Reactions to the release + the next steps...

[Tin of Maize]

Originally Posted by blalock84

the truth is, the idea of pitching around in real life is not something you are going to ever do in just any situation with an 0-2 count. It probably should only be used when you are facing a bad matchup or a good hitter with a guy on base and 1st base open. It would probably pretty hurtful to use that strategy in most other situations as more often than not pitching around a batter almost becomes an intentional walk. If the OOTP's function of this is anything like real life, you are gonna hurt yourself by using that alot with an 0-2 count in just any situation.

Actually, it seems to me that even when you just throw to the batter on an 0-2 count, OOTP often calls it a ball. I don't think that IRL pitching out of the strike zone on a 0-2 count is so rare. If it goes to 1-2, well then you go back in there. But if you can get the guy fishing, so much the better. I often click the pitch around button on a 0-2 count.

(Oooo cool! - first post on a new page!)

[texasmame]

Originally Posted by nyy26wc

Having just about 20% of the rotation spots in the majors consisting of pitchers who were entrenched career relievers is hardly something that has happened fairly routintely in history.

This.

[andymac]

This may be a bit harsh, but I think you guys are going to have to get over it. You are using man-made rosters from a previous version when the pitching system has been redesigned. There are going to be oddities in the conversion process, especially when you bring in your preconceived notions and ignore the whole "OOTP doesn't know names, only ratings" thing. There was a significant amount of testing done and OOTP generated players convert over very well. The OOTP9 man-made roster set is probably not balanced enough to handle the conversion without some flaws. If you feel like you need to edit some players, do it.

[Killing Time]

Originally Posted by andymac

This may be a bit harsh, but I think you guys are going to have to get over it.

[thbroman]

ditto . . . you're not going to get the improved pitching system we have all been whining for for years (and now have!) without a few conversion glitches. This is completely to be expected.

[ashantewarrier]

Originally Posted by andymac

This may be a bit harsh, but I think you guys are going to have to get over it. ......If you feel like you need to edit some players, do it.

[HerbD]

My advice all along has been this: Do not convert OOTP leagues when there is a major overhaul to the game engine.

I learned my lesson going from 6.5 to 2007. You just have to keep the league in its current version, start over in the new version, or accept the flaws of the conversion. This is tough for online leagues cause most guys want to play the newer version but your players will not perform as they did in the old version when the game engine is changed.

[satchel]

Originally Posted by HerbD

You just have to keep the league in its current version, start over in the new version, or accept the flaws of the conversion.

Convert, accept, and move on.

[kq76]

Or if you really want to, before you convert, edit down the endurance of all the relievers you don't want to convert to starters to below 25 (on the 1-100 scale, 50 on the 1-250 editor scale). That's what I'm going to recommend to our league. IMO 25 was just way too low of an endurance to have relievers convert to starters or even have as spot starters in the first place. Maybe there really were some people out there who had 25 endurance pitchers starting, but was 25 really the best cutoff? Eh, whatever. At least we have a way around it if we really want one. Tip courtesy of nutlaw.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by satchel

Convert, accept, and move on.

Exactly. My league has been played in every version from 4 to 10.

[Curtis]

Originally Posted by JoeGoNets

I am relatively new and didn't absorb that a guy with endurance 25 could reasonably be expected to start and go 5 innings. But doesn't this mean that the real problem here is that guys like "K-Rod" Francisco Rodriguez should not be rated at endurance 25?

In addition to what andymac said, don't forget that K-Rod has three major league quality pitches (two well above ML quality). Based on both the Version 10 requirements to be a starter and real life, Rodriguez would make a decent starter. He just makes a much better closer. (By the way, the same could be said about Parnell, who did practically nothing but start while in the minors.)

[RomeinaDay]

I have been spending $12,500,000 a year on scouting, $1,250,000 of which is set towards international scouting, yet I have not received a report from my scouting director recommending even one player. Am I missing something or did OOTP X change the way scouts handle international players?

[NomarHits400]

Originally Posted by RomeinaDay

I have been spending $12,500,000 a year on scouting, $1,250,000 of which is set towards international scouting, yet I have not received a report from my scouting director recommending even one player. Am I missing something or did OOTP X change the way scouts handle international players?

Is it possible that "Scout hidden players" was disabled upon league creation?...If so, that would probably explain it.

[endgame]

Originally Posted by RomeinaDay

I have been spending $12,500,000 a year on scouting, $1,250,000 of which is set towards international scouting, yet I have not received a report from my scouting director recommending even one player. Am I missing something or did OOTP X change the way scouts handle international players?

I guess two additional questions come to mind immediately. Have you completed the year yet? What's the league average for scouting budget? I'm assuming it's considerably less than 12mil

[RomeinaDay]

Thanks for the responses, guys. I will look in to both suggestions.

[youwouldno]

I am running a standard league, started in 2009 with an inaugural draft and 30 teams. I have noticed that a number of teams with plenty of budget room only devote the minimum to scouting, whereas some teams are at or above $7.5 million. For instance, after pre-season the Red Sox have 16.5 in room for this year and 50 million for extensions, yet their scouting budget is 1 million.

This is just not realistic and I'm just worried it will have a distorting effect. It also puts me in a bind because I don't want an unfair advantage against the teams refusing to spend, but also don't want to be swamped by the ones spending a bunch.

I don't know how easy this would be to implement, but scouting budgets should probably be confined to a relatively narrow range, because in real life no team spends 10X more than another on this. Finances vary most when it comes to signing bonuses, which are one of the most important aspects still not included in the game (and which I assume would be difficult to add in patch form).

I have played many of the previous OOTPB incarnations and definitely like this one, just thought I would share something that seems out of whack.

A couple of other observations:

- The arbitration system is improved though still a bit off in a few respects. One fix that would get it pretty close to realism would be for the GM to get the player's requested salary when submitting the team's number, as happens in real life. Along with this, it should be possible to sign a contract after exchanging numbers that cancels the arbitration contract. This happens pretty frequently in baseball, as both sides usually try to compromise on their own.

Though I guess this is a wider issue, that once a player's salary is set for the year only an extension is possible? IIRC in previous games that was not the case and it definitely is more realistic the former way.

- Too many pitchers throw in the high 90s. In general, there seem to be a ton of dominant relievers, way beyond what we actually see in MLB.

[Nutlaw]

Originally Posted by youwouldno

The arbitration system is improved though still a bit off in a few respects. One fix that would get it pretty close to realism would be for the GM to get the player's requested salary when submitting the team's number, as happens in real life.

Do you mean that the team is told the player's bid after submitting its own bid or before? If the latter, I'm fairly sure that that is not the case.

Originally Posted by youwouldno

Along with this, it should be possible to sign a contract after exchanging numbers that cancels the arbitration contract. This happens pretty frequently in baseball, as both sides usually try to compromise on their own.

Do you mean that the player and team often agree to a contract after exchanging bids and before the arbitration case is heard? That happens. If you mean that the player and team agree to an extension that negates the result of an arbitration case, then that does not.

[youwouldno]

Originally Posted by Nutlaw

Do you mean that the team is told the player's bid after submitting its own bid or before? If the latter, I'm fairly sure that that is not the case.

Well I think its kind of simultaneous, so for the purposes of the game it would have to be after.

Originally Posted by Nutlaw

Do you mean that the player and team often agree to a contract after exchanging bids and before the arbitration case is heard? That happens. If you mean that the player and team agree to an extension that negates the result of an arbitration case, then that does not.

It absolutely does. Not necessarily often because players and teams usually agree to a deal before the arbitration hearing. If they don't, it means there are significant disagreements which make a long-term deal a tough prospect. But the character of the contract does not depend on how it comes about (agreement or arbitrator). Labor law does not displace the right of employer and employee to negotiate.

An example of a 1-year contract being replaced would be Justin's Morneau's 6-year contract signed on 1/25/08. He had agreed to a 1-year deal on 1/18/08; the Jan 25 contract replaced it with respect to the 2008 season. His base salary actually remained the same, but he received a signing bonus and additional incentive provisions.

I am not talking out of my butt on this - I studied sports labor law in law school with significant attention to the reserve clause and related issues (including arbitration). It's a relatively minor issue but I found it odd considering that previous versions of the game gave managers the choice of whether to modify the upcoming season as part of extension talks.

[Nutlaw]

Originally Posted by youwouldno

Well I think its kind of simultaneous, so for the purposes of the game it would have to be after.

Right. Good.

Originally Posted by youwouldno

It absolutely does. Not necessarily often because players and teams usually agree to a deal before the arbitration hearing. If they don't, it means there are significant disagreements which make a long-term deal a tough prospect.

Sure, you could supercede the arbitration contract with a longer extension. We're agreeing - I was just making sure.

Anyway, yes, I've been trying to hammer similar points home. Nothing will happen for patch one, but I'm hopeful that we can see improvement by patch two (no promises as to what Markus will actually want to work on, however).

[Tin of Maize]

Originally Posted by NomarHits400

Is it possible that "Scout hidden players" was disabled upon league creation?...If so, that would probably explain it.

"scout hidden players?" Where, exactly, would this be disabled or enabled? Is it possible to change it once the league is underway?