Strategy Settings (Garlon & Others)

[jdw]

Any changes to the Guide for OOTP 22 with the new database changes?

Steam: Setting Up a Historical Game

I'm also curious about this aspect in the Guide:

"Base Current Ratings On: Real Stats"

in contrast to this in the Manual:

Base Ratings on

This option allows you to choose between the pure Lahman statistical database and Garlon and Spritze's neutralized database. There are two options in this drop-down, used to determine the current ratings assigned to imported players.

* Real Stats: The "standard Lahman" option. Current player ratings will be assigned based on a player's historical statistics. So, in this case, a player who played in a hitter-friendly park throughout his career could end up with inflated ratings.

* Neutralized Stats: The "Garlon and Spritze" option. Current player ratings will be assigned based on a player's neutralized statistics, giving perhaps the most accurate assessment of individual player ratings on an even playing field.

Where the Manual points to Neutralized being Spritze and your option. It's a little confusing.

Any input would be great. Back to taking a spin in OOTP for the first time since OOTP19 and looking to run some 1970s starting point leagues with a few franchises.

Thanks!

John

[Brad K]

Here is a thread on the subject that discusses the issues in depth.

https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/...d.php?t=331438

It's stated the manual is wrong, that real stats aren't real but rather are neutralized against the era_ballparks file. Which means since the player ratings are different, neutralized stats must be neutralized against something else.

Edit Note; Fix link

[thehef]

I don't know that these have been specifically answered, but I'd like to know the following:

- If you are using real transactions (thus, players playing in the same ballparks as in real life) and real stats, then the affect will be...

- If you are using real transactions (thus, players playing in the same ballparks as in real life) and neutralized stats, then the affect will be...

- If you are not using real transactions (thus, players not necessarily playing in the same ballparks as in real life) and are using real stats, then the affect will be...

- If you are not using real transactions (thus, players not necessarily playing in the same ballparks as in real life) and are using neutralized stats, then the affect will be...

The middle ground between the first two above & last two above is when you don't have historical txns but have players importing to their actual/historical teams. Then you end up with many - but not all - guys playing in their actual home parks.

Can anyone clarify this?

Originally Posted by jdw

Where the Manual points to Neutralized being Spritze and your option. It's a little confusing.

A little?

Hey Brad, fyi that link doesn't work.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by thehef

Hey Brad, fyi that link doesn't work.

Thanks for letting me know! (I think I fixed it.)

[Brad K]

This is such an amazing game I feel guilty criticizing things.

However it seems clear to me that the rating system and the neutralization system cannot produce realistic results without the heavy hand of the league totals being applied, and applying league totals fixes the league while leaving individual players wanting.

[jdw]

Hi Brad!

I read that post before posting this one. Garlon does come into it and does talk about Real/Neut, but not exactly explicitly on which to use. He also doesn't talk about his overall settings in 22 vs 19 relative to his older Guide. Thought it might be a good time to just ask the broader question. Especially given how much work Garlon did on 22 in helping update the historical model.

John

[jdw]

Just for clarity, here's another example of why it would be interesting if Garlon has updated thoughts on the Guide.

Guide:

Base Fielding Ratings On: Entire Career

Newer Post:

Suggestion for historical fielding ratings

For a career league I think 3yr fielding is the best option. Players will move to new positions as they really did if you use that. With career fielding the player ratings will be the same each season and they will have eligibility at every position they should be eligible to play. With career fielding though there will probably me more of a premium on finding true CF and SS. For example, Andre Dawson came up during testing and if you use career fielding he will import with his career ratings as a RF, but he will have eligibility as a CF. However, the positional ratings for RF are lower than CF so if you use him as CF he will not be very good there. If you use 3yr though he will be able to play CF properly during the seasons he played there.

That's a super interesting comment from Garlon, and exactly the thing I've thought about in the 70s/80s. Dawson moved.

Pete Rose is another example. I would starting various seasons between 1972-1982 depending on team. In the case of the Reds it would be 1972 post-Morgan trade. Rose is well removed from the 2B years, a season removed from RF, just starting his LF run, and then moved to 3B in 1975 and 1B in 1979. I wouldn't want to see him playing 2B at all, either simming the Reds or running another team like the Dodgers. If I felt like simming the Whitey Cardinals starting is say 1981, I wouldn't even want to see Rose popping up at 3B anymore. :-)

So given his efforts helping OOTP Dev with the historical model, it would be interesting to know if the new version has caused him to change some of his settings.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by jdw

Hi Brad!

I read that post before posting this one. Garlon does come into it and does talk about Real/Neut, but not exactly explicitly on which to use. He also doesn't talk about his overall settings in 22 vs 19 relative to his older Guide. Thought it might be a good time to just ask the broader question. Especially given how much work Garlon did on 22 in helping update the historical model.

John

I hope you post prompts more comments from those in the know. They stopped in the other thread like "that's all folks!"

[jdw]

It looks like Garlon has taken a few weeks off. No massive rush.

[Reed]

Excellent thread. Garlon has done a ton of work making the game better. I think the above questions are worded very well and I hope we.get a response since I will probably start a new league in a couple months.

[Brad K]

Yea. I bought 22 months ago but have only used it for testing. I left my Pirates game on 21.

[Garlon]

If you are playing a career league I suggest using 5yr recalc, neutralized stats, player development disabled, fielding 3yr, pitching stamina career, and imports 200/67 for batters, and 25/8 for pitchers, player fatigue set to High, and pitching rotation mode set to strict for every era.

The neutralized statistics are a completely new rebuild from previous versions of the game.

I suggest setting position players to 14 for teams for any era too.

Rotation
1871-1881: 2
1882-1903: 3
1904-1919: 4
1920-2020: 5

Relievers:
1871-1910: 2
1911-1935: 3
1936-1960: 4
1961-1976: 5
1977-1992: 6
1993-2007: 7
2008-2020: 8

Pitcher Stamina set to Normal for rotation modes of 3 or more.

If you want to do a replay league with real transactions you are probably fine using the default OOTP settings with real stats I suppose and 1yr fielding and pitcher stamina.

The fielding ratings and fielding results for players are vastly improved with this game. The fielding ratings were completely rebuilt for 1871-2020 and I think they produce really good results.

For strategy settings I use for all eras, relievers normal, PH for pitchers normal, PH for position players very rarely, defensive substitutions very rarely, stealing very often, bunting often, hit and run very often, infield shifts never. I probably need to do some tests with the hit and run setting but as far as I know when setting that to very often you get more realistic runs scored per game for all seasons.

I turn off injuries, storylines, and the coaching system.

[jdw]

Garlon,

Thank you for the response. I, and lots of other people here, appreciate all you do for the game and the community. You rock!

Best,

John

[thehef]

Great stuff, Garlon! Thanks!

Can you address this?

Originally Posted by thehef

I don't know that these have been specifically answered, but I'd like to know the following:

- If you are using real transactions (thus, players playing in the same ballparks as in real life) and real stats, then the affect will be...

- If you are using real transactions (thus, players playing in the same ballparks as in real life) and neutralized stats, then the affect will be...

- If you are not using real transactions (thus, players not necessarily playing in the same ballparks as in real life) and are using real stats, then the affect will be...

- If you are not using real transactions (thus, players not necessarily playing in the same ballparks as in real life) and are using neutralized stats, then the affect will be...

The middle ground between the first two above & last two above is when you don't have historical txns but have players importing to their actual/historical teams. Then you end up with many - but not all - guys playing in their actual home parks.

Much-appreciated if ya can

Thanks

[Brad K]

Yea, I'd appreciate it too. I'm totally confused about the effects of the choices.

[jdw]

Follow up question:

How badly does accuracy get messed up if L/R is turned on?

It's a little jarring to see one of my favorite replay sim players, 1974 Willie Crawford, import in with even L/R ratings. Part of the fun of him was as a player from 1972-76 he did this:

.295/.381/.439 vs RHP
.231/.299/.355 vs LHP

Alston platooned Crawford quite a bit after 1973, as seen in the 1974 post-season:

NLCS
Game 1 - Ferguson vs Reuss (LHP)
Game 2 - Ferguson vs Rooker (LHP)
Game 3 - Crawford vs Kison (RHP)
Game 4 - Ferguson vs Reuss (LHP)

WS
Game 1 - Ferguson vs Holtzman (LHP)
Game 2 - Ferguson vs Blue (LHP)
Game 3 - Crawford vs Hunter (RHP)
Game 4 - Ferguson vs Holtzman (LHP)
Game 5 - Ferguson vs Blue (LHP)

Also by the % of his PA in those seasons that was vs RHP/LHP:

85-15 Crawford
71-29 Garvey
73-27 Cey

Does the engine compensate enough for handedness match ups to deal with the ratings for both hitters and pitchers being even leveled?

As an old Earl Weaver / Bill James platoon fan from the early 80s on, it would be a bummer if it's impact is minimal. Part of the fun is to have Unplayable vs LHP Wally Backman (.165/.258/.201 career !) be Very Nice Top of the Order vs RHP Wally Backman (.294/.364/.362 career !).

OOTP settings have always been about tradeoffs. Just wanted to see thoughts on just how off accuracy is with the LH/RH check "on" rather than "off".

[joefromchicago]

Originally Posted by Garlon

If you are playing a career league I suggest using 5yr recalc, neutralized stats, player development disabled, fielding 3yr, pitching stamina career, and imports 200/67 for batters, and 25/8 for pitchers, player fatigue set to High, and pitching rotation mode set to strict for every era.

The neutralized statistics are a completely new rebuild from previous versions of the game.

I suggest setting position players to 14 for teams for any era too.

Rotation
1871-1881: 2
1882-1903: 3
1904-1919: 4
1920-2020: 5

Relievers:
1871-1910: 2
1911-1935: 3
1936-1960: 4
1961-1976: 5
1977-1992: 6
1993-2007: 7
2008-2020: 8

Pitcher Stamina set to Normal for rotation modes of 3 or more.

Garlon and I have had several conversations about this topic and I won't belabor it here. If you want to get more in depth, take a look at this thread.

I don't doubt that Garlon's recommended settings will produce accurate league stats, but the individual stats for pitchers will look more and more inaccurate as the user goes back in time. Having a strict rotation before around 1960, for instance, will yield seriously skewed results both at the top of the rotation and at the bottom. Likewise, having pitchers who are exclusively relievers prior to 1925 doesn't reflect how pitchers were actually used in that era. If OOTP can't get realistic league stats without producing unrealistic individual stats, then maybe the whole pitching model needs to be reexamined.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by joefromchicago

Garlon and I have had several conversations about this topic and I won't belabor it here. If you want to get more in depth, take a look at this thread.

I don't doubt that Garlon's recommended settings will produce accurate league stats, but the individual stats for pitchers will look more and more inaccurate as the user goes back in time. Having a strict rotation before around 1960, for instance, will yield seriously skewed results both at the top of the rotation and at the bottom. Likewise, having pitchers who are exclusively relievers prior to 1925 doesn't reflect how pitchers were actually used in that era. If OOTP can't get realistic league stats without producing unrealistic individual stats, then maybe the whole pitching model needs to be reexamined.

I still want OOTP to at least offer us the option to use a pitching staff (we choose the number) with no bullpen whatsoever. For example, let us have a pitching staff of 7 pitchers. Let us select how many of those seven will be the primary go to starters, say 4 or 5 etc. Then allow us to use the Always start the highest rested feature and have the game stick to the our choice for the most part but have the option to use the other staff pitchers as starters as well when fatigue dictates. This way the starts will be spread over 7 guys and the entire staff will have relief appearances as well.

I get mad right now when you try and set it to a 6 man rotation, Always start the highest rested, because the game wants to spread the starts over 5 guys with the occasional start by #6. This too severely limits the number of starts by the teams 2 best pitchers.

[joefromchicago]

Originally Posted by David Watts

I still want OOTP to at least offer us the option to use a pitching staff (we choose the number) with no bullpen whatsoever. For example, let us have a pitching staff of 7 pitchers. Let us select how many of those seven will be the primary go to starters, say 4 or 5 etc. Then allow us to use the Always start the highest rested feature and have the game stick to the our choice for the most part but have the option to use the other staff pitchers as starters as well when fatigue dictates. This way the starts will be spread over 7 guys and the entire staff will have relief appearances as well.

I get mad right now when you try and set it to a 6 man rotation, Always start the highest rested, because the game wants to spread the starts over 5 guys with the occasional start by #6. This too severely limits the number of starts by the teams 2 best pitchers.

I completely agree.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by joefromchicago

I don't doubt that Garlon's recommended settings will produce accurate league stats, but the individual stats for pitchers will look more and more inaccurate as the user goes back in time. Having a strict rotation before around 1960, for instance, will yield seriously skewed results both at the top of the rotation and at the bottom. Likewise, having pitchers who are exclusively relievers prior to 1925 doesn't reflect how pitchers were actually used in that era. If OOTP can't get realistic league stats without producing unrealistic individual stats, then maybe the whole pitching model needs to be reexamined.

I'm glad you said that. It applies to more than pitching.

Garlon's suggested settings are intended to maximize runs accuracy with other things sacrificed. Others may have different goals and so we need the answers to questions thehef has posted.