Takes you out of the moment

[md40022]

Originally Posted by Sweed

I tend to agree but think, at least some teams, are moving away from this. Cubs with Gomes and Contreras, DHing 30 of his 81 games, shows a shift in thinking. Yes, Higgins has been up and down some so at times they may have had 3 C's but, to my knowledge not often. I would think the plan, if injury occurs, would be to move Contreras to C, enter the P in the lineup, PH as necessary. Their second choice is Schwindel as the emergency C. I'll take the former over the later.

Good example with the Cubs. And there are a few teams out there that do roster 3 catchers. The roster size jumping to 26 recently makes that a little more doable I guess.

Going to the "emergency catcher" I would imagine you'd want to avoid at all cost. I might be wrong, but something tells me you can run on Frank Schwindel with ease and your pitchers can't be bouncing in breaking pitches or they're going to be rolling to the backstop all game long. So putting the P into the batting order and forfeiting the DH spot would definitely be the preferred choice there.... and that's not the best choice either given that your bench is already 1 pinch hitter short due to that injury.

Before the NL implemented the DH, you'd almost never see the #2 catcher as a pinch hitter for that same reason. That starting catch gets hurt mid-game at that point and it's Frank Schwindel time

[wallewalls]

Originally Posted by andyhdz

and that's why fictional is always much more fun because when the Elmira Twains trade Bobby Pitcher for Joey Batter no consternation is had.

Agreed. I used to get so hung up on these things that I would never progress past maybe two seasons. Now in fictional, it doesn't matter nearly as much.

[dcordash]

Originally Posted by wallewalls

Agreed. I used to get so hung up on these things that I would never progress past maybe two seasons. Now in fictional, it doesn't matter nearly as much.

As I said earlier, even if you're playing fictional you still want some semblance of logical trades. By just saying play fictional and you don't have to worry about "irregular" happenings is not holding the game to any sort of standard.

Yeah, if a trade between Joe Blow and John Doe seem pretty plausible based on their history, attributes, reputation, etc. ...Great. But, if it doesn't seem right..completely upside down..that's a problem.

I'm of the opinion I want a game to mirror practical baseball sense for the most part. There are always going to be outliers and exceptions in the real world. But, I would prefer fictional, historical, current season play "typically" mirror the only point of reference I have..MLB.

Not saying it doesn't. My point about the whole Fictional preference (and that's what I play often as well) is that shouldn't give the statistical engine a pass to just randomly cough up results, trades, ownership goals, etc. that are ridicky.

Again, I'm not saying that Fictional play spins the ridiculous more often than not..but, if it does, it should be addressed. Not just, "well it's Fictional so everything goes."

[Syd Thrift]

e

[Syd Thrift]

No, I think it's more that with fictional it's easier to take a step back and look at things from a gestalt sense instead of getting really hot and bothered that Raul Ibanez never transitioned from catcher in this save even though he was really, really awful even as a left fielder IRL or whatever. I just don't see the evidence that position switches in OOTP are any more or less common than in real life - if anything, I think that infield to outfield and vice versa changes occur less often because range/arm/etc. correlate less well than IRL. But that's only the sense I've gotten from playing several thousand hours and for all I know the stats might not back me up on that. I know I keep getting bothered by WP and PB rates in leagues I run, only to compare them to real life and find that they're consistently within 10%.

I don't think anyone is saying "it's fictional so anything goes", people are saying "yeah, I also get bothered when Hank Greenberg instead of Roger Maris breaks 61 HRs and so instead I play in fictional leagues where some guy named Justin Stone broke the record".

[dcordash]

My 2023 Cubs big off-season free agent signing was Edwin Diaz. For 14 straight appearances he was nearly unhittable. The last 5 appearances he's getting shelled. 4 of the 5 are blown saves. Now, I know that can happen. Look at Hader right before the all-star break. So, yeah, it "can" happen. But, is it the norm? Is it what you would expect in a simulation?

I got $25 million invested in him the next 2 years. Is it fun for this customer to see him melt down? Does it make the game better for me? In 2019 Diaz was pitching hurt and had an off year, but that was an outlier..not the norm.

So, let's say we're playing a fictional league and the very best closer on the market is named Jose Baez, I get in a bidding war..perhaps over spend a bit..but this guy Baez is lights out. I end up landing him for $25 million because the stud closer is the missing piece to my Fictional run. But then the guy hits a stretch where he can't finish a ball game. 4 games with blown saves in the early season..who knows what lurks his next few outings.

And, I see these things a whole lot. Money players, real and fictional, that don't give the slightest gleam of that.

If I didn't know better I would swear the engine is based, in large part, on game outcome..it just randomly skews individual stats to guarantee win/loss. I guess the culmination of what I see makes it "feel" like it's outcome oriented..not a purely statistical model as you would expect. And, if that's the case it just sucks the fun out of the game for me personally.

[LansdowneSt]

Originally Posted by dcordash

If I didn't know better I would swear the engine is based, in large part, on game outcome..it just randomly skews individual stats to guarantee win/loss. I guess the culmination of what I see makes it "feel" like it's outcome oriented..not a purely statistical model as you would expect. And, if that's the case it just sucks the fun out of the game for me personally.

I felt like this about my Red Sox from birth until 2004. Fate screwed great players in situations just to mess with me and guarantee a loss.

In my history as a fan of the Sox, so, so, so, so many real-life situations fit into scenarios that you are describing as outrageous or unexpected or rigged. I don't think they are. Just as seasons don't roll out the way the Moneyball supercomputers predict when a GM makes his moves, they don't in OOTP either. I think it's just that... and nothing more. That's why you play the games, after all. The real games... and I like that OOTP plays like the real games where the best laid plans of mice and GMs can go astray.

[dcordash]

Originally Posted by LansdowneSt

I felt like this about my Red Sox from birth until 2004. Fate screwed great players in situations just to mess with me and guarantee a loss.

In my history as a fan of the Sox, so, so, so, so many real-life situations fit into scenarios that you are describing as outrageous or unexpected or rigged. I don't think they are. Just as seasons don't roll out the way the Moneyball supercomputers predict when a GM makes his moves, they don't in OOTP either. I think it's just that... and nothing more. That's why you play the games, after all. The real games... and I like that OOTP plays like the real games where the best laid plans of mice and GMs can go astray.

My whole point about this game I've been playing for decades is the rarities/outliers in real-life are the norm. In other words, there is no consistency. Don't we want consistency? That's why we play..not to see chaos and unprecedented results..we all wanna see the manifestation of all our hours and dedication.

When Perfect Team came on the scene I dabbled somewhat. Really thought stats/wins/loss very peculiar and all over the place with no foundation or basis. I can't even play it anymore it's so erratic. And, perhaps, I'm the only one that feels that way. But, I sure gave it 2 seasons of effort. Realized, from my perspective, it wasn't a statistical simulation. Just..just..I don't even know what it is. But I haven't played this year and won't.

That, more than anything, reinforced my theory that we're playing a sim game that is engineered to produce a predetermined outcome (win/loss)..with player abilities, stats, history, etc being secondary.

Similar to MLB the Show w/o the awesome animation.

Anyway, just venting. Not trying to shine a light or give bad press to the game. Just observations shared out of pure irritation and jadedness.

[LansdowneSt]

Originally Posted by dcordash

Anyway, just venting. Not trying to shine a light or give bad press to the game. Just observations shared out of pure irritation and jadedness.

The forum is good for venting. I hear ya. Surrounding the real Lansdowne Street in the Fens of Boston, there are bars full of "venting and observations being shared out of pure irritation and jadedness" about my team tonight. At least they have beers in hand as they do it.

Cheers, mate. I got next round...

[locuspc]

Originally Posted by dcordash

My whole point about this game I've been playing for decades is the rarities/outliers in real-life are the norm. In other words, there is no consistency. Don't we want consistency? That's why we play..not to see chaos and unprecedented results..we all wanna see the manifestation of all our hours and dedication.

No, that's not what we want. You might want that, I don't. Consistency is unrealistic. Chaos is baseball. If nothing surprising happened it wouldn't be baseball, the game where terrible teams still win more than a third of their games in a season. If young stud MVPs don't suddenly bust out and fail to hit .200 in the next seasons, you aren't playing the sport of Cody Bellinger. If lockdown closers making loads of money don't suddenly go cold, you're not playing the sport of Aroldis Chapman. I want baseball, not consistency.

[wallewalls]

Originally Posted by dcordash

As I said earlier, even if you're playing fictional you still want some semblance of logical trades. By just saying play fictional and you don't have to worry about "irregular" happenings is not holding the game to any sort of standard.

Yeah, if a trade between Joe Blow and John Doe seem pretty plausible based on their history, attributes, reputation, etc. ...Great. But, if it doesn't seem right..completely upside down..that's a problem.

I'm of the opinion I want a game to mirror practical baseball sense for the most part. There are always going to be outliers and exceptions in the real world. But, I would prefer fictional, historical, current season play "typically" mirror the only point of reference I have..MLB.

Not saying it doesn't. My point about the whole Fictional preference (and that's what I play often as well) is that shouldn't give the statistical engine a pass to just randomly cough up results, trades, ownership goals, etc. that are ridicky.

Again, I'm not saying that Fictional play spins the ridiculous more often than not..but, if it does, it should be addressed. Not just, "well it's Fictional so everything goes."

I understand all of this. You're never going to get trades 100% perfect when you're dealing with AI though. So for me, playing fictional at least helps me not have to deal with the "this would never happen in real life" mindset that I usually find myself in when I play MLB.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by dcordash

That, more than anything, reinforced my theory that we're playing a sim game that is engineered to produce a predetermined outcome (win/loss)..with player abilities, stats, history, etc being secondary.

Wait, you think the game starts out "the Twins will win today vs. Detroit" and then reverse engineers the game to make it happen? Or is it more macro? IE Twins will win 99 games this year and the game engineers it?

That's what I'm getting from

sim game that is engineered to produce a predetermined outcome (win/loss)

Wouldn't that be way harder to code than simply putting a "pile of ratings" into a formula, spitting out an answer (IE hit, hr, k etc.), and coming up with a winner?

Or I'm taking it the wrong way?

[BarneyRubble]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

This is not what OOTP does. As soon as you do one thing - make a trade, change a roster, advance a day - it becomes fictional and you can see things that you think would never happen in real life. OOTP has never marketed itself as anything other than that.

This can't be stated enough. If anyone believes it to be otherwise, they'll be very disappointed.

[BarneyRubble]

Originally Posted by wallewalls

You're never going to get trades 100% perfect when you're dealing with AI though.

Regardless of the AI, OOTP is never going to get trades 100% perfect. Major League Baseball can't get them perfect, how can a PC game? Articles concerning bad or strange trades are plentiful. Books could be written on bad trades.

To take it a step further, the list of star players that were cut from a team early in their career or went undrafted is rather lengthy.

No matter how one decides to play OOTP, it's fictional.

[tcblcommish]

The thing that was said about perfect team being all over the place, honestly what did you expect. The year Babe Ruth hit 60 homers, he faced a boat load of pitchers that were either average or slightly above average but in perfect team, 99% of the teams have great pitchers and much better fielders so stats will be skewed. How can Bob Gibson maintain 1.12 ERA when he faces the best 9 hitters of all time? How does Joe Jackson hit .400 when all the pitchers in the whole league are superstars and need their stats to be as good as they were. You're expectations of perfect team are way off, not the game or engine.

I didnt say fictional makes it so bad trades are ok but if you look through the history of baseball or any sport for that matter there are so many "bad" trades. They happen all the time. In this, the team picked up a good hitting catcher with decent defense and moved their good hitting catcher to third to make room. I have no idea who was at third but if he was average and that made the team better then it's really not a bad deal or a bad move.

When it happens in fictional leagues, I've seen this kind of thing and yes it's way way way easier to look at a Joe Catcher and wonder why he got moved for Jim Catcher to replace Bob Thirdbase. When you just look at ratings and take out names and history, it's a way easier time making the trade make sense but that doesn't mean that they will all make sense.

Do all trades have to make sense though? Like I said, teams make trades all the time that on the surface make little sense but are done anyways.

I actually kind of like weird and odd trades and see how they play out in my sims

Sent from my SM-G998W using Tapatalk

[md40022]

This thread has gone off the rails. What are we even complaining about right now?

IRL, nothing is guaranteed. Someone mentioned Cody Bellinger going from MVP to awful. Craig Kimbrel went from unhittable to a complete liability back to unhittable and then to mediocre within a span of 3 or 4 years. 2 years ago Mike Trout was on pace to be the GOAT, now it looks like his body is breaking down.... If you took 3 completely different players and had those scenarios happen to them in OOTP apparently people would be losing their damn minds bcuz it's not realistic (or something)

If people want a .250 hitter to go 1 for 4 every single game because 1/4=.250, and for a 30 home run player to hit 1 home run every 5.4 games because 162/30=5.4 then find a different game.

[md40022]

This thread has gone off the rails. What are we even complaining about right now?

IRL, nothing is guaranteed. Someone mentioned Cody Bellinger going from MVP to awful. Craig Kimbrel went from unhittable to a complete liability back to unhittable and then to mediocre within a span of 3 or 4 years. 2 years ago Mike Trout was on pace to be the GOAT, now it looks like his body is breaking down.... If you took 3 completely different players and had those scenarios happen to them in OOTP apparently people would be losing their damn minds bcuz it's not realistic (or something)

If people want a .250 hitter to go 1 for 4 every single game because 1/4=.250, and for a 30 home run player to hit 1 home run every 5.4 games because 162/30=5.4 then find a different game.

[BirdWatcher]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Brandon Inge moved from catcher to 3B in the prime of his career. Brandon's mom told me to post this, as even if I didn't think he was a superstar, he was a Hall of Famer in her book.

And in my father's book. Absolutely his favorite Tiger of the last 30 years or so.
(Of the non-Kaline, non-Trammell ilk, probably his favorite Tiger since John Wockenfuss. And I know because I have to hear about these guys in nearly every conversation that I have with my father. )

[Pelican]

Originally Posted by BarneyRubble

This can't be stated enough. If anyone believes it to be otherwise, they'll be very disappointed.

This is why I'm puzzled, when someone asks if I am playing historical or fictional. I mean, the answer is historical, meaning actual seasons with real players. But because I immediately start making my own trades, setting different lineups, promoting different rookies, eventually drafting different guys, using my own strategy, it really seems "fictional" to me. Of course when I make all of these big and small changes, the results will differ. That's the whole point of making changes. And it flat amazes me how I am rewarded for good decisions, and punished for bad ones. Once I take over, things depart from historical reality pretty fast.

[jcard]

Originally Posted by dcordash

My whole point about this game I've been playing for decades is the rarities/outliers in real-life are the norm. In other words, there is no consistency. Don't we want consistency? That's why we play..not to see chaos and unprecedented results..we all wanna see the manifestation of all our hours and dedication.

When Perfect Team came on the scene I dabbled somewhat. Really thought stats/wins/loss very peculiar and all over the place with no foundation or basis. I can't even play it anymore it's so erratic. And, perhaps, I'm the only one that feels that way. But, I sure gave it 2 seasons of effort. Realized, from my perspective, it wasn't a statistical simulation. Just..just..I don't even know what it is. But I haven't played this year and won't.

That, more than anything, reinforced my theory that we're playing a sim game that is engineered to produce a predetermined outcome (win/loss)..with player abilities, stats, history, etc being secondary.

Similar to MLB the Show w/o the awesome animation.

Anyway, just venting. Not trying to shine a light or give bad press to the game. Just observations shared out of pure irritation and jadedness.

While I do not think that the independent constraint on other outcomes is located in the W/L parameter, I believe your general sentiments are not to be dismissed as summarily as some would seem to do. In any event, they are better grounded than the litany of spurious, irrelevant, and otherwise logically fallacious arguments being advanced against them. I have no stomach for even trying to pursue a rational discussion here; perhaps I will articulate my own thoughts in greater detail elsewhere or convey them privately. For the moment I just wanted to acknowledge that the fact that you have some sense of uncertainty regarding the conventional wisdom is not as ridiculous as other replies might suggest.