Irrevocable Waivers -- How do I disable this?

[nyy26wc]

Originally Posted by RchW

Sure but the subject was irrevocable waivers.

That was one subject raised in this thread. Another subject raised in this thread was whether moves are categorized as "major transactions" or not. That latter subject was what I was directing my answer towards.

[sterjs]

Btw, for those who were defending the AI earlier. How do you defend the AI's decision to play this player on irrevocable waivers:



IMO, this clearly demonstrates that the AI needs to be reined in on this irrevocable waiver business.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by sterjs

Btw, for those who were defending the AI earlier. How do you defend the AI's decision to play this player on irrevocable waivers:



IMO, this clearly demonstrates that the AI needs to be reined in on this irrevocable waiver business.

Without seeing him in context with his current team roster the question is unanswerable. Without seeing the roster one could guess they need 40-man roster room for recently acquired players. I'd certainly defend it on that basis. If there are not better MR on the roster then it would be questionable unless the AI acquired players that have to be on the 40-man. That's bad AI management but not bad AI player evaluation necessarily.

We've already established that we differ on player evaluation. He strikes me as an average MR at best and not a closer. I'm curious about the offensive side of this league it seems it should be very low if such pitchers are considered good.

[nyy26wc]

He's a 26 year old who could have 5 career games in the majors. He could have more in previous years, but since he only has 35 days of major league service, it's not much more than that.

So far, he's been a career minor leaguer.

Maybe he should have been released, maybe not. But, it's far from a sure thing that he shouldn't have been dropped.

Also, those ratings are your scouts' ratings, for both current and potential. They aren't necessarily the correct ratings. There is fog of war error there, which is influenced by a bunch of factors--the scouting accuracy level for the league, your scouts's ratings and your scouting budget. There is also the fact that you're the Padres and this is a Diamondbacks player. Your scouting reports on other teams' players are not as accurate as they are for your own players. The AI very easily could be looking at ratings that look different from what you are looking at.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by sterjs

Btw, for those who were defending the AI earlier. How do you defend the AI's decision to play this player on irrevocable waivers:



IMO, this clearly demonstrates that the AI needs to be reined in on this irrevocable waiver business.

You are correct in one respect. I will not be defending the AI anymore in this thread.

Instead, I'd like to question your game, your league. Because, come to think of it, I don't see very many three-star players on irrevocable waivers in my league, let alone four-star and five-star players.

I'm not going to get into it with you, but I will leave you (and this thread) with this question: Maybe something is wrong with your setup?

[nyy26wc]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

You are correct in one respect. I will not be defending the AI anymore in this thread.

Instead, I'd like to question your game, your league. Because, come to think of it, I don't see very many three-star players on irrevocable waivers in my league, let alone four-star and five-star players.

I'm not going to get into it with you, but I will leave you (and this thread) with this question: Maybe something is wrong with your setup?

I don't believe that there is something wrong with his setup. Instead, I believe it is his scouts. Either

A) the scouting accuracy is low
B) his scout just isn't that good
C) he's not spending enough $ on scouting
D) all of the above
E) some combination of A through C

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by nyy26wc

I don't believe that there is something wrong with his setup. Instead, I believe it is his scouts. Either

A) the scouting accuracy is low
B) his scout just isn't that good
C) he's not spending enough $ on scouting
D) all of the above
E) some combination of A through C

Well, I would include all of those under what I loosely term "setup."

By the way, I looked in my game right after I posted. It's just before opening day when the waiver list is crowded. Wow, I'll take back what I said a bit; there are a couple of four and five-star guys on waivers at this time.

But they are the same run-of-the-mill, crappy MR's that I see all over the place. Nothing to get excited about. Notice none of the position players are currently rated more than one star.

OP clings to this idea that stars must equal worth keeping. Not necessarily, given the factors I mentioned in my first post here and especially that relievers are rated against each other and are the bottom of the totem pole.

Here, in the second screen print, is the four-and-a-half star guy. Big deal! He's dumber than a stump (which is going to affect his performance), he's got very little stuff, he's only got two mediocre pitches, he doesn't field his position well, and he can't hold runners. I wouldn't touch this guy with a 10-foot pole!

Yet, he's highly rated as you see. Why? Because it's 1927, he's a MR which is still relatively rare at this time, and he's being compared to other MR's in my league. Low standards of comparison. Also, maybe my scout needs a clop upside the head.

This pitcher may still have a good season; that's the unpredictability of this game and baseball itself. I am very glad for this.

OP goes on to assert, however, that the AI should have KNOWN this would happen when it gave the player a few stars in comparison to his peers and it should have kept him despite all the other highly negative findings, the need to clear a roster spot for a much more valuable position player, whatever (see post #3). Despite the inaccuracy of scouting and the randomness built into this game, the AI should have KNOWN.

Well, it doesn't work that way, but this is the last time I'm going to say it. Now, I'm much more interested in those position players with multi-star potentials. Let me take a look . . .

[nyy26wc]

Here's a demonstration to show the OP what happens when scouting is involved and your scouts aren't any good.

I set the scouting level to normal. I hired a scout who was "decent" for both majors and minors. I set my scouting budget to half of the league average. (The OP is already up to 2020, so we can probably assume he has been neglecting his scouting budget for several years.) And, to humor the OP a little bit, I even took over the same team as he did--the Padres.

With scouting set to normal, with a scout who isn't good and with the team that has neglected their scouting budget, it LOOKS like the Phillies have placed a 3 1/2 star OVR, 4 star potential player on irrevocable waivers. There has to be a word for that. The AI is stupid, stupid, stupid ... (to be sung to the theme of Jeopardy). That is how it LOOKS.

But, then I set scouting to 100% accurate. That tells us what it actually IS. And, what it actually IS is the Phillies placed a 1 1/2 star OVR, 1 1/2 star potential player on irrevocable waivers.

[Fyrestorm3]

The pitcher that Bru just posted is a perfect example of why star ratings are not the be-all and end-all when it comes to evaluating players. His stats aren't visible, but I can confidently say that that guy is not going to do very well. Control and Movement alone do not equal an effective pitcher, if all his other ratings are mediocre.

I feel like a lot of people get so hung up on star ratings that they get almost blinded to everything else.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by nyy26wc

Here's a demonstration to show the OP what happens when scouting is involved and your scouts aren't any good.

Good example, nyy26wc. I think between us, we have this nailed but I don't think we're going to convince OP.

Oh well. As someone once said to me, "The fault, dear Déjà Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves."

[sterjs]

Originally Posted by nyy26wc

I don't believe that there is something wrong with his setup. Instead, I believe it is his scouts. Either

A) the scouting accuracy is low
B) his scout just isn't that good
C) he's not spending enough $ on scouting
D) all of the above
E) some combination of A through C

Quite the contrary, I have the best scout in the league, normal scouting accuracy and I spend avg amount on scouting. Here is the player with 100% Ratings Accuracy:



I agree that * are not the final word, but this guy had good stats in AA and AAA and he's cost-controlled for many years. Also, he was one of the top 5 or so relievers in my organization, so it's just bonkers to release him.

I bet that the 4* and 5* relievers being placed on irrevocable waivers had bloated contracts and if not, something is very wrong.

[bcduggan]

Originally Posted by nyy26wc

Here's a demonstration to show the OP what happens when scouting is involved and your scouts aren't any good.

I set the scouting level to normal. I hired a scout who was "decent" for both majors and minors. I set my scouting budget to half of the league average. (The OP is already up to 2020, so we can probably assume he has been neglecting his scouting budget for several years.) And, to humor the OP a little bit, I even took over the same team as he did--the Padres.

With scouting set to normal, with a scout who isn't good and with the team that has neglected their scouting budget, it LOOKS like the Phillies have placed a 3 1/2 star OVR, 4 star potential player on irrevocable waivers. There has to be a word for that. The AI is stupid, stupid, stupid ... (to be sung to the theme of Jeopardy). That is how it LOOKS.

But, then I set scouting to 100% accurate. That tells us what it actually IS. And, what it actually IS is the Phillies placed a 1 1/2 star OVR, 1 1/2 star potential player on irrevocable waivers.

What does scouting report tab show? Usually stars are different there, from my experience.




Posted from Ootpdevelopments.com App for Android