Ootp 6 new engine question

jbmagic · 03-08-2004, 01:03 AM

i waiting to get OOTP 6....

i am a total newbie....so i dont have ootp 5....

can u explain what old engine vs new engine is about? not clear on this....i know we will have an option to switch in ootp 6..

thanks

crackpott · 03-08-2004, 01:18 AM

well, I'm sure someone will beat me to it, but...

The old system was fairly similar regarding hitting. It appears as though most things are merely renaming or minor tweaking. The big change I haven't heard confirmation on is whether a batters strikeout rating will matter. In V5 and below, it basically didn't since the batting calculation was basically walk/hit/out and then what type of hit or out. Meaning a strikeout would occur when the game already decided that an out was to occur. This meant that people with huge numbers of strikeouts were not really penalized for it, as in real life a K is a chance you missed putting the ball in play, but here, it was just a chance you missed getting out. The only significance was it meant you were less likely to hit a sac fly... but also less likely to hit into a DP, so it evened out in my books and I just ignored the rating.

Moving onto pitching, this is the key difference. The previous system was fairly flawed in that like batting, strikeouts really didn't matter much, and an important rating was "avoiding hits". Recent studies have shown that there really is little if any ability to actually avoid hits, and lower batting averages allowed are due to strikeouts. So with this flawed rating of players being able to control how frequently they're hit without actually striking anyone out, it needed to be changed. The new system doesn't have "individual" ratings so to speak. Each thing can affect numerous categories from the pitchers ability to K hitters (and effectively lower their batting average) to walks to avoiding homeruns. It's really something we'll need to test to figure out which categories are most important.

ctorg · 03-08-2004, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by crackpott
The big change I haven't heard confirmation on is whether a batters strikeout rating will matter. In V5 and below, it basically didn't since the batting calculation was basically walk/hit/out and then what type of hit or out. Meaning a strikeout would occur when the game already decided that an out was to occur. This meant that people with huge numbers of strikeouts were not really penalized for it, as in real life a K is a chance you missed putting the ball in play, but here, it was just a chance you missed getting out. The only significance was it meant you were less likely to hit a sac fly... but also less likely to hit into a DP, so it evened out in my books and I just ignored the rating.

But a batter's K rating does matter in V5. In fact, it's pretty accurate. Batters who strike out very little according to their ratings strike out very little in the game. The difference is purely in the logical flow, and shows up much more on the pitcher's side of things as you described.

Ervinmagicsmall · 03-08-2004, 10:30 AM

Okay, I understand the concept of what the new pitching engine is based on, but I'm still a bit confoozled about how this concept applies to both real-life baseball and how it'll apply in-game.

For instance look at stats for Moyer and Pettite last year:
Moyer--215 IP 3.27 era 129 k 66 BB 19 HR OBA .246
Pettite-208 IP 4.02 era 180 k 50 BB 21HR OBA .272

So Pettite has more K's, less walks, roughly the same HR, yet his ERA and Opponents BA are both significantly higher. What am I missing? Park effects? Defense? Poise? Clutch? Statistical anomaly? Would the new pitching engine allow for something like this? Why am I asking so many questions?

All in all, I'll be happy if the engine gives me realistic results regardless of the underlying concept, but still I am curious about it.

ctorg · 03-08-2004, 10:52 AM

I believe, according to the New Baseball Logic, this is due to defense. Apparently, if you remove strikeouts from the equation, a pitcher's success at getting hitters out is dependent on his defense, and not on the pitcher's skill.

dougaiton · 03-08-2004, 12:37 PM

In Moyer's case, playing in the best pitcher's park with one of the best outfield defenses behind him, his stats are reduced remarkably. Petitte plays in an average park with terrible infield defense. Remember, you only need to account for a drop of something over 0.026 in OBA for them to have the same ability to get hits off him if we ignored Ks - and the Ks also only count for about 50 of 600 outs made in that season (although some argue Moyer is a special case, I am not overly convinced by Tippet's evidence).

crackpott · 03-08-2004, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ctorg
But a batter's K rating does matter in V5. In fact, it's pretty accurate. Batters who strike out very little according to their ratings strike out very little in the game. The difference is purely in the logical flow, and shows up much more on the pitcher's side of things as you described.

Alright, I edit my statement. The Stirkeout rating matters to determine how much a batter will strikeout, but how much a batter strikes out is effectively meaningless, making the rating also fairly useless.

Henry · 03-08-2004, 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by crackpott
Alright, I edit my statement. The Stirkeout rating matters to determine how much a batter will strikeout, but how much a batter strikes out is effectively meaningless, making the rating also fairly useless.

Which means it should be ignored ? ...thus all batters strikeout frequency is "only" dependent on the pitcher ?

Henry

crackpott · 03-08-2004, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Henry
Which means it should be ignored ? ...thus all batters strikeout frequency is "only" dependent on the pitcher ?

Henry

Why shouldn't it be? It doesn't affect stats. If I have a guy who puts up 200 K's and a guy who puts up 50 with the same stats otherwise, it makes no difference if he strikes out since it would have been an out anyway. In real life, a strikeout takes away an opportunity for the player to get a hit. If what I read in the screenshot forum is true, here it takes away nothing. The strikeout becomes meaningless since you can just think "Well... he was going to get out anyway." Sure, it's always frustrating to watch a guy strike out in the game, but you just need to remind yourself it doesn't matter.

I am confused about something though. If the batter strikeout rating doesn't affect the players batting average, how can this work?

For example, pitchers strikeouts affect how many hits they allow. For this, their strikeout rating is combined with the batter strikeout rating. This would logically mean that the stikeout thing is accounted for first, before the hit/out, which would MAKE strikeouts for batters matter. But according to the other thread if two guys with the same "contact" rating and different K ratings will have the same average, it doesn't seem to work this way.

ctorg · 03-08-2004, 02:06 PM

The problem here is that, while there is some correlation between low strikeouts and high batting average, it is very far from a perfect correlation. There have been guys who have led the league in hits and strikeouts (okay, I can only think of Andres Galarraga, but there's at least him). Babe Ruth struck out a whole lot for the way things were in his day, and still put up a pretty impressive batting average. The route you take to get to whether a batter strikes out or not does not make it any more meaningful or meaningless.

crackpott · 03-08-2004, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ctorg
The problem here is that, while there is some correlation between low strikeouts and high batting average, it is very far from a perfect correlation. There have been guys who have led the league in hits and strikeouts (okay, I can only think of Andres Galarraga, but there's at least him). Babe Ruth struck out a whole lot for the way things were in his day, and still put up a pretty impressive batting average. The route you take to get to whether a batter strikes out or not does not make it any more meaningful or meaningless.

Yes, there are high K/high average guys. But do you not think that if they didn't strike out so much they wouldn't have had an even higher batting average?

Henry · 03-08-2004, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by crackpott
Yes, there are high K/high average guys. But do you not think that if they didn't strike out so much they wouldn't have had an even higher batting average?

Simply put, no. I don't see how you could assume that striking out less would lead to more hits - it only leads to contact with the ball - which at least 70% of the time is going to be an out. To assume that contact would lead to a hit is a big jump. An out is an out is an out - by your own words...

Henry

Gastric ReFlux · 03-08-2004, 02:19 PM

I suppose the point may be that BABIP for batters is a much larger deviation for hitters than it is for pitchers. A batter who strikes out a lot may be using a strategy of swing hard so that the balls he hits are harder for the defense to make a play on.

So the assumption that if the batter's strikeouts were to go lower, his batting average would climb is correct if we can also assume that his BABIP remains constant. It may not though, it may be in order for the hitter to strike out less, he has to give up swinging as hard as he does at every pitcher, resulting in balls that the defense is more able to make a play on.

Henry · 03-08-2004, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gastric ReFlux
I suppose the point may be that BABIP for batters is a much larger deviation for hitters than it is for pitchers. A batter who strikes out a lot may be using a strategy of swing hard so that the balls he hits are harder for the defense to make a play on.

So the assumption that if the batter's strikeouts were to go lower, his batting average would climb is correct if we can also assume that his BABIP remains constant. It may not though, it may be in order for the hitter to strike out less, he has to give up swinging as hard as he does at every pitcher, resulting in balls that the defense is more able to make a play on.

Right On. A nemesis in truth

Henry

TRO · 03-08-2004, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Henry
Simply put, no. I don't see how you could assume that striking out less would lead to more hits - it only leads to contact with the ball - which at least 70% of the time is going to be an out. To assume that contact would lead to a hit is a big jump. An out is an out is an out - by your own words...

Henry

Actually, in your own words, it would lead to 30% of his Ks in more hits which would increase his average.

The batter is the first person that can get himself out, if he puts the ball in play, he forces somebody else to make the out. Even if only 1 of his 50 extra pieces of contact "found a hole", that 1 hit increases his average.

Henry · 03-08-2004, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TRO
Actually, in your own words, it would lead to 30% of his Ks in more hits which would increase his average.

The batter is the first person that can get himself out, if he puts the ball in play, he forces somebody else to make the out. Even if only 1 of his 50 extra pieces of contact "found a hole", that 1 hit increases his average.

This is one of those "chicken and the egg" problems. The point I take issue with is you can't assume that any balls put in play that were originally strikeouts would be hits. To take the step that all converted strikeouts are now under the same rules as any other ball put in contact is a huge assumption. The fact is, if they're not strikeouts, we have no way of knowing what they would be.

I think it's best to wait and see how the new system generates stats before we get to invloved in discussing whether it's right or not. It certainly should be more accurate than the old system.

Henry

EagleEye_0 · 03-08-2004, 02:54 PM

Shouldn't the game first calculate whether it is a strikeout or not? I mean,the game should first calculate whether contact with the pitch is made, and if contact is made then it goes to the other ratings to determine the result of the contact with the ball.

Gastric ReFlux · 03-08-2004, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TRO
Actually, in your own words, it would lead to 30% of his Ks in more hits which would increase his average.

The batter is the first person that can get himself out, if he puts the ball in play, he forces somebody else to make the out. Even if only 1 of his 50 extra pieces of contact "found a hole", that 1 hit increases his average.

You would be incorrect though in assuming that if he strikes out less, the batter's BABIP remains constant. It could in fact drop significantly as the batter uses a strategy of not swinging so hard to make contact more frequently, resulting in balls that are less likely to find holes in the defense.

Look at it this way. In 1980, Mike Schmidt hit .286 with 157 hits in 548 at-bats. He struck out 119 times, meaning that when he hit the ball, he hit at a clip of .366.

That same year, Pete Rose hit .282, 185 hits in 655 at bats, striking out only 33 times. He also only hit 1 home run versus Mike Schmidt's 48. So Pete Rose when making contact hit .295 as compared to Mike Schmidt's .366.

03-08-2004, 01:03 AM	#1
jbmagic Hall Of Famer Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 3,417	Ootp 6 new engine question i waiting to get OOTP 6.... i am a total newbie....so i dont have ootp 5.... can u explain what old engine vs new engine is about? not clear on this....i know we will have an option to switch in ootp 6.. thanks

03-08-2004, 01:18 AM	#2
crackpott Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Toronto Posts: 2,961	well, I'm sure someone will beat me to it, but... The old system was fairly similar regarding hitting. It appears as though most things are merely renaming or minor tweaking. The big change I haven't heard confirmation on is whether a batters strikeout rating will matter. In V5 and below, it basically didn't since the batting calculation was basically walk/hit/out and then what type of hit or out. Meaning a strikeout would occur when the game already decided that an out was to occur. This meant that people with huge numbers of strikeouts were not really penalized for it, as in real life a K is a chance you missed putting the ball in play, but here, it was just a chance you missed getting out. The only significance was it meant you were less likely to hit a sac fly... but also less likely to hit into a DP, so it evened out in my books and I just ignored the rating. Moving onto pitching, this is the key difference. The previous system was fairly flawed in that like batting, strikeouts really didn't matter much, and an important rating was "avoiding hits". Recent studies have shown that there really is little if any ability to actually avoid hits, and lower batting averages allowed are due to strikeouts. So with this flawed rating of players being able to control how frequently they're hit without actually striking anyone out, it needed to be changed. The new system doesn't have "individual" ratings so to speak. Each thing can affect numerous categories from the pitchers ability to K hitters (and effectively lower their batting average) to walks to avoiding homeruns. It's really something we'll need to test to figure out which categories are most important. __________________ Abandoned Planet - Check it out. The photos don't suck anymore.

03-08-2004, 10:52 AM	#5
ctorg Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Queens, NY Posts: 9,848	I believe, according to the New Baseball Logic, this is due to defense. Apparently, if you remove strikeouts from the equation, a pitcher's success at getting hitters out is dependent on his defense, and not on the pitcher's skill. __________________ My music "When the trees blow back and forth, that's what makes the wind." - Steven Wright Fjord emena pancreas thorax fornicate marmalade morpheme proteolysis smaxa cabana offal srue vitriol grope hallelujah lentils

03-08-2004, 12:37 PM	#6
dougaiton Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Location: Posts: 3,414	In Moyer's case, playing in the best pitcher's park with one of the best outfield defenses behind him, his stats are reduced remarkably. Petitte plays in an average park with terrible infield defense. Remember, you only need to account for a drop of something over 0.026 in OBA for them to have the same ability to get hits off him if we ignored Ks - and the Ks also only count for about 50 of 600 outs made in that season (although some argue Moyer is a special case, I am not overly convinced by Tippet's evidence). __________________ tThis shower of clowns My park-adjusted, historically split Born in '69 league file! (also at Joe's wonderful site +BBSC)

03-08-2004, 02:06 PM	#10
ctorg Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Queens, NY Posts: 9,848	The problem here is that, while there is some correlation between low strikeouts and high batting average, it is very far from a perfect correlation. There have been guys who have led the league in hits and strikeouts (okay, I can only think of Andres Galarraga, but there's at least him). Babe Ruth struck out a whole lot for the way things were in his day, and still put up a pretty impressive batting average. The route you take to get to whether a batter strikes out or not does not make it any more meaningful or meaningless. __________________ My music "When the trees blow back and forth, that's what makes the wind." - Steven Wright Fjord emena pancreas thorax fornicate marmalade morpheme proteolysis smaxa cabana offal srue vitriol grope hallelujah lentils

03-08-2004, 10:30 AM	#4
Ervinmagicsmall Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Illinoiz Posts: 67	Okay, I understand the concept of what the new pitching engine is based on, but I'm still a bit confoozled about how this concept applies to both real-life baseball and how it'll apply in-game. For instance look at stats for Moyer and Pettite last year: Moyer--215 IP 3.27 era 129 k 66 BB 19 HR OBA .246 Pettite-208 IP 4.02 era 180 k 50 BB 21HR OBA .272 So Pettite has more K's, less walks, roughly the same HR, yet his ERA and Opponents BA are both significantly higher. What am I missing? Park effects? Defense? Poise? Clutch? Statistical anomaly? Would the new pitching engine allow for something like this? Why am I asking so many questions? All in all, I'll be happy if the engine gives me realistic results regardless of the underlying concept, but still I am curious about it.

03-08-2004, 02:19 PM	#13
Gastric ReFlux Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Member #3409 Posts: 8,350	I suppose the point may be that BABIP for batters is a much larger deviation for hitters than it is for pitchers. A batter who strikes out a lot may be using a strategy of swing hard so that the balls he hits are harder for the defense to make a play on. So the assumption that if the batter's strikeouts were to go lower, his batting average would climb is correct if we can also assume that his BABIP remains constant. It may not though, it may be in order for the hitter to strike out less, he has to give up swinging as hard as he does at every pitcher, resulting in balls that the defense is more able to make a play on.

03-08-2004, 02:54 PM	#17
EagleEye_0 All Star Starter Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 1,426	Shouldn't the game first calculate whether it is a strikeout or not? I mean,the game should first calculate whether contact with the pitch is made, and if contact is made then it goes to the other ratings to determine the result of the contact with the ball.