Stats Only

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by progen

Always nice to see the momentum that "stats only" style of playing produces. Kinda like when you take your first "leap" into the craft beer world, and then you ask yourself, why in the hell have I been drinking Coors "just like water" Lite, or Skunky smelling Yuengling, sadly huge in PA. Fortunately, that past for me over 25 years ago. You'll never go back to drinking that crap, and you'll never leave the "stats only" world.

Ok now I finally understand why I don't like "stats only". I have tried craft beers and I hate them all. I like Bud Light. Thanks for clearing that up!

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Orcin

Ok now I finally understand why I don't like "stats only". I have tried craft beers and I hate them all. I like Bud Light. Thanks for clearing that up!

If you drink (shudder) Bud Lite (shudder), then clearly the craft, gourmet and custom side of life is not for you.

Personally I think that life is too short to drink cheap beer.

[MBarrett]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

....life is too short to drink cheap beer.

The wisest thing you've ever said.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

If you drink (shudder) Bud Lite (shudder), then clearly the craft, gourmet and custom side of life is not for you.

Personally I think that life is too short to drink cheap beer.

Wolf, you're right. Stats only is the way to go but you really have to be into the game and a purist to be able to eliminate the corner-cutting comfort that ratings give. That, and you need the appropriate amount of time to devote to it.

But stats only is the ideal for players to strive for, no question. I envy your achievement.

By the way, well done in this thread, steering the discussion and disseminating your knowledge!

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Where can you get good logos and caps for feeders? They are random....so it seems tough

If you go to the logos et al section of the mods forum you can download all four volumes of the nickname project and the entire 10 cities per state project. And then Justafan has done all of the college logos.

But why even worry about logos for feeder teams? They only exist to put players into the draft. It seems kind of OCD to logo thdm up to me.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

But stats only is the ideal for players to strive for, no question.

I beg to differ. It is a matter of taste, not an "ideal". Indeed, turning off features lessens the game in the opinion of some.

Using ratings is not "cutting corners". What if the ratings are wrong? What if the stats tell one story and the ratings another - which do you trust?

You play your way, but don't degrade the equally challenging way that others play.

[MBarrett]

To me, using ratings is now similar to using real players, you still have pre-conceived notions. With real players it's; "Why isn't this guy hitting 50 HRs like his career average?" With ratings it becomes; "Why isn't so-n-so hitting 50 HRs with his 10/10 power rating?"

[canadian content]

There must be ways to make the game challenging without shutting off most of the ratings; isn't there?

I have trading set to very hard, the AI set to evaluate using statistics only and scouting accuracy set to very low (I never use the star rating system, either).

[kmoser]

I have started my stats only game and am liking it so far. I took over the phillies at the beginning of the 2017 offseason after Amaro Jr. was fired.
I'm liking stats only but I can tell some things will take a while to do, like looking through all the FA to find the guy that fits your team. This is taking a while to do, which I don't mind because I feel more immersed, but since FA is taking a while, I was wondering how long the draft process takes. I have feeder leagues so I'm guessing looking through all those prospects will take a while, but I'm just wondering if you guys have a system for the process or do you just take the time to try and look at every guy.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Orcin

I beg to differ. It is a matter of taste, not an "ideal". Indeed, turning off features lessens the game in the opinion of some.

Using ratings is not "cutting corners". What if the ratings are wrong? What if the stats tell one story and the ratings another - which do you trust?

You play your way, but don't degrade the equally challenging way that others play.

And yet you hang around this topic solely for the purpose of degrading how others play.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by kmoser

I have started my stats only game and am liking it so far. I took over the phillies at the beginning of the 2017 offseason after Amaro Jr. was fired.
I'm liking stats only but I can tell some things will take a while to do, like looking through all the FA to find the guy that fits your team. This is taking a while to do, which I don't mind because I feel more immersed, but since FA is taking a while, I was wondering how long the draft process takes. I have feeder leagues so I'm guessing looking through all those prospects will take a while, but I'm just wondering if you guys have a system for the process or do you just take the time to try and look at every guy.

I take the time to look. It has made drafting fun again.

[kmoser]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

I take the time to look. It has made drafting fun again.

I like the whole drafting process so I think Stats only will make it a lot more intriguing.

[Trebro]

The thing about drafting stats only is that now you have no crutch to rely on. You can't know if that guy with the slightly lower k/bb is a better pick than the one with the eye-popping 99K to 11 BB, because he has a fastball of 15/20 to the 12/20 of the one with 99 punch outs. You have to think about what the potential is based on what they've done. You have to start picking stats you look for (I try for players with high walks as batters in the late rounds, for example) rather than what ratings do.

The game is a lot more like what I wanted when I shut the ratings off. It's not for everyone--it's probably not for MOST folks--but I can't imagine playing any other way now. It's worth the time it takes, like now, when I need a 3B with a big bat, so I'm gonna have to roll the dice on a 30+ player without knowing what ratings would tell me--if he's on a decline. It's so much more like real baseball to me, it's not even funny.

[canadian content]

Originally Posted by Trebro

It's worth the time it takes, like now, when I need a 3B with a big bat, so I'm gonna have to roll the dice on a 30+ player without knowing what ratings would tell me--if he's on a decline. It's so much more like real baseball to me, it's not even funny.

Wouldn't it make a big difference if the scouting ratings were set to very low, though?

[Trebro]

Originally Posted by canadian content

Wouldn't it make a big difference if the scouting ratings were set to very low, though?

If you want to play with bars instead of stats, sure, I guess? I don't know. Once I got the hang of of the other parts of the game, I no longer had any interest in going "this guys a 1/5 vs 3/5" or whatever.

If you do, that's awesome. Enjoy! For me, that still feels too much like looking at video game stats, not enough looking at hard numbers--and hard numbers are my favorite part of baseball!

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Trebro

The thing about drafting stats only is that now you have no crutch to rely on.

It's not just the draft. The thing about stats only as a whole is that there are no crutches. There is no easy mode. You have to make the same decisions that real GM's do the same way they do - and succeed or fail just like they have. You can't just look at ratings and go "Oh."

Originally Posted by Trebro

It's so much more like real baseball to me, it's not even funny.

Exactly.

[canadian content]

Originally Posted by Trebro

If you want to play with bars instead of stats, sure, I guess? I don't know.

Actually, it's bars AND stats not bars instead of stats.

I like seeing the numbers rating but generally just use them for speed, baserunning and defense, pitcher's hold etc. I use a 2-8 scale.

My assessment of pitcher's and hitter's abilities are always determined from numerical statistical analysis.

[canadian content]

Originally Posted by Trebro

It's so much more like real baseball to me, it's not even funny.

I do not understand why that would be.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by canadian content

Actually, it's bars AND stats not bars instead of stats.

I like seeing the numbers rating but generally just use them for speed, baserunning and defense, pitcher's hold etc. I use a 2-8 scale.

My assessment of pitcher's and hitter's abilities are always determined from numerical statistical analysis.

I have experimented with all of the scales, and do look at the written reports as well. I have come to one conclusion....if you are going to use ratings, you may as well use 20-80. I realize the argument about 2-8 being more ambiguous, but in reality, the 20-80 matches up with the text anyway. So using 2-8 and a players contact is "5"...yet the commentary says" His contact is slightly above average"....you can bet your bottom dollar the rating on the 20-80 scale is a 55 anyway. So really, the best you can do without giving anything a way and allowing the text to match the rating scale is 20-80.

[PSUColonel]

This is part of what I don't understand about stats only...they are using scouting anyway....but they are looking at the reports....well, if you know the reports well enough, it's extremely easy to know which comments correlate to the approximate rating. If you are using 2-8 or 20-80...they are approximate ratings in and of themselves....all you are doing is depriving yourself the ease of looking up a player. Remember, there is no guarantee the scouted ratings are correct either...so you must really on stats as well.