Fielding

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Rain King

I forgot to turn off Injuries, but here is 3-Year Fielding recalc (1-Year everything else).

Robinson lost most of his 1963 season, but was healthy aside from that.

Looks like you've just made a strong case for not playing real lineups/real transactions. They may want to change the historical wizard defaults as well, to ensure they are set to 3 or 5 year recalc.

[Rain King]

I mean, I guess I feel like it is obvious that choosing a multi-year recalc is going to smooth things out and lessen 1-year statistical outlier/oddities/sample sizes?

Some, though, want those included. They want '96 Brady Anderson to hit his bombs, for a specific example.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Rain King

I mean, I guess I feel like it is obvious that choosing a multi-year recalc is going to smooth things out and lessen 1-year statistical outlier/oddities/sample sizes?

Some, though, want those included. They want '96 Brady Anderson to hit his bombs, for a specific example.

I love outliers, but not at the expense of turning Brooks Robinson into Nick Castellanos at 3B.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Rain King

I mean, I guess I feel like it is obvious that choosing a multi-year recalc is going to smooth things out and lessen 1-year statistical outlier/oddities/sample sizes?

Some, though, want those included. They want '96 Brady Anderson to hit his bombs, for a specific example.

Ah, I think I read your post wrong. So you used 1 year recalc, but just based fielding on 3 years? That may explain my Robinson screenshot.

[Rain King]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Ah, I think I read your post wrong. So you used 1 year recalc, but just based fielding on 3 years? That may explain my Robinson screenshot.

For that test, yes.

I would not argue against having the default for fielding always be 3-year (since it isn't choosable separately in the wizard). The swings from single season defensive stats can be jarring and I do think for that part of the game people would prefer players play to their reputation than single season samples.

[Rain King]

The primary argument against, however, is that it could significantly alter team defense for an individual season...which will in turn affect pitching results.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Rain King

For that test, yes.

I would not argue against having the default for fielding always be 3-year (since it isn't choosable separately in the wizard). The swings from single season defensive stats can be jarring and I do think for that part of the game people would prefer players play to their reputation than single season samples.

Question. If I started a league last night and had it set to use current year fielding, can I simply change it to 3 year, or would it best to create a new league? Thinking it might be best to start over. I'm about a month into the first season.

[Rain King]

You can change it and then click the Recalculate Player Ratings button and everyone should be updated from that point going forward (until the next recalc).

That is a new capability in OOTP25.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Rain King

You can change it and then click the Recalculate Player Ratings button and everyone should be updated from that point going forward (until the next recalc).

That is a new capability in OOTP25.

Okay, thank you.

[fredbeene]

Originally Posted by Reed

Just don’t be surprised that depending on your other settings you may have more players with outlier type seasons.
Using 3 year recalc, you will have fewer players with outlier type seasons but players like Cobb and Ted Williams may have a very dominating season or 2 since IRL they don’t have an average type season to pull their ratings down like most players.

what is the correct setting if you want rating based on the year you just simmed, but want to retain potential ratings?

[fredbeene]

Originally Posted by David Watts

I love outliers, but not at the expense of turning Brooks Robinson into Nick Castellanos at 3B.

that is why we need override option we can apply to groups of players.

also for your scenario is it possible that ZR is effected because SS is awesome?

I recall when playing PT with best DEF they had lower overall ZR then they do with playing besides average players. I guess other players are scooping up there potential plays??

[twins_34]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Retire according to history was added to the game this version for random debut.

No, it is not new to random debut. It has been a part of the game for as long as I have been playing the game. It has always been an option for random debut, but the problem was, how retire according to history worked in the game

Originally Posted by David Watts

It's a new feature for random debut

No, it's not a new feature. The only thing that is new about Retire according to history, is how it now works! Before 2025, retire according to history was based off the historical date the player retired. This caused issues in Random Debut in prior versions which forced players to have to use recalc with the development engine to make people retire correctly, over playing for 80 years.

Retire according to history is now based on the AGE the player retired and not the date. So, for example say Nolan Ryan random debuted in 1901.

The OLD version of retire according to would have had Ryan play until he was 92. The NEW version, he will retire somewhere around the age of 46, with recalc on, and maybe before that if only the development engine was on.

But retire according to history is not new for RD. It has always been an option you could turn on, most people didn't because it really didnt work right for RD.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by twins_34

No, it is not new to random debut. It has been a part of the game for as long as I have been playing the game. It has always been an option for random debut, but the problem was, how retire according to history worked in the game

No, it's not a new feature. The only thing that is new about Retire according to history, is how it now works! Before 2025, retire according to history was based off the historical date the player retired. This caused issues in Random Debut in prior versions which forced players to have to use recalc with the development engine to make people retire correctly, over playing for 80 years.

Retire according to history is now based on the AGE the player retired and not the date. So, for example say Nolan Ryan random debuted in 1901.

The OLD version of retire according to would have had Ryan play until he was 92. The NEW version, he will retire somewhere around the age of 46, with recalc on, and maybe before that if only the development engine was on.

But retire according to history is not new for RD. It has always been an option you could turn on, most people didn't because it really didnt work right for RD.

That's a lot of words to use, especially when the last 6 you used "it really didn't work right for RD" basically says it all.

You might have to look for it, but a week or so back I said OOTP doesn't have the ability to create iinterleague schedules. You will probably want to corrrect me. OOTP does have the ability to generate interleague schedules. Most people don't do it though, because it doesn't work.

[Garlon]

For fielding ratings you really want to use 1yr for replay games with real lineups and transactions. Otherwise, you are better off using 3yr ratings.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by Rain King

You can change it and then click the Recalculate Player Ratings button and everyone should be updated from that point going forward (until the next recalc).

That is a new capability in OOTP25.

Just thought I would let you know that in the random debut I used to test retire according to history(3 year recalc, no development, fielding based on 3 years) I had much better results in terms of guys like Brooks Robinson and other top fielders. Thanks. Now if I can just get close to the same results using combo of recalc and development in my random debut's I will be all set.

[Rain King]

Happy I could help!