a 5 star player i always look to see hoe many errors chances putouts he has and if he can play more then 1 position. i never use a DH if i can help it.....on my current Chicago White Sox MAL league team my 1B can play 6 positions 1B is his worst position my SS can play all 9 including pitching but he is a custom made player.

[BusterKing]

Originally Posted by Chicagofan76

in drafting in my EBL league and the other fantasy league i deleted i always looked at stats 1st.....my teams r known for defense speed and pitching, so even if i draft a 5 star player i always look to see hoe many errors chances putouts he has and if he can play more then 1 position. i never use a DH if i can help it.....on my current Chicago White Sox MAL league team my 1B can play 6 positions 1B is his worst position my SS can play all 9 including pitching but he is a custom made player.

I don't know if your post was met as a comment about mine but just in case.

Of course I always check the stats out of the players but in conjunction with the player ratings. Then it gives me a pretty good assessment of what the players are about and what to expect from them. To only look at the stats, well tons of info is missing.

[Chicagofan76]

i dont look just at stats, but i do look at them 1st.....in my 1871-2010 historical league i look at stats pretty much only along with speed and range ratings for players that i sign in offseason.....but thats different i also look at what they did in real life too.....but the guys that played 1 game and batted .500 i dont draft i draft the guys that played 11 sns as a .220 hhitter so far i suck so maybe my plan isnt working some notables on my 1892 Chicago White Sox r connioe mack, charlie comiskey, Cy Young, Pud Galvin, Clark Griffithm Hugh Duffy, Dummy Hoy, Cap Anson plus 1 custom player my GG grandpa who now is over 400 wins 4500 k

[Biggio509]

Originally Posted by damientheomen3

It is a challenge to play stats only, but I prefer playing with real ratings. However, if a player with good ratings has a horrible statistical season, I'll do the realistic thing and trade him, release him or not offer him a contract. Really it's not that hard to have difficulties with ratings on; just don't sign big free agents (I only sign utility players or stop gap guys to 1 year deals, or relievers), never edit any players, and use the loyalty factor and keep your guys who have been performing great for you but are slowing down on your roster. That's the best way I've been able to replicate the natural cycle of good to bad for my team.

Although, I do this as well I sometime wonder if I am giving myself a bit of an advantage. No matter how I set AI evaluation the AI seems to set lineups and do promotions and demotions heavily based on ratings. I went through a short phase of the I have a manager might as well use him attitude. I let the manager do the lineups. A guy with good ratings who wasn't hitting his weight was put in the lead off spot. Same goes for a guy with good HR ratings but not hitting HRs in the 4 spot.

Thinking about it from what I have read it may be the heavy emphasis on current stats in my AI evaluation from what I understand these are pro-rated in some way possibly making them much weaker in the formula than I thought. I haven't tried AI evaluation of 0% ratings and the rest stats I wonder if that would make the AI perform more realistically, ie. pulling guys who aren't hitting. I go back and forth on that particularly with young players. As an Astros fan I have seen many guys the organization was getting good scouting on left in the linuep or pitching rotation too long because they really believed these guys just needed more development.

Honestly, I think stats only is easier in some ways. Except the young guys. I mostly use stats but sometimes it is the bad scouting that makes me hold on to a player when I should not. I get into the sure hit 150 this year but my scout says he has potential it was just his first year out of HS thinking. Sometimes later performances justifies this sometimes it doesn't.

If you play with scouting on you have to mostly rely on stats. The scouting is really more for potential until they are at AA or AAA. At that point age and stats can easily tell you if you have a career minor leaguer, a possible backup, a serviceable starter, or a star in the making. If you play with scouting you know how brutal the next report might be especially if you have a new scouting director. With stats only, you have to go with your gut more as to if this guy is playing at the top of his game and although he is good at say A ball will never reach AAA. With scouting you have someone guessing that for you and sometimes he is right and more likely he is not unless you have a great scout and high scouting accuracy.

Also with scouting bad reports can be a reason you don't promote a guy when you should. You have two guys who have stats that look like they can be promoted. For one the scout says he is as good as he is going to get. For the other it says he still has potential. You might promote the second and find the scout was wrong on both players.