Position disappeared

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by ThePretender

Why is that bizarre? A decline in skills doesn't wait until the end of the season, allowing players to neatly play defence well one season and fall apart over the offseason. They can come quickly, and they can come suddenly.

Players can be injured in the middle of the season, and these injuries can permanently alter a player's ability, creating a physical decline. You can have the experience or knowledge to play a position, but if your body is breaking down, you can most definitely lose the skill to play a position overnight.

Even if you know what you should do to react to a play, if you physically are slower (ie less range), you won't be able to get to a ball you used to be able to catch, and therefore are no longer able to play.

I agree turn DP should lower the 3B position rating, but if a physical decline caused something like range/arm to decline to the point where they can't remotely play 3B, then I agree the skill should disappear.

We're not talking about injuries. We're talking about guys having good ratings at a position and then having no ratings because one skill falls below a certain threshold. It's unrealistic.

What's realistic is the overall position rating steadily declining until it disappears. That could happen rapidly (as Mets fans are seeing with David Wright, although his deterioration is caused by injury) or it can happen over the course of years. But a player should not go from well-rated at a position to not rated at all overnight if a significant injury is not involved.

[ThePretender]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

We're not talking about injuries. We're talking about guys having good ratings at a position and then having no ratings because one skill falls below a certain threshold. It's unrealistic.

Is it? Jose Bautista didn't have a leg injury and yet his range declined significantly in the second half of last season. His shoulder injury didn't prevent him from missing routine plays, and it was a dramatic drop off. It was unbelievable how he was failing to make routine plays that he would have a week or two previous.

It happens more often than you think. In most of these cases a guy steadily loses the rating over time, and eventually it gets to the point where it disappears. Physical skills decline doesn't just happen between October and March.

What's realistic is the overall position rating steadily declining until it disappears. That could happen rapidly (as Mets fans are seeing with David Wright, although his deterioration is caused by injury) or it can happen over the course of years. But a player should not go from well-rated at a position to not rated at all overnight if a significant injury is not involved.

That's what happens. I think in most cases people don't realize the decline is happening. Or the skill was so borderline to begin with, that when it goes, the player loses their ability.

For instance, I think of a player like Player Report for #24 Dermot Davidson. His IF range over his entire career was barely above 20, and he had a brutal defensive #. You can see the UZR was always bad. But then it disappeared, as his range further declined. Now he's limited to 1B/DH.

In most of these cases it'll happen to guys:

1) Coming off of injuries
2) Getting older and losing the physical skill (ie slow decline)
3) Guys who were borderline defenders, usually below average, where the tiniest decline would leave them unable to play

It doesn't surprise me when these things happen, and I'm not sure what was so surprising here.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by grmagne

I completely agree. I've always found it a bit bizarre that a player can completely lose his ability to play a position one day, even though he played it well the day before (and, often, throughout his whole career).

but, the guy didn't completely lose his ability at all... in fact, he's still essentially the same when his turn dp dipped below 30 and his other fielding ratings fine.

secondly, when it happens it's not just 1 day. he was slowly losing an already low turn dp rating...

you guys are applying your concerns about the asthetics to the game... they are exclusive issues of one and other. you want to 'see' a rating... even though the guy doesn't have one, he is more than competent and has experience at 3b.

what you are not seeing is making you unsure about the 3b ability... no worries, he is nearly as good as before when you were happy with him and could see a 3b defensive rating. an ootp rep clarified that, so don't take my word.

[BigRed75]

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

The 3B "turn DP" rating would come into effect for an "around the horn" DP. So if he's below the threshold, you'll see less DPs that he starts at the hot corner.

That doesn't impact the rest of his ratings, though. He should still make the same number of the rest of his plays, and the same number of errors, and you can probably still continue to play him at 3B and you won't notice a big drop-off in play.

Glad to see I was right about Turn DP with regards to third basemen and that it's not just about plays up the middle, but starting DPs as well...

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by ThePretender

Is it? Jose Bautista didn't have a leg injury and yet his range declined significantly in the second half of last season. His shoulder injury didn't prevent him from missing routine plays, and it was a dramatic drop off. It was unbelievable how he was failing to make routine plays that he would have a week or two previous.

It happens more often than you think. In most of these cases a guy steadily loses the rating over time, and eventually it gets to the point where it disappears. Physical skills decline doesn't just happen between October and March.

I'm not sure if you're disagreeing or agreeing with me. Your Bautista example is exactly what I'm talking about. He didn't go from a good outfielder to completely unable to play the position overnight. He has steadily declined. But in OOTP, guys go from being average or even above average defenders to having no rating whatsoever at a position, which suggests he's unable to play that position anymore. As the individual ratings decline (arm, range, etc.), the overall position rating should decline. The overall rating should not completely disappear just because one of the individual ratings falls below a certain threshold.

Plus, as Matt told us earlier with third basemen, the lack of a rating may not indicate that a guy can't be serviceable at that position. So it's not realistic for the position rating to just disappear if the individual ratings tell us (and the game engine agrees) that the player can still be effective at that position.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by NoOne

what you are not seeing is making you unsure about the 3b ability... no worries, he is nearly as good as before when you were happy with him and could see a 3b defensive rating. an ootp rep clarified that, so don't take my word.

And Matt also said this, confirming that the rating probably shouldn't disappear ...

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

But he hasn't lost his experience at the position, he has simply lost an "overall" rating at it. We are likely too aggressive at removing ratings, especially in this case where the turn DP isn't really a "core" skill of a 3B, but in the above case, Headley would not be a "complete butcher" at the position despite the fact that his rating there is listed as 0.

Having a zero or no rating suggests that a guy cannot play the position. Matt is telling us in the above quote that this actually isn't always the case. So there clearly is a misrepresentation at times when a player loses his position rating.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

And Matt also said this, confirming that the rating probably shouldn't disappear ...



Having a zero or no rating suggests that a guy cannot play the position. Matt is telling us in the above quote that this actually isn't always the case. So there clearly is a misrepresentation at times when a player loses his position rating.

well we've just learned that it does not suggest that. i think it's more a mole hill than a mountain of a problem, because it seems fairly straightforward to me. the guy shouldn't be a 3b, but he's good enough to suffice. it makes perfect sense that he not have a 3b rating, too. this is a matter of splitting hairs. maybe it has somethign to do with AI decisions... there's lots more related to this beyond the context of this thread.

About turn DP: i think you are backward on what he said.

i'm pretty sure what matt confirmed was that it's the guy catching and "Turning" the double play as it is used in common baseball vernacular in real life. the guy throwing to 3b for a DP is not turning anything.

and logically that makes sense... the first throw is the same as any other on the diamond - whether a toss, a throw or a flip - they are not specific to dp... it's the guy who has to catch, retrieve the ball, turn, and throw that is doing something different - and only that guy.

ss/2b need it because both cover 2b often. it's has nothing to do with the liklihood that they will start one. that initial throw and catch is the same whether 1-2-3 outs or anyone on base.

[ThePretender]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

I'm not sure if you're disagreeing or agreeing with me. Your Bautista example is exactly what I'm talking about. He didn't go from a good outfielder to completely unable to play the position overnight.

No, he actually became unplayable over night. The week before the ASB he was fine, and after that he was failing to make even routine catches. There wasn't a slow, steady decline, it was pretty much overnight. One day he was making routine catches, the next day he literally could not catch even a routine flyball.

He has steadily declined. But in OOTP, guys go from being average or even above average defenders to having no rating whatsoever at a position, which suggests he's unable to play that position anymore. As the individual ratings decline (arm, range, etc.), the overall position rating should decline. The overall rating should not completely disappear just because one of the individual ratings falls below a certain threshold.

Actually, that makes perfect sense. The defensive ratings do decline over time, but eventually a player gets to a point where they need to be moved off the specific position. Maybe the declines should be harsher, if anything, as I typically ignore the position rating and look at the individual ratings. For example, in 1-100, I avoid putting anybody with sub 50 OF range in the OF. A RF might show as 48-70-100 and have an 80 or so OF rating, but most players below 50 range will have negative UZR despite the 80 RF rating.

So I think the position ratings aren't being calculated properly, which is why you think it's a "sudden" overnight decline. In most of these cases, the players aren't performing well, in spite of a good OF or IF rating at a specific position.

Plus, as Matt told us earlier with third basemen, the lack of a rating may not indicate that a guy can't be serviceable at that position. So it's not realistic for the position rating to just disappear if the individual ratings tell us (and the game engine agrees) that the player can still be effective at that position.

This is the only thing I agree with, and it's why I think they need to re-evaluate how the specific position ratings are calculated.

[Number4]

Some generated third baseman have great range, great arm, few errors, but bad DP rating. Those guys usually have a elite rating at 3B, that drops suddenly to zero. Now this guy after a normal decline, not the very rare sudden catastrophy, should be still a very good third baseman, not someone that shouldn't be playing there, which the no rating is supposed to indicate.

And, even if someone is actually a bad defender at a certain position, that still does not mean he should not play there. There are only 1(1B, NL) or 2(1B, DH, AL) obvious spots where bad defenders will be moved if their bat still merits playing time, and 3B is along with LF next in line. If I have a .900 ops hitting 3B, I won't bench him, as long as he fields his position with anything remotely resembling a professional ballplayer.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by NoOne

well we've just learned that it does not suggest that. i think it's more a mole hill than a mountain of a problem, because it seems fairly straightforward to me. the guy shouldn't be a 3b, but he's good enough to suffice. it makes perfect sense that he not have a 3b rating, too. this is a matter of splitting hairs. maybe it has somethign to do with AI decisions... there's lots more related to this beyond the context of this thread.

If you were not a reader of these forums and you played OOTP and saw a guy with no rating at a position, what would you think? I know what I would think -- that he can't play that position at all and will need A LOT of work to possibly become even mediocre at that position. So yes, it does suggest that.

Originally Posted by NoOne

About turn DP: i think you are backward on what he said.

i'm pretty sure what matt confirmed was that it's the guy catching and "Turning" the double play as it is used in common baseball vernacular in real life. the guy throwing to 3b for a DP is not turning anything.

and logically that makes sense... the first throw is the same as any other on the diamond - whether a toss, a throw or a flip - they are not specific to dp... it's the guy who has to catch, retrieve the ball, turn, and throw that is doing something different - and only that guy.

ss/2b need it because both cover 2b often. it's has nothing to do with the liklihood that they will start one. that initial throw and catch is the same whether 1-2-3 outs or anyone on base.

Matt specifically said the Turn DP rating for third basemen is related to them starting a 5-4-3 double play, so I'm not backward on anything. Here's exactly what he said.

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

The 3B "turn DP" rating would come into effect for an "around the horn" DP. So if he's below the threshold, you'll see less DPs that he starts at the hot corner.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by Number4

Some generated third baseman have great range, great arm, few errors, but bad DP rating. Those guys usually have a elite rating at 3B, that drops suddenly to zero. Now this guy after a normal decline, not the very rare sudden catastrophy, should be still a very good third baseman, not someone that shouldn't be playing there, which the no rating is supposed to indicate.

Exactly, thank you for saying this.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by ThePretender

No, he actually became unplayable over night. The week before the ASB he was fine, and after that he was failing to make even routine catches. There wasn't a slow, steady decline, it was pretty much overnight. One day he was making routine catches, the next day he literally could not catch even a routine flyball.

He only had three errors in 118 games in right field last season, so he clearly could catch a routine fly ball. He's a below average defender, but he's not unable to play right field.

[Dukie98]

I have seen the ratings disappear from my starting second baseman, shortstop, and center fielder from my 1902 Indians team, but with no visible reduction in their defensive production.

Nap Lajoie now has no rating for any position - his range/ error/ arm/ DP ratings are 55 / 35/ 50/ 60 on the 20-80 scale. In terms of zone rating, he's a +15 on the season -- in the top ten of all players in MLB at any position.

I traded for shortstop Win Conroy, who had a 55 rating at SS and was playing well enough defensively that he was Honus Wagner's regular late-game defensive sub before the trade. He now is rated only at 3B (40), and has no SS rating -- but he's still +5 in zone rating, which is sixth for all shortstops with much less playing time than the others ahead of him.

Finally, center fielder Ollie Pickering was my only CF on the roster at the start of the season. He now is ranked only at RF (45), and still has a 60 rating for range and arm. He is +8.5 in zone rating (7th best CF in MLB). His error total is high, but being error prone shouldn't suggest that he can play RF without being able to play CF.

Any idea why this is happening? It doesn't seem to be any sort of widespread deterioration in their overall defensive skills, and they all remain plus defenders on the season. Thanks.

[Number4]

Wasn't early year baseball defense notoriously bad? So even if he is by modern standards a bad defender and the position rating, which is calibrated for modern standards, doesn't therefore rate him, he's maybe still better than a lot of the other butchers out there and therefore a plus defender?

[Dukie98]

Originally Posted by Number4

Wasn't early year baseball defense notoriously bad? So even if he is by modern standards a bad defender and the position rating, which is calibrated for modern standards, doesn't therefore rate him, he's maybe still better than a lot of the other butchers out there and therefore a plus defender?

Yes, but each of them had a rating earlier in the season, which apparently vanished at some point during the course of the season, despite playing regularly. I wouldn't have traded for Conroy to play SS if he didn't have a rating at that position. It also doesn't make sense that Lajoie (in his prime) would have a sudden reduction in his skill level that he couldn't play 2B (or, for that matter, any position at all), while still statistically rating as one of the best defensive players in all of baseball.

[ThePretender]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

He only had three errors in 118 games in right field last season, so he clearly could catch a routine fly ball. He's a below average defender, but he's not unable to play right field.

Let's not use errors to judge defence. He had the worst UZR of his career last season and is on pace to do much worse this year.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by ThePretender

Let's not use errors to judge defence. He had the worst UZR of his career last season and is on pace to do much worse this year.

My point was that he was not failing to catch routine fly balls, which is what the person I was responding to was claiming. I didn't say he was a good defender.

[Number4]

What can be a routine fly ball for a good defender can still end up a base hit for a bad one. Routine fly ball does not always mean lazy popup into right.

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by Number4

What can be a routine fly ball for a good defender can still end up a base hit for a bad one. Routine fly ball does not always mean lazy popup into right.

So every routine fly ball he missed last year except for three was ruled a hit?

[ThePretender]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

So every routine fly ball he missed last year except for three was ruled a hit?

Yes. A ball isn't considered an error when it goes over your head because you're 5-10 feet away from it. That's why I prefer UZR.