Disappointing Stats from my experience - Page 2

revcarte · 07-23-2011, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyMyers

I don't know... I have been around baseball for a very long time. I have played baseball simulations from about 1967 or so on. I have tried almost every game out there and always try to see the value of the particular product.

When it comes to judging talent and abilities I trust managers, players (present and former), scouts and sports writers a hell of a lot more than I do those that base everything on mathematics and numbers. Not everything, and especially not abilities can be summed up in numbers. There is just too many other factors.

BTW- I say this as a numbers and computer guy. I am a professional software engineer and consider computers to be my passion. I also have a degree in mathematics.

I have written papers in college on "The Art of Pitching", the pitch by pitch contest of batter and pitcher and have publish baseball statistics software. I do not claim to know any more than anyone else, only that I have been a baseball numbers cruncher for a very long time.

I have finally came to the realization that in baseball, even though numbers are wonderful, the recent trend of trying to explain EVERYTHING by pure numbers is just dead wrong. The more I explore the more I realize that one company has it right when they say that numbers when taken along with a tremendous amount of research can give much more accurate feel to how players perform realistically within a simulation environment. It is not pure plain and simply numbers. That methodology is just incorrect.

Thank you so much. I feel somewhat vindicated!

Husky51 · 07-23-2011, 01:50 PM

I guess people come to games for different reason, some Strat players (myself included) have tried out ioopt because we've been seeking a sim baseball game in an app environment, something that Strat does not appear to have serious plans to develop, but which some Strat players have been advocating for. I have always enjoyed my SOM experience. I have both the pc game, and the cards (love the cards!) but the ioopt has been fun from the start and i plan to acquire all the seasons as they become available. I am not a sabre-matrician so i am unarmed when it comes to engaging in the the analytics discussions, however, i have found that i get more enjoyment out of ioopt by playing it but not wishing it was strat when i do play. It's not and i am pretty sure it doesn't intend to be. But, for now, if you want an engaging and realistic sim game in an app environment, this is your choice. Further, what i really like, is despite being the only such product on the market, ioopt (palli, et., al.) have been open to issues raised here and have taken that feedback and acted on it. I like buying things from businesses who respect me as a customer (no matter how misguided my insights might be!).

CHOWDERHEAD · 07-23-2011, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ike121212

Why look at other games when you can look at the stats? His dWAR in '76 was .1. That puts his defense below average. He won his Gold Glove and ratings in other games on reputation. The stats tell a different story.

I'd like to compare it to Jeter, because it feels similar. Somehow his -.9 dWAR in 2010 earned him an average defensive rating in OOTP and his well below average RF earned him above average range.

For me, given the way that I play the game, I do not get too worked up over differences between what is and what was. With that said, I also looked at Morgan's dWAR and found that he just was not (given the metric) the dominate player that I thought he was. In fact, in the five (5) years that he won the GG, his dWAR was 1, 0.6, 1.7, 0.1, and -0.9. He finished his 22 year career with a dWAR of -5.6

Husky51 · 07-23-2011, 02:05 PM

Interesting discussion here has migrated to the Strat forum. May not be up long though as that forum gets picky about other sim games being discussed.

ike121212 · 07-23-2011, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyMyers

There are some things in Baseball that you can rate using Stats, and others you can not. It has been proven over and over and over and over and over that metrics for rating defense just do not work.

I think a lot of people would strongly disagree with you on this one. Frankly, it's not something you can prove or disprove. Do you really want a game rating players based on public perception?

The statistical story of Morgan being a poor fielder early in his career, developing into a good fielder in the middle of his career, followed by his range noticeably dropping after the age of 32 isn't at all hard to believe.

RandyMyers · 07-23-2011, 02:33 PM

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.

ike121212 · 07-23-2011, 03:09 PM

In the full version, Cano is rated an 11 (out of 20) and Tex a 17. Both about right. Jeter is 10, too generous. ARod a 9, about right.

Caving to Yankee fans and over-rating them all would be a bad decision.

RandyMyers · 07-23-2011, 03:47 PM

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???????

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...

Great game if you want to play pure fictitious league but do not even consider doing a realistic replay if you care about the players performing as they do in RL with same true abilities because it won't happen.

AN ELEVEN HOLY ****.... Markus, you really got to actually watch a few games to get close on ratings.

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....

Even though both Jeter and Cano were great last year, (combined 9 errors for your middle infield... WOW) they would have had more than the record setting low errors that they both had if it was not for Tex...

Can you tell me how you feel a 10 out of 20 is too generous for a gold glove winner.... I suppose you claim to know more than the people who have devoted their lives to baseball...

A players abilities do not change dramatically from year to year as the pure numbers indicate if you go only by the numbers...

Sorry, but you are dead wrong...

ike121212 · 07-23-2011, 04:02 PM

There's no point continuing to discuss defense with anyone who thinks Jeter was great defensively last season, or at any point in his career. He makes bad range look good, and fools a lot of people in the process. There's been some comical GG's over the years. Jeter's are among the worst.

RandyMyers · 07-23-2011, 04:11 PM

... (pulled, not worth replying to)

Just one quick thought.... it is the managers and coaches who give out the awards, not the writers. They are also not allowed to vote for players on their own team. Therefore the Golden Glove award is truly an award given by their piers.... maybe the single most meaningful award given each year because opposing managers and coaches are the ones who vote. If you think you know more than these men who have dedicated their lives to baseball then more power to you. I personally feel that these are the people who know the most about baseball and trust their opinions above all else.

Husky51 · 07-23-2011, 05:07 PM

Let me first say this, this may not mean much in this conversation, but in my ioopt 2011 season completed, Derek Jeter's fielding percentage was .979; in real life it is .980 for the 2011 season so far, per baseball reference.

18 games in to my 76 ioopt replay, Morgan is fielding at .980. In real life for 1976 he was at a .981 fielding percentage.

ike121212 · 07-23-2011, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyMyers

Therefore the Golden Glove award is truly an award given by their piers.... maybe the single most meaningful award given each year because opposing managers and coaches are the ones who vote.

I think you're crazy. It's an award given out on reputation and popularity, not performance. There's no shortage of players and writers saying the same thing. Hate to bring up Palmeiro, because it's just too obvious and easy, but how seriously are you taking things when a full-time DH wins a GG in a landslide?

Back to the point though, factoring in Gold Gloves in fielding ratings would be foolish.

RandyMyers · 07-23-2011, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Husky51

Let me first say this, this may not mean much in this conversation, but in my ioopt 2011 season completed, Derek Jeter's fielding percentage was .979; in real life it is .980 for the 2011 season so far, per baseball reference.

18 games in to my 76 ioopt replay, Morgan is fielding at .980. In real life for 1976 he was at a .981 fielding percentage.

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

RandyMyers · 07-23-2011, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ike121212

I think you're crazy. It's an award given out on reputation and popularity, not performance. There's no shortage of players and writers saying the same thing. Hate to bring up Palmeiro, because it's just too obvious and easy, but how seriously are you taking things when a full-time DH wins a GG in a landslide?

Back to the point though, factoring in Gold Gloves in fielding ratings would be foolish.

Certainly no more foolish then basing ratings purely on stats. There is no meaningful way of determining a players abilities by numbers. There are far too many variables. Have you noticed all the new, almost silly stat categories that have sprang up lately. Because computers can crunch numbers so fast people think they can make meaningful analogies from these numbers. In a team sport where there are so many other influences this just does not prove out to be statistically accurate.

Highly rated players have had there reputations and careers dragged through the mud because of some bored persons new, benign and farcical rating. I will take experienced persons who dedicated there life's to the game opinions any day over some new number crunch. All the numbers do is cloud the picture. Guess what people.... more often than not numbers lie...

Don't get me wrong... the numbers have a place, as long as a little common sense and reasoning are used with them. Therefore a game engine that is based purely on the numbers is missing the boat in a big way.

RandyMyers · 07-23-2011, 07:41 PM

Admittedly some things have gone wrong in some awards, Palemeiro was one of course (but he did play one heck of a first base for those 28 games), however here is a quote from Sports Illustrated:

"The old standby, fielding percentage, is inadequate. It hurts players with good range, who often make errors on balls that slower fielders would not reach. Range factor (putouts plus assists) and Zone Rating (a nebulous STATS, Inc. concoction) can be compromised by luck, the type of pitching staff a team has (flyball vs. groundball) and the ballpark it plays in. Sabermetricians have come up with something you need an aerospace engineering degree to understand, Ultimate Zone Rating, which sounded like a good idea until it told us Darin Erstad was the best player in the history of the world."

Point being that the numbers, no matter what method you come up with, by themselves do not tell the whole story.

Husky51 · 07-23-2011, 07:59 PM

This was posted on the strat forum as the ratings conversation here is also being discussed there. The poster of the content in bold has nearly 5000 posts on that site:

"I dont know anything about OOTP, but i'll be the contrarian here and say from everything i've ever read comparing all-time greats, morgan was an average defensive second baseman. Another thing to keep in mind is that for many years (not anymore), strat was married to the very flawed gold glove = '1' rating system, so it's not Even certain the powers that be at strat even agree with his consistent '1' ratings."

ike121212 · 07-23-2011, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyMyers

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

Every baseball game ever made is built around the idea that you can. If you want a game built around your opinion of players, then you're going to have to do some editing.

Jeter vs Ripken has always been an interesting comparison to me. Jeter is -14.1 dWAR for his career, Ripken is +17.6. Over 3000+ games, statistical anomalies aren't an issue. 1 is consistently below average, 1 is consistently above. Yankee fans think the 2 were defensive equals. O's fan's know Ripken was significantly better. Personally, I think it shows that you can never ask a Yankee fan to be objective.

CHOWDERHEAD · 07-23-2011, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Husky51

This was posted on the strat forum as the ratings conversation here is also being discussed there. The poster of the content in bold has nearly 5000 posts on that site:

"I dont know anything about OOTP, but i'll be the contrarian here and say from everything i've ever read comparing all-time greats, morgan was an average defensive second baseman. Another thing to keep in mind is that for many years (not anymore), strat was married to the very flawed gold glove = '1' rating system, so it's not Even certain the powers that be at strat even agree with his consistent '1' ratings."

Good find - thanks for posting that

CHOWDERHEAD · 07-23-2011, 09:35 PM

*** edit ***

CHOWDERHEAD · 07-23-2011, 09:37 PM

*** edit ***

07-23-2011, 03:47 PM	#28
RandyMyers Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 97	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??????? 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... Great game if you want to play pure fictitious league but do not even consider doing a realistic replay if you care about the players performing as they do in RL with same true abilities because it won't happen. AN ELEVEN HOLY ***.... Markus, you really got to actually watch a few games to get close on ratings. 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.... Even though both Jeter and Cano were great last year, (combined 9 errors for your middle infield... WOW) they would have had more than the record setting low errors that they both had if it was not for Tex... Can you tell me how you feel a 10 out of 20 is too generous for a gold glove winner.... I suppose you claim to know more than the people who have devoted their lives to baseball... A players abilities do not change dramatically from year to year as the pure numbers indicate if you go only by the numbers... Sorry, but you are dead wrong... Last edited by RandyMyers; 07-23-2011 at 03:54 PM.*

07-23-2011, 04:02 PM	#29
ike121212 All Star Reserve Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 938	There's no point continuing to discuss defense with anyone who thinks Jeter was great defensively last season, or at any point in his career. He makes bad range look good, and fools a lot of people in the process. There's been some comical GG's over the years. Jeter's are among the worst. Last edited by ike121212; 07-23-2011 at 05:42 PM.

07-23-2011, 04:11 PM	#30
RandyMyers Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 97	... (pulled, not worth replying to) Just one quick thought.... it is the managers and coaches who give out the awards, not the writers. They are also not allowed to vote for players on their own team. Therefore the Golden Glove award is truly an award given by their piers.... maybe the single most meaningful award given each year because opposing managers and coaches are the ones who vote. If you think you know more than these men who have dedicated their lives to baseball then more power to you. I personally feel that these are the people who know the most about baseball and trust their opinions above all else. Last edited by RandyMyers; 07-23-2011 at 05:10 PM.

07-23-2011, 05:07 PM	#31
Husky51 Minors (Double A) Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 198	Let me first say this, this may not mean much in this conversation, but in my ioopt 2011 season completed, Derek Jeter's fielding percentage was .979; in real life it is .980 for the 2011 season so far, per baseball reference. 18 games in to my 76 ioopt replay, Morgan is fielding at .980. In real life for 1976 he was at a .981 fielding percentage. Last edited by Husky51; 07-23-2011 at 05:17 PM. Reason: Mistake fixed, more info added

07-23-2011, 09:35 PM	#39
CHOWDERHEAD Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Omaha - Home of the College World Series! Posts: 2,849	* edit * __________________ Life is Good! Last edited by CHOWDERHEAD; 07-23-2011 at 09:50 PM. Reason: I was unfair with my post

07-23-2011, 01:50 PM	#22
Husky51 Minors (Double A) Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 198	I guess people come to games for different reason, some Strat players (myself included) have tried out ioopt because we've been seeking a sim baseball game in an app environment, something that Strat does not appear to have serious plans to develop, but which some Strat players have been advocating for. I have always enjoyed my SOM experience. I have both the pc game, and the cards (love the cards!) but the ioopt has been fun from the start and i plan to acquire all the seasons as they become available. I am not a sabre-matrician so i am unarmed when it comes to engaging in the the analytics discussions, however, i have found that i get more enjoyment out of ioopt by playing it but not wishing it was strat when i do play. It's not and i am pretty sure it doesn't intend to be. But, for now, if you want an engaging and realistic sim game in an app environment, this is your choice. Further, what i really like, is despite being the only such product on the market, ioopt (palli, et., al.) have been open to issues raised here and have taken that feedback and acted on it. I like buying things from businesses who respect me as a customer (no matter how misguided my insights might be!).

07-23-2011, 02:05 PM	#24
Husky51 Minors (Double A) Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 198	Interesting discussion here has migrated to the Strat forum. May not be up long though as that forum gets picky about other sim games being discussed.

07-23-2011, 02:33 PM	#26
RandyMyers Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 97	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.

07-23-2011, 03:09 PM	#27
ike121212 All Star Reserve Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 938	In the full version, Cano is rated an 11 (out of 20) and Tex a 17. Both about right. Jeter is 10, too generous. ARod a 9, about right. Caving to Yankee fans and over-rating them all would be a bad decision.

07-23-2011, 07:41 PM	#35
RandyMyers Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 97	Admittedly some things have gone wrong in some awards, Palemeiro was one of course (but he did play one heck of a first base for those 28 games), however here is a quote from Sports Illustrated: "The old standby, fielding percentage, is inadequate. It hurts players with good range, who often make errors on balls that slower fielders would not reach. Range factor (putouts plus assists) and Zone Rating (a nebulous STATS, Inc. concoction) can be compromised by luck, the type of pitching staff a team has (flyball vs. groundball) and the ballpark it plays in. Sabermetricians have come up with something you need an aerospace engineering degree to understand, Ultimate Zone Rating, which sounded like a good idea until it told us Darin Erstad was the best player in the history of the world." Point being that the numbers, no matter what method you come up with, by themselves do not tell the whole story.

07-23-2011, 07:59 PM	#36
Husky51 Minors (Double A) Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 198	This was posted on the strat forum as the ratings conversation here is also being discussed there. The poster of the content in bold has nearly 5000 posts on that site: "I dont know anything about OOTP, but i'll be the contrarian here and say from everything i've ever read comparing all-time greats, morgan was an average defensive second baseman. Another thing to keep in mind is that for many years (not anymore), strat was married to the very flawed gold glove = '1' rating system, so it's not Even certain the powers that be at strat even agree with his consistent '1' ratings."

07-23-2011, 09:37 PM	#40
CHOWDERHEAD Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Omaha - Home of the College World Series! Posts: 2,849	* edit * __________________ Life is Good! Last edited by CHOWDERHEAD; 07-23-2011 at 09:50 PM. Reason: I'm an idiot!