Do you really let players learn SS ?

[One Great Matrix]

I feel like next to catcher it's the … well, let's just say only shortstops be shortstops normally.

I know things are a-changin' but 1B, 3B, oh yeah the whole infield...4 distinctively different positions. It's no cakewalk learning any of them if your home is somewhere else on the diamond.

People have different opinions but I feel like OF, sort of inter-changeable except for the speed needed in center. You can even train an infielder out there sometimes...

And then...for the most part there is a learning curve at the other positions. I see that's accounted for to some extent...except Wright is already a solid 1B and I'm not sure how that would have went. Can't really complain I have an extra option at 1B :-) but just commenting on what I''ve observed in years of baseball vs. OOTP Simulation.

And then we have this play in the playoffs where Clemente goes back on the ball and my runners lose their minds and I guess apparently they thought it was an extra-base hit for sure, but you have baserunners out there (Carter, DiMaggio, Wright) that aren't known for their absent-mindedness... just losing their way on the basepaths. Shot to RF, bases loaded...Clemente goes back, catches it, doubles up the runners at 2nd and 1st.

Cheers!

[mcdog512]

Old Bobby Clemente has like a 107 arm in RF.....

[One Great Matrix]

Any of my fellow managers, or anyone reading this, know how the ZR and EFF defensive statistics are produced? I remember listening to a report on ZR where they studied which balls they got to, & am entirely unfamiliar with EFF.

And the difference between the simmed number I can see on the reports vs. RL?

[One Great Matrix]

Originally Posted by mcdog512

Old Bobby Clemente has like a 107 arm in RF.....

That explains why with the bases loaded and nobody out the runners would take off on contact on a ball that's either caught or bounces to the fence & they can walk home.
Joking.
This is fresh stuff, you know? Best-of-5, game 1 action, today.

[daves]

Originally Posted by One Great Matrix

Any of my fellow managers, or anyone reading this, know how the ZR and EFF defensive statistics are produced? I remember listening to a report on ZR where they studied which balls they got to, & am entirely unfamiliar with EFF.

And the difference between the simmed number I can see on the reports vs. RL?

I remember asking about this before but I cannot find the post. A high ZR means the player makes plays better than the average play for the position. Ozzie would have a good ZR rating. Rod Carew would have a poor ZR rating at 2b.

[bphilb]

I've often thought the training is way to easy in this game. While Adalberto Mondesi is a good defensive center fielder, I don't know how that assumes he will be a great center fielder and after one year would be better than Mike Trout who has been playing the position for years. I see teams with Jackie Robinson playing short and Honus Wagner playing 2nd which is not representative of baseball history. This is something I hope would get looked at for PT 21 as the better representation of the game is if players are in positions they played in their career.

[nutt]

I did last week. I moved Kelly Gruber to short for a few games to get Rizzo into my lineup. I had five infielders to start and was rotating LIVE Rizzo with 2016 Miggy, Bobby Doerr, and Jose Reyes. Miggy would start at third then either Reyes, Doerr, or Jeff McNeil would be at second.

[justpatrick]

I do it for back ups, but never starters. In 19 I trained Gaetti there, but can´t remember now where he ended up, and in 20 Trillo peaked at 65.

[Mike Burks]

Scott Rolen trains out at over a hundred at shortstop.

[One Great Matrix]

I figured the historical cards would rate them at their positions and be fixed, since its representative of the player...I mean if they jumped around a bit to have those positions & their ratings...

And maybe the live cards could project.

On the other hand, I know that decision has to be made on how to deal with putting a player at a position other than one he has already played, (esp. with lives or players that are still active...), & that they gradually get better is a decent way of doing it.

I'm critiquing more than complaining...all the historical players have their info on where they played most of their games and the minority of their games and how they fared (to some degree).

Live cards are different. Tricky. Escpecially with trying a bat at a new position to get them in the lineup being a current trend. And I guess some PT managers enjoy training so that they can make their team flexible that way. It's just te 1st time I did it I moved Historical Dykstra from Center to Right knowing he could play right.

And then I saw historical INFIELDERS all over the diamond (besides catcher)(s).

Any time a guy is learning a new Infield position it's a transition, often a failed or at least crummy one where they play no-good defense but can at least hit.

Practice in OF is pretty simple where a player can improve with practice.

You know, there is a lot going on at SS and 2B as far as coordinating DPs and relay throws...3B is the hot corner and the player needs that ability to quickly lunge to the left or the right (also DP & strong arm across INF).

1B uses an entirely different glove, has to scoop throws, sometimes be a nice big target for the other infielders, and if he's really good, be great at turning a DP as well.

[One Great Matrix]

Originally Posted by Mike Burks

Scott Rolen trains out at over a hundred at shortstop.

Well Rolen might have been able to play SS (train in off-season) wonder how that would work, but...all the historical ratings are fixed except their positional ratings.

[chazzycat]

Originally Posted by One Great Matrix

Any of my fellow managers, or anyone reading this, know how the ZR and EFF defensive statistics are produced? I remember listening to a report on ZR where they studied which balls they got to, & am entirely unfamiliar with EFF.

And the difference between the simmed number I can see on the reports vs. RL?

EFF is just a straightforward percentage of how many balls in play are converted to outs. So park factors would have huge effects on this and could be very misleading. Like if you set your AVG factor to .9, you can have the "best" defense by EFF even if it's not really that good. Zone Rating is a more robust stat, where every play is judged separately, against how an "average" defender would make the play or not. The +/- number reflects the number of runs saved (or cost) above or below average. So this is generally a better stat to use if you have modified your park factors.

[One Great Matrix]

Wow, thanks...

Yeah, I wasn't sure about taking either one of them tooooo seriously, but I figured at least if I knew what they were, I could at least understand what I was looking at. Trammell played SS a few years ago for me and had a mildly - ZR...that's related to runs, huh? I could see a few ways that number wouldn't really be on the mark necessarily. ... you don't get to enjoy great defense in the game the same way you do in real life. I put in Eddie Mayo at what point last season, he's the first 2B I noticed making a difference out there. But he hit under .200 while he was out there.

Currently in severe pain. One of them toothache bouts.

[One Great Matrix]

I figure personally that the 2B & SS positions if any should have pretty tough learning curves like catcher since there is a lot going on besides fielding ground balls & throwing...a lot of coordinating.

[Cobbiusto]

When you watch a game these days with all the shifts going on, on any given AB, the 3b may be playing at SS, the SS at 2b or the 2b at SS. Sometimes even the 3b is shifted over to 2b side leaving the SS in place. But still, the three positions are much more interchangeable now than they have been historically.

[One Great Matrix]

That's an decent point...I've seen a lot of folly with shifts, though by players out of position, much more than I've seen a 3rd baseman become a wizard at dealing with getting outs at 2nd base, (& on to 1st).

[One Great Matrix]

Some pretty brilliant shifts regarding outs strictly at 1st base...but I still don't see how many third basemen have become naturals up the middle, particularly regarding 2nd base.

[Justinw303]

Wait, so PT cards can learn positions like in the offline modes? Pardon the stupid question, I might need to look for a source that has all the changes from PT 1 to 2.

[SpacePope]

Originally Posted by Justinw303

Wait, so PT cards can learn positions like in the offline modes? Pardon the stupid question, I might need to look for a source that has all the changes from PT 1 to 2.

Yup.

I wish I was at home right now, I'd screenshot my Pablo Sandoval. He's got a rating over 90 at SS and over 100 at 2B.

EDIT: I like the training system. It might not be super realistic, but it does take the better part of a full season for players to reach their full potential at a position. I don't think that's too unrealistic (even if Panda playing SS day-in-day-out at a Cal Ripken level is a bad example). Even players with great ratings are pretty bad for a long while while they're learning a position they have no ratings at. You can imagine how reluctant a player would be to go through that humiliation and stress irl, which is one of the reasons you don't see it quite so much.

[CrazyWR]

Originally Posted by Justinw303

Wait, so PT cards can learn positions like in the offline modes? Pardon the stupid question, I might need to look for a source that has all the changes from PT 1 to 2.

this isnt a change from PT in OOTP 19 - you could do it there too