Historical Mode updates

[Syd Thrift]

OK that makes me feel a bit better and I honestly don’t see power pitchers horribly “underperforming” in fictional leagues (there’s this one guy but he’s like the poster child of someone who would be meh in spite of a high enough K rate to lead the league, also having bad control and a propensity to give up a lot of dingers). I wish we had a biiit more info, like is it straight up fastball stuff? I don’t need or want to know the exact numbers of course.

And again, I understand what the intent is of the math regarding fielding. I’m just not convinced that just, say, manually assigning Mark Belanger an 80 range in the early 70s or Ozzie in the 80s will make his totals look that far off. Im not sure that anyone mentioned Junior; as a Mariners fan my recollection is that he was never quite the same after the diving catch that made him miss half of 1995 and even before then he was really more of a guy who was a decent, like league average CF who had the potential to hit like one of the best players on the game. My comparison was Andruw Jones, who did in fact consistently win a game to a game and a half on defense in the 90s.

[Garlon]

I do not understand how Andruw Jones did not get voted into the Hall of Fame.

He saved about 254 runs with defense (230 of those in CF). The value of a HR is about 1.4 to 1.5 runs. If we use the higher value of 1.5 and we made him an average defensive CF and converted all of those 230 runs saved to HR, that will give him another 153 HR.

He had 434 HR. That could make him an average defensive CF with 587 HR.

[italyprof]

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

Apples and oranges.

You are not being asked to do anything, you are being given an option. Pre order or don't, entirely up to you.

I am writing a book now. It will be done someday soon. Preorder it now please, you'll like it. You won't regret buying it. It is full of stuff that was not in my previous books. Buy it and you will see what those things are.

[Matt Arnold]

Originally Posted by Garlon

I do not understand how Andruw Jones did not get voted into the Hall of Fame.

He saved about 254 runs with defense (230 of those in CF). The value of a HR is about 1.4 to 1.5 runs. If we use the higher value of 1.5 and we made him an average defensive CF and converted all of those 230 runs saved to HR, that will give him another 153 HR.

He had 434 HR. That could make him an average defensive CF with 587 HR.

Because he just stopped at age 30. After he left Atlanta (side note, never realized he left), he only got barely the equivalent of 2 seasons of games in. Give him 5 years of average ball instead of 2 in that time, and now he's at 2200 or 2300 hits instead of 1900, and maybe he even reached 500 HR.

I think people still don't see defense, though. Like even when I read that he saved 250 runs on defense, my brain is sometimes like "oh, but those aren't runs runs. They're like fielding runs, so only worth like 50 or 60, right?"

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by italyprof

I am writing a book now. It will be done someday soon. Preorder it now please, you'll like it. You won't regret buying it. It is full of stuff that was not in my previous books. Buy it and you will see what those things are.

This only works if I've already read one of your books.


I have bought some books, that are part of a series, based on my experience with the author. Beings it is a series I already know the characters and subject matter (players and baseball in OOTP's case) and the style of the author (OOTP's developers). IE the author has a track record with me, same as Markus, Matt, and team. You don't.

[Scipio Africanus]

Originally Posted by italyprof

I am writing a book now. It will be done someday soon. Preorder it now please, you'll like it. You won't regret buying it. It is full of stuff that was not in my previous books. Buy it and you will see what those things are.

That's exactly how some authors sell their books on Kickstarter. You may have heard about Brandon Sanderson's recent Kickstarter where he promised four upcoming books and raised $41.7 million.

[Charlie Hough]

I posted some of these previously in the historical forum, but here is a prioritized list of historical and related issues that I was hoping to see fixed or improved:

1. Occasionally, the AI makes insane decisions, such as placing a young Ozzie Smith on irrevocable waivers when he is by far the best shortstop in the organization. I had to use the option to lock Smith and one of his teammates on the 1981 San Diego Padres because the AI kept wanting to waive and demote them and use players who had worse ratings at their positions. I've seen similar problems with Alfredo Griffin, the top shortstop in the Toronto Blue Jays organization in 1981, being declined arbitration and being allowed to become a free agent despite having a low contract demand.

2. The AI must STOP leaving starting pitchers in the game for far too long, even when the pull starting pitcher AI slider is set to maximum. The AI will sometimes leave starters in the game to give up 7 or more runs instead of pulling them, even with the slider all the way to the maximum of quick pulling of starters. The AI needs to base pulling pitchers on runs and earned runs allowed and not just fatigue and historical era strategy settings.

3. In historical games, especially with historical minors, too many quality free agents remain unsigned by spring training and the start of the season, and too many of them suddenly accept minor league contracts with major league options. AI teams should be signing these players before it gets to this point, and I can't figure out why they're not doing it. The players' contract demands aren't high, they're often better than other players on teams' 40-man rosters, and their latest stats and ratings are very good. If they were signed in a more timely fashion, they wouldn't end up lowering their demands and settling for a minor league deal with a major league option.

3. The AI leaves far too many experienced major league players as free agents after the entire off-season and spring training, and even throughout the subsequent season. It could easily sign them to minor league contracts, but it doesn't do that. Many of them are good enough to be on an MLB roster and have better ratings than some of the AI teams players at their positions. But the AI does not recognize this. AI teams could sign these players to improve their talent at certain positions or to assign these players to AAA and later call them up in case of injuries or poor performance, but there are always a number of veteran players that the AI ignores and leaves as free agents. For example, how does Milt Wilcox, with decent ratings and 16 wins during the previous season, remain unsigned with a low contract demand? How do outfielders who are good enough to be a starter or a team's best reserve outfielder go unsigned?

4. The AI waives players far too frequently and risks losing younger players or players with good talent because it keeps waiving some of the same players multiple times throughout a season. The AI will often waive players with good ratings and good prior-year or even current-year stats, yet it will keep players on the roster at the same position who are not as good. Then another AI team or the human team will claim some of these players, and they are lost with no compensation.

5. In some cases, counter to point #3 above, players have an overly inflated expectation that they should be signed to a major league contract extension when they're currently on a minor league deal and their ratings and recent history do not justify an MLB contract. For example, a player shouldn't be demanding an MLB contract when he is currently in the minors, has a minor league contract, isn't good enough to be on 40-man roster, and has never played in the majors or has not played in the majors over the past couple of seasons. They should at least be willing to sign a minor league contract with a major league option.

[LouColonels]

What bout league history in Historical Mode cause I know that Louisville Colonels played for AA(1882-91) and then NL(1892-99)when Honus Wanger and co went to Pittsburgh.Cincinnati Reds played in the NL (1876-79) when they were kicked for selling beer and renting out the ball field on sundays,then they came back with AA(1881-89),then went back to the NL were they have been ever since 1890.So to me the league is so messed up that it make their historical records not in line with what MLB has for them since they don't reconized the National Association from 1871-75.for history mode it should be from 1876-2023 with the approitate history of w/l records for those teams since some didn't play from 1871-75 with the exception of Atlanta and Chicago who were part of the NL when it was found in Dec 1875 in Louisville,KY to which Louisville Eclipse were part of until 1877.Some of the teams who came and went didn't last long.I've looked up alot of the teams and some of them were either in the Players League,AA,or Union Association.

[LansdowneSt]

Originally Posted by LouColonels

What bout league history in Historical Mode cause I know that Louisville Colonels played for AA(1882-91) and then NL(1892-99)when Honus Wanger and co went to Pittsburgh.Cincinnati Reds played in the NL (1876-79) when they were kicked for selling beer and renting out the ball field on sundays,then they came back with AA(1881-89),then went back to the NL were they have been ever since 1890.So to me the league is so messed up that it make their historical records not in line with what MLB has for them since they don't reconized the National Association from 1871-75.for history mode it should be from 1876-2023 with the approitate history of w/l records for those teams since some didn't play from 1871-75 with the exception of Atlanta and Chicago who were part of the NL when it was found in Dec 1875 in Louisville,KY to which Louisville Eclipse were part of until 1877.Some of the teams who came and went didn't last long.I've looked up alot of the teams and some of them were either in the Players League,AA,or Union Association.

The 19th century in OOTP is done in a manner to make it playable. The game can't contract in-game ML teams. The teams that are in there (based on whatever year you start) become NL or AL teams. Obviously, there is no connection between those 19th c. teams and the AL teams but to make the game playable that's how it is handled. Also, while MLB doesn't recognize the NA, bRef treats those numbers as part of a player's Major League stats, so anyone can judge those leagues as they wish.

[Syd Thrift]

Yeah and there’s some other RL weirdness too that’s just going to be hard to make work in an OOTP sense. There’s one season where a team in I think Washington just quits playing games for around a week, then all the players wind up in Richmond and play out the schedule. This is officially listed as two teams. There are a couple other instances when a team folds midway through the year. How do you handle that in a multi-year sim? Sure, they could make the game more robust in that regard, I guess, but teams folding and relocating mid season just isn’t a part of the modern game, like, at all.

And of course fictionalized schedules are way, way off, simply because they didn’t play baseball the same way they do now. It was a semi-pro league into the early 1880s where teams played the vast majority of their games on the weekends (and, depending on the city, not on Sundays).

[LouColonels]

That maybe so but the Majors don't count the stats of the NA as not official because the Majors cited erratic schedules,gambling,and poor newspaper coverage.When I have tried starting in the 19th Century for history mode,its unplayable for me because of the fact that its broken into 2 leagues of 4 teams when the NA was one league of 9 teams when it started,then it goes from there as those teams becomes the future NL and AL teams.I think the formula that is used in FHM in which you can activate and deactivate leagues and team as they happened in historically or let them continue playing,so the editing of history mode like in FHM would work OOTP to help the 19th Century part of the game more playable.

[Bajecco]

These are all good points. I'd like to add that while progressing through seasons during a Historical game playthrough, the Amateur Draft too often becomes populated with players that are far too old. It will regularly have over 100 players that are 23-26 years old. Their player profiles shows they were over 20 during HS.

[Syd Thrift]

You can manually set up the league to make it 9 teams in size and import the as played schedule. I know people who have done that (Eckstein 4 Prez doesn’t post here a lot anymore but he’s a resource). I personally started in 1876 when I did a fictionalized 19th century League a few versions ago for the “it’s not exactly a major league” reasons cited, but YMMV. Starting in 1871 does give you the drama of the Chicago Fire, so there’s that…

[BaseballMan]

Originally Posted by LouColonels

That maybe so but the Majors don't count the stats of the NA as not official because the Majors cited erratic schedules,gambling,and poor newspaper coverage.When I have tried starting in the 19th Century for history mode,its unplayable for me because of the fact that its broken into 2 leagues of 4 teams when the NA was one league of 9 teams when it started,then it goes from there as those teams becomes the future NL and AL teams.I think the formula that is used in FHM in which you can activate and deactivate leagues and team as they happened in historically or let them continue playing,so the editing of history mode like in FHM would work OOTP to help the 19th Century part of the game more playable.

Its not a simple case of just getting team names and league setup correct.
Ootp could probably do that as players have been able to mod the game and get get correct setup for 9 teams or 13 teams or even one league only.

There are bigger problems than that if you are playing strictly historical.
You will need to be aware of when players can be traded.
Keep in mind a lot of data for 19th century transactions dates are not known.
So if you trade a player too soon from a team and they are left with say no pitchers well then you may have a position player pitching 30 games and the opposition hitters will feast on his poor pitching.

Speaking of pitching, some teams used 1 and some used 2 or 3.
You would have to control roster changes when using expansion draft
or the computer will sign players to teams you dont want them too.
I don't remember why i use expansion off hand but i think it may have something to do with 19th century rookies going to correct teams.

These are just a few problems off the top of my head.
Bottom line is that you will have to do more manual work with 19th century leagues than modern ones.
However i have been able to run a 19th century league lot faster now.
It use to take me months and now i could probably run one in less than a month if i put my mind to it.
But keep in mind that i and probably others here have spent years getting a system to play 19th century leagues that works for them.
I don't mind sharing what ive made and what ive collected but i don't wanna pay a monthly drop box fee.

None of the stuff i do could not be done by ootp. They would have to put together a transaction file that would keep in mind when teams would be below nine players or not have a pitcher.
I wouldn't count on ootp doing much improvement for 19th century play.
Not that they don't care but most players use modern or fictional leagues.
Its probably not that big of a priority and to be honest i can't really blame ootp.
But who knows maybe someday i will be able to start a historical league in 1871 and have it auto run to present day.

[HonusWagner]

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

better auto-import everything from parks to historical jerseys

[joefromchicago]

Originally Posted by LouColonels

That maybe so but the Majors don't count the stats of the NA as not official because the Majors cited erratic schedules,gambling,and poor newspaper coverage.When I have tried starting in the 19th Century for history mode,its unplayable for me because of the fact that its broken into 2 leagues of 4 teams when the NA was one league of 9 teams when it started,then it goes from there as those teams becomes the future NL and AL teams.I think the formula that is used in FHM in which you can activate and deactivate leagues and team as they happened in historically or let them continue playing,so the editing of history mode like in FHM would work OOTP to help the 19th Century part of the game more playable.

The NA wasn't a major league because it wasn't a league. It was a loose collection of semi-pro clubs operating under the rubric of the NA but playing their games on a club-versus-club challenge basis. That's why some clubs would play 80 games in a season while others would play maybe a dozen.

I agree, though, that OOTP could improve its handling of nineteenth-century leagues. I didn't know that FHM allows for dropping teams or leagues - that would be a huge improvement in the way OOTP deals with early professional baseball.