Player Rest

[Questdog]

Originally Posted by andymac

Well 1) I would think that fatigue would be much less of a factor for someone in their late teen's or early 20's than for a player who is in his mid to late 30's. 2) I would also doubt that you were expected to do as much extra work on game days in college as most pro's do. I have a friend who is in the minors and he has told me that it isn't even close the amount of running/fielding work that is expected of players every day there than when he was in college. I'm sure once they get to the majors some of those decisions are left up to the players as far as how they prepare but I would bet they are expected to get a decent amount of work in on most clubs.

Trying to use personal experience to base what should be the effects of a feature in a game such as this is just a bad idea in general. There are way too many factors that are going to be different from your experience and the situation the game is trying to replicate to realistically compare them.

If ML clubs are fatiguing their players by working them out, then they are morons....

Luckily, I played for a coach who wasn't concerned with conditioning....

About the point of all the extracurricular activity wearing players down: This will happen whether the player plays in a game or not and sitting out a game won't negate that, so to talk about that entering into the fatigue rating is unjustified. Players talk all the time about how the grind of the season wears them down, but that is irrelevant, since the grind will be there no matter what. It's already a part of the statistical results and to add more modifiers for it is overkill, especially since it is universal and unmeasurable.

We should be talking about the PHYSICAL fatigue a player accumulates from playing in a game and how it relates to the GAME (OOTP). Pitchers obviously cannot pitch 9 innings everyday, so we need some sort of way of reflecting that in the game to keep people from doing it. Having catchers start 162 games in a season is unrealistic, so we need a system to avoid that. But for all the rest of the players there is no need need to have any game system to keep players from playing everyday. Real players CAN and DO play in 162 games in a year, so we should not be preventing it in our game, especially when their is NO evidence to suggest that playing a full schedule is detrimental to a player's output. The injury system will prevent ALL starters from ALL teams playing ALL 162 games. And with the report that day-to-day injuries have be bumped up, there seems to be no need for regular player position fatigue and actually puts unrealistic constraints on a game players decisions.

Thank you.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by Questdog

If ML clubs are fatiguing their players by working them out, then they are morons....

Even if those players are improving based on working out? Nobody can just show up and be a great baseball player at the major league level. It takes some work.

Yes, players can play 162 games a year but that doesn't mean they don't need rest. Those players do get days off (team off days) and I would bet there are days where they do less as far as workouts for that day to compensate for staying in the lineup every game.

Yes, we are talking about a general fatigue simulation here and unless the game is going to start having us manage a players pre and post game workouts then it should consider those in its' fatigue model.

I think that the fatigue system needs to be tweaked obviously since pinch-hitters shouldn't receive the same hit as a player out there for nine innings but just saying that players don't fatigue at all unless they are catchers isn't realistic IMO either.

[BIG Irish]

QUESTDOG is right...Cal Ripken was a wuss!!! I bet you get Lou Gehrig's disease by being lazy!

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by BIG Irish

QUESTDOG is right...Cal Ripken was a wuss!!! I bet you get Lou Gehrig's disease by being lazy!

No, but Cal Ripken will forever be the most classless player in my lifetime for willingly breaking the record of a man whose streak only stopped because he was DYING.

[Zitofan75]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

No, but Cal Ripken will forever be the most classless player in my lifetime for willingly breaking the record of a man whose streak only stopped because he was DYING.

????? Records are meant to be broken. Besides I'm sure you can think of a few more players who were far more classless than Cal Ripken ...

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by Zitofan75

????? Records are meant to be broken. Besides I'm sure you can think of a few more players who were far more classless than Cal Ripken ...

Not me. None of those other players willing chose to break the record of a man whose streak stopped because he was dying. If you do coke or get drunk and do something stupid, that is one thing. If you ask that person about it later, he's going to know that he shouldn't have done it. And he probably wouldn't have done it if he had his wits about it.

If you do steroids or otherwise cheat, then you're a pathetic man who couldn't win on his own merits.

But when you consciously and wittingly make a choice like Cal Ripken did, then you're truly showing that you have no class. There's no excuse of being drunk or slipping into a momentary fit of rage. You're showing that you have no respect or honor for a baseball legend, and you kept right on playing and breaking that record even though you had months and years to rethink it.

[Zitofan75]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

Nope, because none of them willing chose to break the record of a man whose streak stopped because he was dying. If you do coke or get drunk and do something stupid, that is one thing. If you ask that person about it later, he's going to know that he shouldn't have done it. And he probably wouldn't have done it if he had his wits about it.

If you do steroids or otherwise cheat, then you're a pathetic man who couldn't win on his own merits.

But when you consciously and wittingly make a choice like Cal Ripken did, then you're truly showing that you have no class. There's no excuse of being drunk or slipping into a momentary fit of rage. You're showing that you have no respect or honor for a baseball legend, and you kept right on playing and breaking that record even though you had months and years to rethink it.

Actually being drunk or losing yourself in a fit of rage is a far worse excuse to me than breaking a streak. The first ones tend to get people hurt or killed, you know? The second one does not.

[markprior22]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

No, but Cal Ripken will forever be the most classless player in my lifetime for willingly breaking the record of a man whose streak only stopped because he was DYING.

Ok...I generally refrain from partaking in threads like this, but the above is one of the stupidest things I've ever read on this (or any other) message board.

[Questdog]

Originally Posted by markprior22

Ok...I generally refrain from partaking in threads like this, but the above is one of the stupidest things I've ever read on this (or any other) message board.

What about Hank Aaron? The no good birdhead willingly broke the record of a man who's home run total ended at 714 only because he got too old to hit anymore.... What a classless loser....

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by markprior22

Ok...I generally refrain from partaking in threads like this, but the above is one of the stupidest things I've ever read on this (or any other) message board.

Good. If you agreed with me, I'd be worried.

[The Wolf]

I'd bet you a dollar that Gehrig would have liked Ripken.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by markprior22

Ok...I generally refrain from partaking in threads like this, but the above is one of the stupidest things I've ever read on this (or any other) message board.

I've seen things that were far more stupid posted on game message boards earlier today.

[Zitofan75]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

I'd bet you a dollar that Gehrig would have liked Ripken.

Who knows? Gehrig might not have minded. Especially since Gehrig never enjoyed being around the flashy, showboating Babe, and most people regarded Ripken as a class act on and off the field they might've liked each other.

[The Wolf]

I bet you're right.

[Bosscat]

Originally Posted by Questdog

All I know is that I played Centerfield in college and I NEVER was tired from playing a game. And I was a speedy leadoff type who ran a LOT. We didn't play 162 games but we played about 30-40 in one month in the fall and 60 or so in 2 months in the spring....

Questdog - What college level did you play at that permitted 90-100 games per season?

Just curious...

[Questdog]

Originally Posted by Bosscat

Questdog - What college level did you play at that permitted 90-100 games per season?

Just curious...

Fall Baseball is not a part of the regular Spring Season....

[Bosscat]

Originally Posted by Questdog

We should be talking about the PHYSICAL fatigue a player accumulates from playing in a game and how it relates to the GAME (OOTP). Pitchers obviously cannot pitch 9 innings everyday, so we need some sort of way of reflecting that in the game to keep people from doing it. Having catchers start 162 games in a season is unrealistic, so we need a system to avoid that. But for all the rest of the players there is no need need to have any game system to keep players from playing everyday. Real players CAN and DO play in 162 games in a year, so we should not be preventing it in our game, especially when their is NO evidence to suggest that playing a full schedule is detrimental to a player's output. The injury system will prevent ALL starters from ALL teams playing ALL 162 games. And with the report that day-to-day injuries have be bumped up, there seems to be no need for regular player position fatigue and actually puts unrealistic constraints on a game players decisions.

Thank you.

Just to be clear, I am sure many of you have played this game more than I have, but I really did not have much concern with how it handles position player fatigue.

In response to Questdogs' posts, I respectfully disagree that playing 162 game season over a six month period is not physically taxing. First, I never assumed that the fatigue in this game was only physical. I may be wrong, but I assumed the game took mental fatigue into account as well. Also, to base the argument on a comparison to a college player's schedule (three or four games a week in the spring and early summer) to a Major League player's schedule (six or seven games a week with the bulk of the season in the summer) is not very convincing. Further, these players play this six month grind after six weeks of preparation that includes 4 weeks of games. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that spring training is anywhere close to be as taxing as the regular season, but to assume the every day grind of preparing to play and then playing games for 7 1/2 to 8 months is not going to fatigue a player physically and mentally is not realistic.

Are there players today who play 162 games per season? Absolutely, Tejada and Sizemore come to mind for me and there may be others. The reason what they do is noteworthy is because it is so rare. Therefore, in my opinion, it should be rare in this game as well. Should most starters play 150+ games in OOTP? Without a doubt. In my experience, that is what happens. The times my starters (other than my catcher) don't play 150+ games is when they are injured during the season.

I get as frustrated as anyone when my #3 hitter is fatigued with a big series coming up. To me that means that just like in RL, as a manager I must plan to rest my key players before a big series. While the season is going on, I want those players to be 100% every day too, but in the long run, I would be disappointed in the game if they were.

[Bishop]

In 2005, it appears 4 players in the national league played 162 games.

Jason Bey - 26
Bobby Abreu - 31
Carlos Lee - 29
Juan Pierre - 27

If we open it up to 160 games, 6 players.

Andreuw Jones - 28
Jeromy Burnitz - 36
Adam Dunn - 25
David Wright - 22
Jose Reyes - 22
Albert Pujols - 25 (man, he sucks! *please come play for us*)


So, basically 10 players out of what, 400 played all or almost all of their games. Sure, not all of that is fatigue, and it's only the national league I looked at, but clearly playing 162 games is asking a -lot- of players. Most are fairly young, with some abberations.

[Bosscat]

Originally Posted by Questdog

Fall Baseball is not a part of the regular Spring Season....

At what level?

The NCAA Division I limit for a player in an academic year is 56. That doesn't include conference or NCAA tournament games, but I am still struggling to get to 90-100.

[Questdog]

Originally Posted by Bishop

In 2005, it appears 4 players in the national league played 162 games.

Jason Bey - 26
Bobby Abreu - 31
Carlos Lee - 29
Juan Pierre - 27

If we open it up to 160 games, 6 players.

Andreuw Jones - 28
Jeromy Burnitz - 36
Adam Dunn - 25
David Wright - 22
Jose Reyes - 22
Albert Pujols - 25 (man, he sucks! *please come play for us*)


So, basically 10 players out of what, 400 played all or almost all of their games. Sure, not all of that is fatigue, and it's only the national league I looked at, but clearly playing 162 games is asking a -lot- of players. Most are fairly young, with some abberations.

Players don't play every single game as a rule, but it has nothing to do with fatigue:

#1) Performance. Not all positions on every team have a clear cut starter whom the manager is tickled pink to have in the lineup. When a player slumps or shows he's maybe not the answer, the manager looks to other players, either to take over the position or to just give the player a break to maybe change his luck.

#2) Injuries and illness. It is very difficult to make it through a 162 game schedule without getting hurt.

#3) Bench players need to keep their skills sharp, so starters have to sit when a backup gets some playing time.

#4) Matchups. Especially in these days, managers will write or erase players names in the lineup based on the handedness of the pitcher and the players' past history facing one another.

I would say that these 4 explanations more than account for all time off taken by players. Playing a baseball game is just NOT that strenuous of an activity, except for pitchers and catchers. Traveling and working away from home for six months straight ARE stressful, but as I've said, the effects of those factors are universal and 1) are not relieved by sitting on the bench during the game instead of standing in left field and 2) are already reflected in the players statistical results and do not need further elaboration.