Disappointing Stats from my experience - Page 3

RandyMyers · 07-23-2011, 09:41 PM

Personal insults aside, I am very objective. I acknowledge there are many great players. Ripken was not only a great player but he was a great man.

The main problem is that Yankees haters are blinded by their blood lust to dis-credit any Yankee in any way they can; especially if they can find a way to discredit a true Yankees hero, and captain and truly great guy.

Unlike Yankees haters I can appreciate great players no matter which team they happen to play for. Unfortunately Yankees haters cannot. I don't understand it, maybe it is jealous, maybe hate clouds their judgement... I never have been able to figure it out.

Now that you have degraded this excellent debate on the err of using pure stats to qualify a players abilities in baseball simulations into a Yankees bash event, is there anything else you want to degrade? You know, the US has it's first black president.... would you like to take a swipe at him as well?

I consider any further debate with you to be futile and honestly, rude.

RandyMyers · 07-23-2011, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CHOWDERHEAD

Not sure what you are getting at, but he was explaining that Jeter's iOOTP % for 2011 and his real life 2011 % was nearly identical. Not sure why you are bringing up 2010...

iOTTP is based on 2010 season... that is the only reason. As I said a very minor point.

CHOWDERHEAD · 07-23-2011, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyMyers

iOTTP is based on 2010 season... that is the only reason. As I said a very minor point.

Sorry about that, I see what you are saying. My mistake

RandyMyers · 07-23-2011, 09:57 PM

No worries... I saw the 2011 after my reply and was going to edit it but thought it was a minor point.

ike121212 · 07-23-2011, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyMyers

There is no meaningful way of determining a players abilities by numbers.

Objectively evaluating Yankee players is not Yankee hating. Your opinion here isn't at all objective, it's purely subjective. OOTP rates them very fairly, based on their stats. There's no debate to be had here. If you can't deal with ratings based on stats, then baseball game's just aren't for you.

Hasta la vista pelota · 07-24-2011, 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyMyers

Cano an 11.... are you kidding me. He had incredible range and had only 3 errors all season. He deserved the gold glove more than any other player who received the award. AN ELEVEN... now I know why OOTP will never be more than an also ran in baseball simulation games...

...

Jeter won the gold glove and yes he has lost a step or two, but there is not a more solid day in day out defensive short stop. He had the highest fielding % in history for a full time short stop... hmmm there is a stat for the stat only people.... a ten..... that is just wrong.

Yes, the baseball sim people know more about baseball than the people who live baseball day in day out their entire lives... some for 60+ years.... NOT... The baseball people gave him the award as the best....

SOM gave him a 3 to reflect his loosing a step or two, but then they gave him deserved in the other ratings.... oh yea, there is more to fielding your position than just range rating... Ask all the infielders how much they appreciated having Tex there to pull those throws out of the dirt....

There's more to fielding than just the general fielding rating in OOTP. There's also the range, error, arm and double play ratings. Jeter seems rated about right (I'm using the PC game ratings, which I assume are the same as the iOOTP ratings). He's rated above average for errors and arm, average for everything else. Sounds similar to Strat's rating.

Cano is rated above average in range and average everywhere else. Yes, he made very few errors in 2010, but was in double-digits the previous three years and is on pace for double digits in 2011. I would say 2010 was an outlier and the rest of his career is more in line with his true abilities.

Randy, just curious. You used to bash SOM pretty good nearly every time it was mentioned on the Action boards. I remember you saying that you sold all of your Strat stuff and would never deal with SOM again. What prompted the change of heart?

RandyMyers · 07-24-2011, 01:58 AM

I was feeling disconnected, like something was missing. I researched and/or tried several games to see what others offered. I guess I was missing the game I grew up with.

In all my research and wondering through various games I could see that the thing that really matters is the game. SOM feels more like baseball to me. I very much appreciate the effort and research that they put into all ratings. I believe this gives a truer feel of the game than plugging in numbers and waiting for the resulting ratings.

I appreciate both Action and OOTP for different reasons. Mostly because Dave and Markus do a great job. They care for their customers. I will continue to contribute to both companies because of these two gentlemen. Honestly I will probably not play OOTP much because it is not my game style (if I ever want to experiment with fictitious leagues I will definitive be all over OOTP). I purchased version 12 because Markus responded to my e-mail and was a nice guy.

For now SOM is fulfilling my baseball simulation jones... I am enjoying the hell out of the game...

Husky51 · 07-24-2011, 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyMyers

Very small point, but Jeter had a .989 pct last year in RL.

Randy,

I did mistakenly note that in my first post which I edited, but wasn't as fast as you

. Thanks for noting that; since this was a ioopt 2011 season, I had meant to compare his 2011 to date fielding rating and that's where the point difference lies.

Any who, I hope people keep posting because the insight is interesting and we all need to remember that "sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me." I wonder if that still applies in this internet/blog/social media driven world?

Sebastian Palkowski · 07-24-2011, 06:57 AM

Just a few words before lunch.

1. The 2011 ratings are not based on 2010 stats. The 2011 ratings are based on projected stats for the 2011 season (before the season started) + manually editing them where is seemed appropriated. The process is the same as for the PC/Mac version. So the Fielding% numbers from Husky51 are pretty good.

2. Keep the discussion alive. We always look to improve OOTP and we can only do it by talking to the people who play the game.

3. As an example to point 2: thanks to the original post in this thread (and two other posts almost at the same time) we could find a bug regarding relieve pitcher giving up an unusual high number of BB and hits to the first few batter they face (only when playing out games). I was able to fix it and put it in the actual update, that should be available next week (fingers crossed).

4. Please keep the discussion civil! We are very tolerant here but please keep personal attacks out of this board. We are all here to have fun with OOTP and baseball and people will always have a difference in opinions (would be boring if not).

tomwolf2008 · 07-24-2011, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyMyers

I do not refer simply to Joe Morgan. I did not pay close attention to his career, although I do recall him being considered one of the best during the Big Red era.

I do take homage when I see players like Robinson Cano and Mark Teixeira being rated as average or below average fielders (like version 12 does). They both won gold glove last year and watching 90% of the games, I can say in no uncertain terms, they were the best at their positions in the league.

Maybe both of their stats lowered playing next to each other....

Bottom line they both deserved to be rated as the best (as SOM does). Any game that does not rate these two at the highest level are really missing the boat. Stats do not tell the whole story. There are too many other factors.

Just saying, according to metric stats like dWAR, Teixeira is actually below average, just because they making flashy plays doesn't mean they are actually good defensively. Maybe the ball they need flashy plays to field is a routine groundball for another player

phillupi · 07-24-2011, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by palli

Just a few words before lunch.

1. The 2011 ratings are not based on 2010 stats. The 2011 ratings are based on projected stats for the 2011 season (before the season started) + manually editing them where is seemed appropriated. The process is the same as for the PC/Mac version. So the Fielding% numbers from Husky51 are pretty good.

2. Keep the discussion alive. We always look to improve OOTP and we can only do it by talking to the people who play the game.

3. As an example to point 2: thanks to the original post in this thread (and two other posts almost at the same time) we could find a bug regarding relieve pitcher giving up an unusual high number of BB and hits to the first few batter they face (only when playing out games). I was able to fix it and put it in the actual update, that should be available next week (fingers crossed).

4. Please keep the discussion civil! We are very tolerant here but please keep personal attacks out of this board. We are all here to have fun with OOTP and baseball and people will always have a difference in opinions (would be boring if not).

And this response is the main reason this is best game on the market. Real people programming the game and listening to ideas and suggestions.
Keep up the great communication.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

tanda · 07-24-2011, 12:36 PM

Randy wrote: "Tex is one of the top first basemen of all time (defensively). Him, Bill White and Don Mattingly are hands down the top 3. (Gehrig was supposed to be good but can't remember exactly any reports). They gave Tex an 11 range rating???????"

Randy, no offense, but part of your problems probably stem from a weak understanding of baseball history.

Gehrig was never discussed as an all-time top fielder. Further, the three you list are not "hands down" the top three defensive first basemen ever.

Just as an example, Hernandez, Pujols and Olerud all rate in the top 100 defensive players ever, at any position. Others of note would be Vic Power, Wes Parker and Frank McCormick.

I think Hernandez is the current consensus choice.

BTW, if the baseball insiders (managers, players, etc.) are sooo knowledgable and Palmeiro was sooo good in limited time at 1b when he won the GG, why did his baseball insider manager with years of experience in the game choose to play a brilliant defensive performer at DH most of the year?

RandyMyers · 07-24-2011, 01:02 PM

I actually am very into baseball history but was not able to wrap my head around first base at that point (when making that post). Yes I recall Olerud, Hernandez and Parker being consider some of the best.

You can not discount the entire golden glove process and awards because one year one player was cookie cuttered in. For the most part the winning players deserved the win, especially when you see a player get voted in the first time several seasons into their career.

And yes, with one glaring exception, I trust coaches and managers opinions a whole lot more than the average stat guy. Again, remember my background. I am a software engineer with a heavy math background. I am also a pure logic thinker (nickname in some corners is Spok). But I also realize that there are some areas where pure stats can not be fully descriptive. Baseball players abilities are one.

Again I emphasis that going purely by statistics a players abilities, for more cases that would be statistically accurate, vary far too much year by year. A players abilities may improve with work and experience or decline with age, but in general would not vary significantly from one year to the next. Pure stats show it the opposite, which disproves the validity being used wholly on their own. Remember again what I have stated. Stats certainly have a role when taken in conjunction with many other factors.

For any game to "get it right" all these factors must be inclusive, however this requires significant effort. This sums my opinion. I hope that it makes sense.

BTW- Palmeiro had nagging injuries that season. The remainder of his career he played first base most of the time. For several years after that the award varied; Olerud won a couple as did others. I believe that was a significant wake up call. So the awards are a heck of a lot more valid in the 2000's...

ike121212 · 07-24-2011, 01:58 PM

It takes years to develop the reputation to win a GG and years to lose it after winning a GG. In any given year, the odds of the best defensive player in each league at any position winning the award is under 50%. Based on the fielding bible, in 2010, 5/9 in the NL won a GG, 3/9 in the AL.

Brett Gardner was the best defensive LF in baseball last season. Why hasn't he won a GG yet? Simple, he hasn't built a strong enough reputation to win a popularity contest. OOTP properly gives him a 20. Looking at the full Yankee roster, they did an outstanding job in their defensive ratings. Giving Posada a 12 makes me scratch my head, but catcher's are inherently hard to rate.

RandyMyers · 07-24-2011, 04:04 PM

I would not say that the GG is a popularity contest, however reputation will certainly play a part. It is an award that has to be earned. Brett Garner is a great example. Last year was his first full time playing season and many coaches and managers may not have had the opportunity to see his incredible outfield abilities. It would be rare for a rookie/first time starter to win such an award. More have seen his incredible abilities this season and if he does not win this year then I would start to really be concerned.

tomwolf2008 · 07-24-2011, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyMyers

I would not say that the GG is a popularity contest, however reputation will certainly play a part. It is an award that has to be earned. Brett Garner is a great example. Last year was his first full time playing season and many coaches and managers may not have had the opportunity to see his incredible outfield abilities. It would be rare for a rookie/first time starter to win such an award. More have seen his incredible abilities this season and if he does not win this year then I would start to really be concerned.

But popularity played a big role though, or Derek Jeter won't win that many GGs since virtually every defensive stats rated Jeter as a terrible fielder. (Just to be fair, Jeter do have a few good defensive years) Torii Hunter won't win GG for 9 straight years either for that matter

tanda · 07-24-2011, 04:41 PM

Question Randy,

If these managers and players are so knowledgable compared to us outsiders, why do you even admit that it will take them an extra year or two to realize Gardner is a GG outfielder while us outsiders realized it quite quickly?

It means that not only did a deserving player not win it last year, but an undeserving player won it in his place.

RandyMyers · 07-25-2011, 01:28 AM

I guess my question would be how could anyone believe that the men who live and breath baseball every day of their lives, for their entire lives could not know and understand the game the best. I mean really.... I would not have the audacity to believe that I know more about the game.

I love baseball and follow it as a true fan, however I could never claim to live and breath the game, day in day out as coaches and managers do. I dare say that none of you do either. I would think it would be far too arrogant of me to believe otherwise.

So yes, any intelligent person would realize that people who have dedicated their lives to a particular subject; sport, instrument, writing, computer code, photography, or any other specialty you can come up with would know more than the fans of that subject. This is beyond question. Why do you think your general practitioner sends you to a specialist?

BTW- hind site is 20/20. Even us true Yankees fanatics did not truly understand just how incredible Garner was until far into the second half of the season last year. So yes, it might take opposing coaches and managers a while to see this. They don't watch him day in and day out like we did.

So yes, beyond question I believe that coaches and managers know more than any of us about baseball, no matter how much we believe we know.

tanda · 07-25-2011, 07:00 AM

I think walks are overrated unless you can run. If you get a walk and put the pitcher in a stretch, that helps, but the guy who walks and can’t run, most of the time he’s clogging up the bases for somebody who can run. – Dusty Baker.

Dusty thinks it is better for slow guys to make an out than to walk. I hate those runners who clog the bases on HRs. It would help the offense if all their HRs were solo shots.

Yeah ... I think I know more than John Baker, notwithstanding his years as a player and manager.

RandyMyers · 07-25-2011, 09:10 AM

Keep in mind that anything can be taken out of context...

Tanda, "...Gehrig was never discussed as an all-time top fielder..."

Baseball Historian, "...His career fielding average was a high .991 and he was considered one of the better fielding first baseman of his era..."

Honestly, I would take Dusty Baker's opinions on baseball over your's any day of the week. Not to say that you are not knowledgeable. Dusty has dedicated his life to baseball, day in day out. Without knowing the context of the quote we do not know the entirety of it's meaning. One small thought on the subject, not to say this was the context... How many runs did the Twins loose because Tony Oliva could still hit but could barely walk during his final seasons. He actually cost them runs as many times as not; if he didn't hit a home run it would have been better that he made an out.... think about it, for entire seasons he barely scored 30 runs even though he was on base a lot, other than home runs... just a thought.

Taken out of context Yogi would have been considered a bumbling idiot. But we all know better. We all know he was an astute baseball mind. If this is not accepted as fact then I guess that there is no more reason to debate. "You can observe a lot just by watching."

And yes, I can find quotes and examples to belittle anyone on any given subject if I look. I stand by my opinion. It would be ignorant and arrogant to think other wise.

07-24-2011, 06:57 AM	#49
Sebastian Palkowski Developer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Hamburg, Germany Posts: 5,114	Just a few words before lunch. 1. The 2011 ratings are not based on 2010 stats. The 2011 ratings are based on projected stats for the 2011 season (before the season started) + manually editing them where is seemed appropriated. The process is the same as for the PC/Mac version. So the Fielding% numbers from Husky51 are pretty good. 2. Keep the discussion alive. We always look to improve OOTP and we can only do it by talking to the people who play the game. 3. As an example to point 2: thanks to the original post in this thread (and two other posts almost at the same time) we could find a bug regarding relieve pitcher giving up an unusual high number of BB and hits to the first few batter they face (only when playing out games). I was able to fix it and put it in the actual update, that should be available next week (fingers crossed). 4. Please keep the discussion civil! We are very tolerant here but please keep personal attacks out of this board. We are all here to have fun with OOTP and baseball and people will always have a difference in opinions (would be boring if not). __________________ Buy Franchise Hockey Manager 10

07-24-2011, 01:02 PM	#53
RandyMyers Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 97	I actually am very into baseball history but was not able to wrap my head around first base at that point (when making that post). Yes I recall Olerud, Hernandez and Parker being consider some of the best. You can not discount the entire golden glove process and awards because one year one player was cookie cuttered in. For the most part the winning players deserved the win, especially when you see a player get voted in the first time several seasons into their career. And yes, with one glaring exception, I trust coaches and managers opinions a whole lot more than the average stat guy. Again, remember my background. I am a software engineer with a heavy math background. I am also a pure logic thinker (nickname in some corners is Spok). But I also realize that there are some areas where pure stats can not be fully descriptive. Baseball players abilities are one. Again I emphasis that going purely by statistics a players abilities, for more cases that would be statistically accurate, vary far too much year by year. A players abilities may improve with work and experience or decline with age, but in general would not vary significantly from one year to the next. Pure stats show it the opposite, which disproves the validity being used wholly on their own. Remember again what I have stated. Stats certainly have a role when taken in conjunction with many other factors. For any game to "get it right" all these factors must be inclusive, however this requires significant effort. This sums my opinion. I hope that it makes sense. BTW- Palmeiro had nagging injuries that season. The remainder of his career he played first base most of the time. For several years after that the award varied; Olerud won a couple as did others. I believe that was a significant wake up call. So the awards are a heck of a lot more valid in the 2000's... Last edited by RandyMyers; 07-24-2011 at 01:10 PM.

07-24-2011, 04:41 PM	#57
tanda Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 26	Question Randy, If these managers and players are so knowledgable compared to us outsiders, why do you even admit that it will take them an extra year or two to realize Gardner is a GG outfielder while us outsiders realized it quite quickly? It means that not only did a deserving player not win it last year, but an undeserving player won it in his place. Last edited by tanda; 07-24-2011 at 04:42 PM.

07-25-2011, 01:28 AM	#58
RandyMyers Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 97	I guess my question would be how could anyone believe that the men who live and breath baseball every day of their lives, for their entire lives could not know and understand the game the best. I mean really.... I would not have the audacity to believe that I know more about the game. I love baseball and follow it as a true fan, however I could never claim to live and breath the game, day in day out as coaches and managers do. I dare say that none of you do either. I would think it would be far too arrogant of me to believe otherwise. So yes, any intelligent person would realize that people who have dedicated their lives to a particular subject; sport, instrument, writing, computer code, photography, or any other specialty you can come up with would know more than the fans of that subject. This is beyond question. Why do you think your general practitioner sends you to a specialist? BTW- hind site is 20/20. Even us true Yankees fanatics did not truly understand just how incredible Garner was until far into the second half of the season last year. So yes, it might take opposing coaches and managers a while to see this. They don't watch him day in and day out like we did. So yes, beyond question I believe that coaches and managers know more than any of us about baseball, no matter how much we believe we know. Last edited by RandyMyers; 07-25-2011 at 01:31 AM.

07-25-2011, 09:10 AM	#60
RandyMyers Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 97	Keep in mind that anything can be taken out of context... Tanda, "...Gehrig was never discussed as an all-time top fielder..." Baseball Historian, "...His career fielding average was a high .991 and he was considered one of the better fielding first baseman of his era..." Honestly, I would take Dusty Baker's opinions on baseball over your's any day of the week. Not to say that you are not knowledgeable. Dusty has dedicated his life to baseball, day in day out. Without knowing the context of the quote we do not know the entirety of it's meaning. One small thought on the subject, not to say this was the context... How many runs did the Twins loose because Tony Oliva could still hit but could barely walk during his final seasons. He actually cost them runs as many times as not; if he didn't hit a home run it would have been better that he made an out.... think about it, for entire seasons he barely scored 30 runs even though he was on base a lot, other than home runs... just a thought. Taken out of context Yogi would have been considered a bumbling idiot. But we all know better. We all know he was an astute baseball mind. If this is not accepted as fact then I guess that there is no more reason to debate. "You can observe a lot just by watching." And yes, I can find quotes and examples to belittle anyone on any given subject if I look. I stand by my opinion. It would be ignorant and arrogant to think other wise. Last edited by RandyMyers; 07-25-2011 at 09:20 AM.

07-23-2011, 09:41 PM	#41
RandyMyers Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 97	Personal insults aside, I am very objective. I acknowledge there are many great players. Ripken was not only a great player but he was a great man. The main problem is that Yankees haters are blinded by their blood lust to dis-credit any Yankee in any way they can; especially if they can find a way to discredit a true Yankees hero, and captain and truly great guy. Unlike Yankees haters I can appreciate great players no matter which team they happen to play for. Unfortunately Yankees haters cannot. I don't understand it, maybe it is jealous, maybe hate clouds their judgement... I never have been able to figure it out. Now that you have degraded this excellent debate on the err of using pure stats to qualify a players abilities in baseball simulations into a Yankees bash event, is there anything else you want to degrade? You know, the US has it's first black president.... would you like to take a swipe at him as well? I consider any further debate with you to be futile and honestly, rude.

07-23-2011, 09:57 PM	#44
RandyMyers Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 97	No worries... I saw the 2011 after my reply and was going to edit it but thought it was a minor point.

07-24-2011, 01:58 AM	#47
RandyMyers Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 97	I was feeling disconnected, like something was missing. I researched and/or tried several games to see what others offered. I guess I was missing the game I grew up with. In all my research and wondering through various games I could see that the thing that really matters is the game. SOM feels more like baseball to me. I very much appreciate the effort and research that they put into all ratings. I believe this gives a truer feel of the game than plugging in numbers and waiting for the resulting ratings. I appreciate both Action and OOTP for different reasons. Mostly because Dave and Markus do a great job. They care for their customers. I will continue to contribute to both companies because of these two gentlemen. Honestly I will probably not play OOTP much because it is not my game style (if I ever want to experiment with fictitious leagues I will definitive be all over OOTP). I purchased version 12 because Markus responded to my e-mail and was a nice guy. For now SOM is fulfilling my baseball simulation jones... I am enjoying the hell out of the game...

07-24-2011, 12:36 PM	#52
tanda Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 26	Randy wrote: "Tex is one of the top first basemen of all time (defensively). Him, Bill White and Don Mattingly are hands down the top 3. (Gehrig was supposed to be good but can't remember exactly any reports). They gave Tex an 11 range rating???????" Randy, no offense, but part of your problems probably stem from a weak understanding of baseball history. Gehrig was never discussed as an all-time top fielder. Further, the three you list are not "hands down" the top three defensive first basemen ever. Just as an example, Hernandez, Pujols and Olerud all rate in the top 100 defensive players ever, at any position. Others of note would be Vic Power, Wes Parker and Frank McCormick. I think Hernandez is the current consensus choice. BTW, if the baseball insiders (managers, players, etc.) are sooo knowledgable and Palmeiro was sooo good in limited time at 1b when he won the GG, why did his baseball insider manager with years of experience in the game choose to play a brilliant defensive performer at DH most of the year?

07-24-2011, 01:58 PM	#54
ike121212 All Star Reserve Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 938	It takes years to develop the reputation to win a GG and years to lose it after winning a GG. In any given year, the odds of the best defensive player in each league at any position winning the award is under 50%. Based on the fielding bible, in 2010, 5/9 in the NL won a GG, 3/9 in the AL. Brett Gardner was the best defensive LF in baseball last season. Why hasn't he won a GG yet? Simple, he hasn't built a strong enough reputation to win a popularity contest. OOTP properly gives him a 20. Looking at the full Yankee roster, they did an outstanding job in their defensive ratings. Giving Posada a 12 makes me scratch my head, but catcher's are inherently hard to rate.

07-24-2011, 04:04 PM	#55
RandyMyers Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 97	I would not say that the GG is a popularity contest, however reputation will certainly play a part. It is an award that has to be earned. Brett Garner is a great example. Last year was his first full time playing season and many coaches and managers may not have had the opportunity to see his incredible outfield abilities. It would be rare for a rookie/first time starter to win such an award. More have seen his incredible abilities this season and if he does not win this year then I would start to really be concerned.

07-25-2011, 07:00 AM	#59
tanda Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 26	I think walks are overrated unless you can run. If you get a walk and put the pitcher in a stretch, that helps, but the guy who walks and can’t run, most of the time he’s clogging up the bases for somebody who can run. – Dusty Baker. Dusty thinks it is better for slow guys to make an out than to walk. I hate those runners who clog the bases on HRs. It would help the offense if all their HRs were solo shots. Yeah ... I think I know more than John Baker, notwithstanding his years as a player and manager.