Expansion draft woes

[uruguru]

Setting: the 1968 MLB expansion draft

Issue: Pat Jarvis, the 4-star 31 year old starter for the Tigers just won the Cy Young Award with a 21-3 record and a league-leading 2.17 ERA. The game clocks him in at 6.5 WAR for the season.

When it came time to submit its protection list, Detroit left this star pitcher unprotected in favor of a 1-star 18-year-old prospect (3-star potential) named Stan Perzanowski. Fresh out of high school, he went 3-8 with an 8.23 ERA for the Batavia Trojans (BC level). I can't understand how the AI would protect a one-star player with three-star potential over a 4-star player.

I am using reserve era rules. Detroit's payroll is $2 million under budget and Jarvis's salary will be $231,000 in 1969 so it's not a money issue.

Somebody make this make sense.

Fortunately, I saved before the draft started so I could kill the game. Now I need to go through every team's protection list to ensure star players are properly protected.

[Rain King]

Can you describe your league a little more? What type of historical league is this?

Also, I'm a bit confused about the age/year you've listed.

In real life 1968 Jarvis was 27. In real life at 31, Jarvis didn't have much left. Just trying to understand if maybe the AI knows something about Recalc/future value or something.

[uruguru]

Just a regular historical league, one-year recalc. Started in 1962 and rookies enter as free agents so younger players will be on different franchises. Player personalities and chemistry are turned off. League Totals are locked at 1962 levels so there was no "Year of the Pitcher".

(loads save) You are correct about Pat Jarvis. He is 27 years and 205 days in this sim as of 10/9/68, one day before the expansion draft. I'm not sure now where I got the idea he was 31. Sorry about that! Maybe a mishover on the wrong player when I was typing that first post.

It's the first day of the Offseason ("Offseason starts"), so everyone has had their one-year recalc. No scouting, so 100% accuracy on ratings. Player evaluation does not use ratings.. it's 0/60/30/10.

Pat Jarvis is listed as a 4-star pitcher. The AI, based on his 1968 season, said he had the best season in the league (the CY). Even with the updated recalc ratings, the Tigers list him as the #1 starter in their rotation. Their other 4 starters are Fritz Peterson, Rick Wise, Mickey Lolich and Jim Bunning. All four of those pitchers are protected in the draft. Even Bunning, who is the #5 pitcher and 36 years old.

Even ignoring the award based on the previous years stats (and ratings), I can't understand why the AI would say "he's our #1 starter" while simultaneously not protecting him in the expansion draft..

[splat58]

That's interesting. In my historical league, also begun in 1962, Detroit left Jarvis unprotected after a 22 -6, 2.35 ERA, 1.00 WHIP season in 1968.

[uruguru]

Originally Posted by splat58

That's interesting. In my historical league, also begun in 1962, Detroit left Jarvis unprotected after a 22 -6, 2.35 ERA, 1.00 WHIP season in 1968.

wow! I was not expecting that.

[bwburke94]

Could this be a recalc issue?

[splat58]

I'm using 1 year recalc, remaining seasons of career. In 1969 his ratings are 56 Overall, 57 Potential. For expansion Seattle in 1969 he was 12-14, 3.47, 1.17. Not too shabby considering.

His salary in 1968 was $80,000, then jumped to $170,000 for 1969. Detroit has a '69 budget of $5,500,000 & payroll of $2,557,500.

[uruguru]

Originally Posted by bwburke94

Could this be a recalc issue?

The thing is that recalc affects ratings, right? But in my sim, player evaluation is 0% based on ratings. It's 60% stats from current season, 30% previous season and 10% 2 years ago.

I would expect the protection list uses the evalution rating.

Either way, the AI is convinced that Pat Jarvis is still the #1 starting pitcher for the Tigers (that's where it puts him in the rotation). It protects Starters #2 through #5, but not starter #1.

[splat58]

My expansion draft rules may have affected his being unprotected. Each team could lose up to 7 players max. This put 140 players into the draft - exactly enough for 35 rounds.

[uruguru]

Originally Posted by splat58

My expansion draft rules may have affected his being unprotected. Each team could lose up to 7 players max. This put 140 players into the draft - exactly enough for 35 rounds.

Maybe. But I was fortunate to catch this on draft day and was able to revert to the save right before the draft. That allowed me to look at Detroit's protection list and noticed they were protecting Perzanowski over Jarvis.

[omg_pwnasaurus]

Why would the CPU need to protect an 18 year old at the BC level? How many players does your setup require they protect? It makes sense to protect the future of the organization more by keeping the 18 year old in the organization that has close to similar potential (at least judging by only the 3 vs 4 star rating provided). That being said, I would examine the setup rules and what makes a player eligible to be selected, perhaps tweaking that a bit.

[uruguru]

In my sim, have the expansion rules allow teams to protect 25 players, and that's it. There's no automatic lower-level player protection.

This means team can fully protect their 25-man active roster (instead of the default 15 players) and leave all of their prospects unprotected, or protect a few key prospects and let some of their 25-man roster protected.

The expansion teams only draft 25 players so it's not like they can just raid everyone's farm system.

None of this matters, though. Detroit protected 7 minor-leaguers including Perzanowski. This in actuality means that these expansion rules allow them to protect 3 more players on their active roster than the default rules. So the real issue is that Detroit left their #1 starter unprotected while protecting starters #2 through #5.

I'm not sure how to explain why the AI did it unless there is some RNG controlling which everyday players (or maybe just starting pitchers) should be left unprotected, perhaps to give the expansion teams a fighting chance.

Attached at the highest-ranked players left unprotected in the draft.

2 4-star starters... Pat Jarvis, the AL Cy Young Winner and Luis Tiant, the #2 starter for the Indians.

2 3.5-star starters.. George Brunet & Lew Krausse, both the #2 starter for their teams

1 3-star starter.. Mike McCormick, #2 starter for the Pirates

So maybe this is what is going on since the top 5 rated players in the draft are starting pitchers. But if that's what the OOTP devs wanted to do, which is actually a good idea, maybe they need to tune it down to just #4 and #5 starters.

Or maybe evaluate starter/relievers role based on how they played in 1968, not according to their recalced 1969 stamina. (that would actually be a lot more realistic, tbh)

Anyway, it's confusing enough to me that I will be probably hand-tuning the protection lists to fix it.

[omg_pwnasaurus]

I would try using the default settings and seeing what happens. It's < 3 years of service auto protect I think?

[uruguru]

Originally Posted by omg_pwnasaurus

I would try using the default settings and seeing what happens. It's < 3 years of service auto protect I think?

With the default settings, the problem is worse.

Detroit protected 18 players on its active roster with the settings I use, but only 15 with the default settings.

They still leave their #1 starter unprotected while protecting starters #2 through #5. That's really the most direct way to underscore the issue.

Several other teams do the exact same with their #2 starter.

[RosalieBridges]

Originally Posted by uruguru

Setting: the 1968 MLB expansion draft

Issue: Pat Jarvis, the 4-star 31 year old starter for the Tigers just won the Cy Young Award with a 21-3 record and a league-leading 2.17 ERA. The game clocks him in at 6.5 WAR for the season.
It’s baffling that Detroit would protect a low-performing prospect like Stan Perzanowski over a Cy Young winner like Pat Jarvis. The AI might prioritize potential over current performance, aiming for long-term gains, or could be making a strategic decision for a rebuilding phase. It’s also possible this is just a glitch in the AI logic. Since you saved before the draft, double-checking protection lists is a smart move to avoid further issues. So, I had this book report due, and I was freaking out because I didn’t finish reading the book. Then I came academized.com/book-report-writing-service Academized’s book report writing service. Honestly, it was a lifesaver! They helped me get a great report even though I didn’t have much time. If you’re ever in a pinch like I was, give them a try!
When it came time to submit its protection list, Detroit left this star pitcher unprotected in favor of a 1-star 18-year-old prospect (3-star potential) named Stan Perzanowski. Fresh out of high school, he went 3-8 with an 8.23 ERA for the Batavia Trojans (BC level). I can't understand how the AI would protect a one-star player with three-star potential over a 4-star player.

I am using reserve era rules. Detroit's payroll is $2 million under budget and Jarvis's salary will be $231,000 in 1969 so it's not a money issue.

Somebody make this make sense.

Fortunately, I saved before the draft started so I could kill the game. Now I need to go through every team's protection list to ensure star players are properly protected.

Nice one. I like it.

[Bobfather]

A wild guess maybe the ai thinks that the expansion teams would not be interested in Jarvis? Since you have everything saved maybe you pull run the draft and see whathappens?

[Bobfather]

Also check if it prefers prospects or veterans