TotalMinors v 1.1 Released - Page 8

Shorty · 04-07-2003, 12:16 AM

Check out the Runelyvs Hernandez guy in KC.. he's been spectacular over 13 innings this season.. he could be a big rookie this year.

Shorty · 04-07-2003, 03:44 PM

Also, Ge, KC's starting 1B Ken Harvey needs to be imported, it looks as if you created him.

He had at-bats in 2001 that are never registered in your version of him.

Mariner and Giants Fan · 04-07-2003, 04:23 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by GForce22
[B]ok, another update, recently completed stuff:
All pitching rotations accurate
all transactions made up to opening day
team markets adjusted
pitching ratings developed with my formulas for all top 30 pitching prospects not covered in v 1.1. The ratings will be imported sometime tomorrow.
25 Man Rosters & Disabled lists with accurate times remaining

still to do:
more added prospects
accurate lineups/depth charts
moving minor leaguers to correct levels
ratings tweaks/touch-ups
as many eligible players for the 2003 draft as I have time to enter. Barring setbacks this week, I hope to get as many as 200 guys I have info for into the game for the draft.

as of now, we are still good for an April 15 release. Productive weekend.

Thanks for the continued support.

At lest this gives me something good to look forward to on TAX day, though it really doesn't balance out the bad (taxes owed) for that day. Oh well I won't have to worry about it after the 15th for another year

GForce22 · 04-07-2003, 05:22 PM

I'll give your teams some extra cash for OOTP

GH

GForce22 · 04-08-2003, 04:50 PM

update 4/8:

-- top 50 college prospects added for 2003 draft (from here I will do the top 50 H.S., then the next 50 college, then next 50 H.S. if time allows. I will definitely get to the top 50 H.S. prospects. From the last 100 depend on time.)
-- Extra batch prospects (those not in the top 30 but shown on Baseball America's organizational depth chart in the Prospect Handbook) added for the NL East and Central. Those teams now have between 80-95 prospects (Milwaukee has the least, Pittsburgh the most...that 95 number is a bit high for my liking so I may eliminate a couple of guys just to avoid roster problems).

Keep in mind, I am getting what I call "shells" of these guys in the game right now. That means they have accurate handedness, HT, WT and ages (the batch prospects have correct birthdays, the college prospects right now just have ages right...if you know where I can find their birthdays, let me know.) Talents are loosely accurate. Hopefully I will have time to run these guys through my sheets (batch guys)/read up on them more (amateurs) to make the ratings more accurate.

I am getting every player who I want included in TotalMinors into the opening day version. That will allow me to update the .csv files for ratings adjustments and the best accuracy possible, post those .csv files on my site for download, and you will be able to update your league with any changes I make without having to restart your league. So, for example, some of the college guys may not be rated as accurately as I would like at the opening release, depending on time. But if I get them how I want them a week after release, I can post the csv files, you can import them, and the guys will be rated more appropriately, all while your season continues as it was. Hopefully this makes sense.

I had said the release date would be the 15th. Right now that still seems accurate. It may even be a little earlier if the next few days go well. I'm going to give an April 13-April 20 range (call the late side of this the unknown BABY FACTOR) for the release. Hopefully it will be the first half of that range. Right now I still think it will be.

GH

DCHepler25 · 04-08-2003, 05:13 PM

GForce...

I want to let you know where I'm at with those Fan Interest numbers. I have tweaked them a couple of times and, hopefully after this next round of testing, they will be accurate. I will have them done and to you in time for your opening day, v2 release.

I must warn people that these numbers are based on last year's team attendance and record. Teams that consistantly performed better in my simms of the 2003 season, had better attendance figures and thus make it hard to come-up with an accurate FI#. Also, some teams performed much worse but still out-drew their 2002 attendance and, so, their FI#'s may seem much lower than would be expected. One example is Anaheim. You may think the defending champs should draw alot of people and I have adjusted their expected attendance figures accordingly. However, in my testing, they have averaged 19 fewer wins in 2003 than in 2002 and I have had to drop their FI# down to about 64. Even at this low number for the champs they will consistantly draw 500,000 - 1million more fans.

I hope this explanation helps. Basically, I'm trying to find FI#'s that will produce attendance figures equal to 2002. I am not trying to reduce anyone's attendance, but that has happened occasionally(2% of teams over ten plus simmed seasons). Most major attendance increases have occurred because the team performed much better than in 2002. Philly has done this in every season I have simmed.

Again, I hope this helps.

GForce22 · 04-08-2003, 05:20 PM

sounds good...this will be a big bonus to the release. Thanks for your help.

GH

DCHepler25 · 04-09-2003, 09:17 AM

GH...

After wondering why the FI#s I came-up with were so low, I took a look at the Fan Loyalty settings. I believe these settings are too high and may be the reason why the FI#s are low. I think, and believe you would agree, that the average team should have an AVERAGE fan loyalty setting. However, the average setting in your TM roster set is GOOD. 20 of 30 teams are set at GOOD or better, 6 are average and 4 are fair with no poor or extremely poor teams. I think Florida, Montreal, and Tampa Bay should be at least poor, if not extremely poor. I'm not trying to put you down here and please don't think that. I don't even know if you adjusted these settings or if they were default ones the game has set.

What I think I will do, if it is ok with you, is take a look at the average attendance figures over the past 3-5 years and see if we can't use the average percentage of seats filled to come-up with a more realistic breakdown of fan loyalty.

Please let me know what you think.

GForce22 · 04-09-2003, 11:09 AM

I hadn't touched fan loyalty settings at all, so you may be completely right here.

I think your 3-5 year thing works well. I personally like the attendance per win figure, but it's your time so you let me know. I just think attendance per win is a better measure of loyalty overall than pure attendance. But I appreciate your efforts, regardless, and trust what you come up with.

GH

GForce22 · 04-09-2003, 11:57 AM

quick update: the top 50 High School players as per Baseball America are now in the set for the 2003 draft as well.

GH

bauermj · 04-09-2003, 12:07 PM

ok, so the top 50 college and top 50 hs are in for the draft. Are these the players (plus any additional) that you plan on releasing csv updates for? Also, you didn't make too many of them studs did you? Just because some may not choose to go pro in real life next season and having 100 top notch prospects may be a bit much for a draft..

Just trying to get a feel. These additions are incredible and I certainly can't wait to get ahold of the final version!

GForce22 · 04-09-2003, 12:22 PM

bauermj,

since it's so hard to project these guys, I'm kind of going bell curvish with respect to the star ratings. So it would be similar to (assuming 100 college and 100 H.S. by the time it's done)

5 star: 3
4.5 star: 5
4 star: 10
3.5 star: 17
3 star: 30
2.5 star: 17
2 star: 10
1.5 star: 5
1 star: 3

Those will be the base ratings, then I'll adjust as I feel needed. It should give you a few potential stars, a bunch of solid players, and some guys who won't pan out. All of these are subject to the game's talent fluctuations. If guys think that curve looks off, I'll be glad to adjust. You can't really judge college and H.S. guys by stats, especially H.S. guys. Levels of competition vary, aluminum bats (a transition that is very difficult for some, etc.)...I feel doing it this way will set a good variability.

Feedback is appreciated.

GH

bauermj · 04-09-2003, 12:25 PM

wow GForce, looks excellent. My only thought, and this is a pretty uneducated thought, would be to have a curve much like you did, with maybe a little more influence to a median of 3.5 stars or so, but I understand what you are going for and that is awesome.

Last question, if i use this as a 2004 draft class. Will the game also create its own rookies to make sure there are enough to go around (traditional mlb for 7 rounds)?

thanks

GForce22 · 04-09-2003, 12:39 PM

I may make the H.S. bell curve a little more towards the middle than the college one, just because so much more can happen with a H.S. guy.
You won't be able to use this as a 2004 draft class. it's already in the set as the 2003 class, so that's when they will be drafted.
There's going to be one catch though...I will include a guy named Adam Loewen. He was drafted by the Orioles but remains unsigned. If he is not signed by the draft he will be draft eligible. So before guys get to their draft they may want to make the decision of assigning Loewen to the Orioles beforehand or leaving him for the draft.

GH

bauermj · 04-09-2003, 01:22 PM

well, but with this roster set, wont it be ready for opening day 2003...And then you would play the season, and proceed to next season, then have the draft. Would that not be considered the 2004 draft?

GForce22 · 04-09-2003, 01:24 PM

right, but the draft is set for June like the real draft is. So it's for the 2003 draft.

GH

bauermj · 04-09-2003, 01:25 PM

excellent!

GForce22 · 04-09-2003, 01:28 PM

yeah, I had it set at before the season, but I changed it so guys could get into this year's draft.

GH

DCHepler25 · 04-09-2003, 05:05 PM

GH...

Just read your post about attendance per win and that hadn't even entered my mind. I agree that should be a much better sign of loyalty, ie the Cubs who never win but always draw good attendance figures and the Expos who are a reasonably good team but no one in Montreal cares.

Thanks for the heads-up. I'll go with that instead. I had some more research to do anyway so this won't take me anymore time. I should have you some new fan loyalty settings tomorrow and then only a few more days to get you fan interest numbers based on those.

Thanks again for the great roster set that inspires me and many others to want to help make the OOTP experience as fun and realistic as possible!

gpm22 · 04-09-2003, 05:06 PM

Any timetable for its release?

04-07-2003, 12:16 AM	#141
Shorty All Star Reserve Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Cincinnati, Ohio Posts: 992	Check out the Runelyvs Hernandez guy in KC.. he's been spectacular over 13 innings this season.. he could be a big rookie this year. __________________ Here we go Redlegs here we go!

04-07-2003, 03:44 PM	#142
Shorty All Star Reserve Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Cincinnati, Ohio Posts: 992	Also, Ge, KC's starting 1B Ken Harvey needs to be imported, it looks as if you created him. He had at-bats in 2001 that are never registered in your version of him. __________________ Here we go Redlegs here we go!

04-08-2003, 05:13 PM	#146
DCHepler25 All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Western Pennsylvania Posts: 1,491	GForce... I want to let you know where I'm at with those Fan Interest numbers. I have tweaked them a couple of times and, hopefully after this next round of testing, they will be accurate. I will have them done and to you in time for your opening day, v2 release. I must warn people that these numbers are based on last year's team attendance and record. Teams that consistantly performed better in my simms of the 2003 season, had better attendance figures and thus make it hard to come-up with an accurate FI#. Also, some teams performed much worse but still out-drew their 2002 attendance and, so, their FI#'s may seem much lower than would be expected. One example is Anaheim. You may think the defending champs should draw alot of people and I have adjusted their expected attendance figures accordingly. However, in my testing, they have averaged 19 fewer wins in 2003 than in 2002 and I have had to drop their FI# down to about 64. Even at this low number for the champs they will consistantly draw 500,000 - 1million more fans. I hope this explanation helps. Basically, I'm trying to find FI#'s that will produce attendance figures equal to 2002. I am not trying to reduce anyone's attendance, but that has happened occasionally(2% of teams over ten plus simmed seasons). Most major attendance increases have occurred because the team performed much better than in 2002. Philly has done this in every season I have simmed. Again, I hope this helps. __________________ Raise the Jolly Roger!

04-09-2003, 09:17 AM	#148
DCHepler25 All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Western Pennsylvania Posts: 1,491	GH... After wondering why the FI#s I came-up with were so low, I took a look at the Fan Loyalty settings. I believe these settings are too high and may be the reason why the FI#s are low. I think, and believe you would agree, that the average team should have an AVERAGE fan loyalty setting. However, the average setting in your TM roster set is GOOD. 20 of 30 teams are set at GOOD or better, 6 are average and 4 are fair with no poor or extremely poor teams. I think Florida, Montreal, and Tampa Bay should be at least poor, if not extremely poor. I'm not trying to put you down here and please don't think that. I don't even know if you adjusted these settings or if they were default ones the game has set. What I think I will do, if it is ok with you, is take a look at the average attendance figures over the past 3-5 years and see if we can't use the average percentage of seats filled to come-up with a more realistic breakdown of fan loyalty. Please let me know what you think. __________________ Raise the Jolly Roger!

04-09-2003, 12:07 PM	#151
bauermj Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 179	ok, so the top 50 college and top 50 hs are in for the draft. Are these the players (plus any additional) that you plan on releasing csv updates for? Also, you didn't make too many of them studs did you? Just because some may not choose to go pro in real life next season and having 100 top notch prospects may be a bit much for a draft.. Just trying to get a feel. These additions are incredible and I certainly can't wait to get ahold of the final version! __________________ Commissioner / Cubs Owner Rounding-Third Baseball League (R3BL) www.rounding-third.com Indianapolis Outlaws PFBL Houston Astros Massena

04-07-2003, 04:23 PM	#143
Mariner and Giants Fan All Star Starter Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Port Townsend, WA. Posts: 1,264	[QUOTE]Originally posted by GForce22 [B]ok, another update, recently completed stuff: All pitching rotations accurate all transactions made up to opening day team markets adjusted pitching ratings developed with my formulas for all top 30 pitching prospects not covered in v 1.1. The ratings will be imported sometime tomorrow. 25 Man Rosters & Disabled lists with accurate times remaining still to do: more added prospects accurate lineups/depth charts moving minor leaguers to correct levels ratings tweaks/touch-ups as many eligible players for the 2003 draft as I have time to enter. Barring setbacks this week, I hope to get as many as 200 guys I have info for into the game for the draft. as of now, we are still good for an April 15 release. Productive weekend. Thanks for the continued support. At lest this gives me something good to look forward to on TAX day, though it really doesn't balance out the bad (taxes owed) for that day. Oh well I won't have to worry about it after the 15th for another year

04-07-2003, 05:22 PM	#144
GForce22 Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 2,654	I'll give your teams some extra cash for OOTP GH

04-08-2003, 04:50 PM	#145
GForce22 Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 2,654	update 4/8: -- top 50 college prospects added for 2003 draft (from here I will do the top 50 H.S., then the next 50 college, then next 50 H.S. if time allows. I will definitely get to the top 50 H.S. prospects. From the last 100 depend on time.) -- Extra batch prospects (those not in the top 30 but shown on Baseball America's organizational depth chart in the Prospect Handbook) added for the NL East and Central. Those teams now have between 80-95 prospects (Milwaukee has the least, Pittsburgh the most...that 95 number is a bit high for my liking so I may eliminate a couple of guys just to avoid roster problems). Keep in mind, I am getting what I call "shells" of these guys in the game right now. That means they have accurate handedness, HT, WT and ages (the batch prospects have correct birthdays, the college prospects right now just have ages right...if you know where I can find their birthdays, let me know.) Talents are loosely accurate. Hopefully I will have time to run these guys through my sheets (batch guys)/read up on them more (amateurs) to make the ratings more accurate. I am getting every player who I want included in TotalMinors into the opening day version. That will allow me to update the .csv files for ratings adjustments and the best accuracy possible, post those .csv files on my site for download, and you will be able to update your league with any changes I make without having to restart your league. So, for example, some of the college guys may not be rated as accurately as I would like at the opening release, depending on time. But if I get them how I want them a week after release, I can post the csv files, you can import them, and the guys will be rated more appropriately, all while your season continues as it was. Hopefully this makes sense. I had said the release date would be the 15th. Right now that still seems accurate. It may even be a little earlier if the next few days go well. I'm going to give an April 13-April 20 range (call the late side of this the unknown BABY FACTOR) for the release. Hopefully it will be the first half of that range. Right now I still think it will be. GH

04-08-2003, 05:20 PM	#147
GForce22 Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 2,654	sounds good...this will be a big bonus to the release. Thanks for your help. GH

04-09-2003, 11:09 AM	#149
GForce22 Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 2,654	I hadn't touched fan loyalty settings at all, so you may be completely right here. I think your 3-5 year thing works well. I personally like the attendance per win figure, but it's your time so you let me know. I just think attendance per win is a better measure of loyalty overall than pure attendance. But I appreciate your efforts, regardless, and trust what you come up with. GH

04-09-2003, 11:57 AM	#150
GForce22 Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 2,654	quick update: the top 50 High School players as per Baseball America are now in the set for the 2003 draft as well. GH

04-09-2003, 12:22 PM	#152
GForce22 Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 2,654	bauermj, since it's so hard to project these guys, I'm kind of going bell curvish with respect to the star ratings. So it would be similar to (assuming 100 college and 100 H.S. by the time it's done) 5 star: 3 4.5 star: 5 4 star: 10 3.5 star: 17 3 star: 30 2.5 star: 17 2 star: 10 1.5 star: 5 1 star: 3 Those will be the base ratings, then I'll adjust as I feel needed. It should give you a few potential stars, a bunch of solid players, and some guys who won't pan out. All of these are subject to the game's talent fluctuations. If guys think that curve looks off, I'll be glad to adjust. You can't really judge college and H.S. guys by stats, especially H.S. guys. Levels of competition vary, aluminum bats (a transition that is very difficult for some, etc.)...I feel doing it this way will set a good variability. Feedback is appreciated. GH

04-09-2003, 12:25 PM	#153
bauermj Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 179	wow GForce, looks excellent. My only thought, and this is a pretty uneducated thought, would be to have a curve much like you did, with maybe a little more influence to a median of 3.5 stars or so, but I understand what you are going for and that is awesome. Last question, if i use this as a 2004 draft class. Will the game also create its own rookies to make sure there are enough to go around (traditional mlb for 7 rounds)? thanks __________________ Commissioner / Cubs Owner Rounding-Third Baseball League (R3BL) www.rounding-third.com Indianapolis Outlaws PFBL Houston Astros Massena

04-09-2003, 12:39 PM	#154
GForce22 Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 2,654	I may make the H.S. bell curve a little more towards the middle than the college one, just because so much more can happen with a H.S. guy. You won't be able to use this as a 2004 draft class. it's already in the set as the 2003 class, so that's when they will be drafted. There's going to be one catch though...I will include a guy named Adam Loewen. He was drafted by the Orioles but remains unsigned. If he is not signed by the draft he will be draft eligible. So before guys get to their draft they may want to make the decision of assigning Loewen to the Orioles beforehand or leaving him for the draft. GH

04-09-2003, 01:22 PM	#155
bauermj Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 179	well, but with this roster set, wont it be ready for opening day 2003...And then you would play the season, and proceed to next season, then have the draft. Would that not be considered the 2004 draft? __________________ Commissioner / Cubs Owner Rounding-Third Baseball League (R3BL) www.rounding-third.com Indianapolis Outlaws PFBL Houston Astros Massena

04-09-2003, 01:24 PM	#156
GForce22 Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 2,654	right, but the draft is set for June like the real draft is. So it's for the 2003 draft. GH

04-09-2003, 01:25 PM	#157
bauermj Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 179	excellent! __________________ Commissioner / Cubs Owner Rounding-Third Baseball League (R3BL) www.rounding-third.com Indianapolis Outlaws PFBL Houston Astros Massena

04-09-2003, 01:28 PM	#158
GForce22 Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Long Island, NY Posts: 2,654	yeah, I had it set at before the season, but I changed it so guys could get into this year's draft. GH

04-09-2003, 05:05 PM	#159
DCHepler25 All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Western Pennsylvania Posts: 1,491	GH... Just read your post about attendance per win and that hadn't even entered my mind. I agree that should be a much better sign of loyalty, ie the Cubs who never win but always draw good attendance figures and the Expos who are a reasonably good team but no one in Montreal cares. Thanks for the heads-up. I'll go with that instead. I had some more research to do anyway so this won't take me anymore time. I should have you some new fan loyalty settings tomorrow and then only a few more days to get you fan interest numbers based on those. Thanks again for the great roster set that inspires me and many others to want to help make the OOTP experience as fun and realistic as possible! __________________ Raise the Jolly Roger!

04-09-2003, 05:06 PM	#160
gpm22 All Star Reserve Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 513	Any timetable for its release?