Do you really let players learn SS ?

[Ratbelly]

Originally Posted by 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.

Craig Biggio was a catcher in 1992 and won the gold glove at 2nd base in 1994.

[OMGPuppies]

Originally Posted by Ratbelly

Craig Biggio was a catcher in 1992 and won the gold glove at 2nd base in 1994.

Anyone try playing 94 Biggio at catcher? How bad is it?

[One Great Matrix]

Yeah, not so bad.

I'm not sure the level of detail you're looking for (not the perfect defensive backstop) but he caught 10 games or so for me without a problem. The AI likes to put him in CF, sometimes, too, and he's got a gun out there anyway.

[One Great Matrix]

Not sure why you jumped to Biggio, Ratbelly...He really WAS a catcher before he was a second baseman. I guess one of the issues is as a simulation, you sometimes like realism. How would that really go I wonder? Plus, historical cards, a guy with a whole career at a position is fixed you know in mediocre range, while the live cards can learn their position and become better than them.

Doesn't bug me so much, but felt it was something worth "exploring" a little more in depth for future versions.

[One Great Matrix]

Pete Rose played 5 positions, pretty well, quite different ones, too...but they DID play those positions and it is the exception, not very common.

Some guys can even hit and pitch at the major league level. SOME guys.

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by One Great Matrix

Pete Rose played 5 positions, pretty well, quite different ones, too...but they DID play those positions and it is the exception, not very common.

Some guys can even hit and pitch at the major league level. SOME guys.

Pete Rose started his career at second base. In four seasons at the position, he was always about league average on defense. The game rates his "peak" card as a 9, and he can't improve according to the position calculator. A "9" is clearly not a league average rating.

On the other hand, Jackie Robinson played 1 major league game at shortstop. It came in 1953. Yet, his 1951 card (not his "peak" card) can get to a 100 rating at shortstop and even his peak card can get to 80. He only played one game there, yet he is infinitely better at a strange position than a guy that played four years at a familiar position and did pretty well there.

That kind of stuff makes no sense to me and hurts the immersion of the mode in my opinion. I get that it is a game and there are many aspects that are unrealistic such as Babe Ruth pitching to Babe Ruth. But the accuracy and realism of defensive position ratings could easily be improved and would make the game better.

[Ratbelly]

Originally Posted by One Great Matrix

Not sure why you jumped to Biggio, Ratbelly...He really WAS a catcher before he was a second baseman. I guess one of the issues is as a simulation, you sometimes like realism. How would that really go I wonder? Plus, historical cards, a guy with a whole career at a position is fixed you know in mediocre range, while the live cards can learn their position and become better than them.

Doesn't bug me so much, but felt it was something worth "exploring" a little more in depth for future versions.

Mondesi is a shortstop by trade correct and jumped to Centerfield and became very good in the game. It isn't unprecedented in real baseball. Biggio was a catcher and switched to 2nd base where he won a gold glove after just his 2nd year. Seems like a legitimate comparison.

[Ratbelly]

Originally Posted by One Great Matrix

Not sure why you jumped to Biggio, Ratbelly...He really WAS a catcher before he was a second baseman. I guess one of the issues is as a simulation, you sometimes like realism. How would that really go I wonder? Plus, historical cards, a guy with a whole career at a position is fixed you know in mediocre range, while the live cards can learn their position and become better than them.

Doesn't bug me so much, but felt it was something worth "exploring" a little more in depth for future versions.

Mondesi is a shortstop by trade correct and jumped to Centerfield and became very good in the game. It isn't unprecedented in real baseball. Biggio was a catcher and switched to 2nd base where he won a gold glove after just his 2nd year. Seems like a legitimate comparison. Maybe I missed something.

[One Great Matrix]

You cited, one example, I cited another in Rose.
But these examples are rather rare, that a guy jumps around the diamond...

Historical players that DIDN'T play this position or that position...didn't, or maybe a little, probably for a reason.
LIVES are a different story, hard to say.

I don't know, it's not really a big deal.

Biggio, Rose, Mondesi, we know about them, name 30 other random players and tell me how they would do at one of the 6 or 7 or 8 positions they've never played in the Majors.

[SpacePope]

Originally Posted by Orcin

That kind of stuff makes no sense to me and hurts the immersion of the mode in my opinion.

Whatever immersion is left after you imagine clones of baseball players from various eras playing against each other and themselves, this doesn't break it.

Maybe they got the ratings wrong here or there, but how is it unrealistic to allow players to learn positions they would have been able to learn by playing them at that position over the course of a season?

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by SpacePope

Whatever immersion is left after you imagine clones of baseball players from various eras playing against each other and themselves, this doesn't break it.

I've heard this argument before and it fails for me.

I have played OOTP and games like it going all the way back to Strat-O-Matic for decades. I am quite used to all-star players from different eras being matched in a fantasy game. In ALL of those games, the emphasis was on providing the most realistic outcomes possible and that does not include teaching Cal Ripken Jr. to play second base.

I understand if that is different for you. I am simply giving my opinion.

[One Great Matrix]

Originally Posted by SpacePope

Whatever immersion is left after you imagine clones of baseball players from various eras playing against each other and themselves, this doesn't break it.

Maybe they got the ratings wrong here or there, but how is it unrealistic to allow players to learn positions they would have been able to learn by playing them at that position over the course of a season?

Examples? Of a team putting a player in at a position other than one he's practiced at & him improving all that much from playing regular season games there, not from practicing there? (since a lot of this is done in the off-season, and there isn't really one yet, there's same amt. of time between end of one season and end of approximately a month)

Again, there's no objection here because I don't have a solution other than simply giving the player abilities on the card that are fixed at all the positions he can play & rating them at each position...

But it seems like there's an attempt to do a little more than that in reality. Just in a certain way that you don't agree with.

I know way better than to think that, well, that some of these things weren't considered in creating the game I'm playing, which does a pretty good job at keeping things ...well, real. Whatever that means.

I think it's a great game...sometimes you just start talking about aspects of the game that you'd like to see change out of nowhere, somehow that means you love the game, constructive criticism or something...Now that we're on the topic, what's that about?

I get the impression that every once in awhile, a guy can be trained at a new position, in practice, and sometimes it's a success, and sometimes it's a failure.

[One Great Matrix]

You might say it could be a little irritating to play a team with Brett at 1st, and Ripken at 2nd, Robinson at Short & some other guy who's never played 3rd at 3rd....if only because Robinson was a 2nd baseman, Brett a 3rd baseman & Ripken a shortstop...

Easy to think I could just adjust, you know and understand I could play those people at whatever position they can be trained at, sometimes it kind of just bothers me, though I want to know .....if Ripken & some of these other guys could really play the whole infield if not simply say he couldn't. Or he shouldn't since it is common knowledge that he was a Shortstop.

Cal Ripken?!!? at 2B?? at 3B???

Plus I figure the developers are best at figuring this stuff out if they made the game. It's firsthand baseball experience I think sometimes, MAYBE...that makes me at least think..."Whoa...it's not that easy to just put him at another infield position & trust he'll take to it.", perform well.

[SpacePope]

I think there are two different questions that are getting a little mixed up.

The first is whether players ought to be able to improve at any of their positional skills. I think so, but I get others prefer they don't. I like finding players I can groom to fit into my team. I think that's part of managing a club and, honestly, I think the game can use as many elements that we can manage as possible because, in the end, we don't have a whole lot to do in the game. I also think it makes the game more realistic, since most good defensive players probably could learn another position.

The second question is whether OOTP has got it right wrt position training. I'm fine with it as is, but I think it could be improved. The question of SS is a good one. If a guy could play stellar SS, he probably played it. If he didn't, it's probably because he couldn't. There are exceptions, obviously, but just because someone was amazing at 2B or 3B doesn't mean they'd be very good at SS, which is how the game works. It might be as simple as an overrating of some arms of 2B and overrating of the range of some 3B.

[BigRed75]

Did y'all forget that Cal Ripken came up as a 3B and also finished his career there?

And George Brett finished his career at 1B?

Seems like some rather...odd examples if you want to make your case.

[Dogberry99]

I find it weird that all cards reflect the accomplishments of a specific season (except for the Peak cards) and there is no statistical growth or "potential" - except defense. Go crazy with that. And the increase in OVR ratings given to players with ratings at multiple positions is pointless, making those cards perform worse than their inflated ratings would otherwise indicate.


Also, someone needs to mention Michael Young in this thread, considering he came up through the minors playing 2B before winning a GG at SS with the Rangers in 2008.

[SpacePope]

Originally Posted by BigRed75

Did y'all forget that Cal Ripken came up as a 3B and also finished his career there?

And George Brett finished his career at 1B?

Seems like some rather...odd examples if you want to make your case.

Also, Jackie Robinson started at first only a few days after signing with the Dodgers as a SS. Not sure if his move to 2B was as unrehearsed.

Also also, Pete Rose's move to 3B appears to have been impromptu during the '75 season. Don't know about his other position changes.

Of course, it's probably less common for someone to change to SS in the middle of the season (like Cal Ripken did). It still seems likely a lot of players that can become elite SS in OOTP probably wouldn't have been all that good at the position. Even though Jackie Robinson played it in the negro leagues I just read he wasn't all that great at it (range issues). Who knows if he'd have even grown into the beast of a SS that the 99 Jackie can become. If it were the 100 Jackie with those aspirational defensive ratings I'd feel better about it. I see the PEAK cards as being some kind of Platonic ideals of the players.

[HiDesertAce]

Originally Posted by Orcin

In ALL of those games, the emphasis was on providing the most realistic outcomes possible and that does not include teaching Cal Ripken Jr. to play second base.

I understand if that is different for you. I am simply giving my opinion.

I dont think Perfect Team mode is about realistic outcomes. The regular OOTP mode gives you that if that is what you seek. Perfect Team is a different beast imo.

[Dogberry99]

Originally Posted by HiDesertAce

I dont think Perfect Team mode is about realistic outcomes. The regular OOTP mode gives you that if that is what you seek. Perfect Team is a different beast imo.

PT isn't about realistic outcomes, but the cards are supposed to be based upon real statistical production. The ability to learn new positions is one of the rare places where our actions as players of this game can improve a card's ratings beyond that which was acquired by real life production.

[One Great Matrix]

Originally Posted by BigRed75

Did y'all forget that Cal Ripken came up as a 3B and also finished his career there?

And George Brett finished his career at 1B?

Seems like some rather...odd examples if you want to make your case.

Yes, I did.

However, he did play a heck of a lot more games at SS and played at a much higher level at SS than at 3B in Cal's case...

And Brett, (very few of us have 10% of the information available as to the details of everyone's career stored in our heads), I'd have to guess they moved him from his primary position for similar reason...no longer ideal at their primary positions for the team...

So they aren't really the worst examples, neither...
The basic argument is just that a card representing a player should reflect if not strictly the positions they played that year... or in their career in the case of a peak... then strictly their ability to play the positions. Pretty sure Ripken made a lot more errors as a 3rd baseman and Brett was better at his primary position, 3rd, as well.

You have to remember the game is fantasy-based. For some reasons beyond my ability to comment on it right now, the idea is to keep it true to reality, otherwise we might as well let a player play anywhere.