Call To The Hall Content!

[Kris Jardine]

Available NOW in Perfect Team

[BoofBonser26]

I know this is about the HOF, but I just want to take a moment to compliment the card design. Each one evokes the era it represents while managing to fall on the right side of the "inspired by" / "copied from" line. And it really shows when you see a large number of legends posted together like this.

[Izz]

Awesome stuff, guys!

[Kris Jardine]

If you would like to watch the archive of last night's special Hall of Fame stream, you can do so HERE

[mess]

Finally a Diamond Halladay! I feel like I just complained about the 2003 Halladay only being a gold lol

[Maddox]

I doubt that I can afford any of them but thanks for continuing to add more cards. Hopefully more historic diamond choices overall will drive the price of those cards down a little.

[Xogo]

I listened to the HOF stream last night. Id like to see something from the devs about all core ratings and impact in PT. I find PT plays different than OOTP. I heard one of the guest give their breakdown of the new cards. While I agree with the assessment, the points he was making about how the card would perform I dont agree with based on what Ive seen so far. And Ive been in PT since the start. One area specifically they mention is defense. I agree defense should be very important, but I dont see that in actual games. Ive seen and lost to many teams who are playing cards in positions they have no rating and it doesnt seem to matter one bit. Playing a 84 3B who has a 0 at RF, should be the same as if you are asking him to pitch. It makes no sense to me why I can take a card who is a 70 LF and play him in RF all season, and by the end of the season he has a better rating in RF than LF. For a game like PT, I would make it where you can only play cards in the positions they are eligible. Example of Edgar Martinez. Not a great 3B. But even in a Perfect League his rating will not be a problem, or playing him at 1B where he has no rating.

[Xogo]

Originally Posted by Kris Jardine

Available NOW in Perfect Team

All great cards Id love to be able to play that Ill never get

[Morug]

Lee Smith 85 is good for me...I'm not sure I'll be able to afford the 95 version for my Expos.

[joehart]

Originally Posted by Xogo

I listened to the HOF stream last night. Id like to see something from the devs about all core ratings and impact in PT. I find PT plays different than OOTP. I heard one of the guest give their breakdown of the new cards. While I agree with the assessment, the points he was making about how the card would perform I dont agree with based on what Ive seen so far. And Ive been in PT since the start. One area specifically they mention is defense. I agree defense should be very important, but I dont see that in actual games. Ive seen and lost to many teams who are playing cards in positions they have no rating and it doesnt seem to matter one bit. Playing a 84 3B who has a 0 at RF, should be the same as if you are asking him to pitch. It makes no sense to me why I can take a card who is a 70 LF and play him in RF all season, and by the end of the season he has a better rating in RF than LF. For a game like PT, I would make it where you can only play cards in the positions they are eligible. Example of Edgar Martinez. Not a great 3B. But even in a Perfect League his rating will not be a problem, or playing him at 1B where he has no rating.

Interesting comment....maybe some additional clarification needed.

Personally, I do like the "what if" scenario that PT gives us.
What if the Mariners did not have John Olerud at 1B and instead used Edgar at 1B? The game allows us to try that scenario.

What if Trout was moved to LF because another faster player+better arm was acquired. Trout can became a 106 LF player in PT.

So the idea that I can re-train a player to another position is one of the features I have come to enjoy, even if they end up learning a different position beyond the position they currently know & play.

Personally, with so many superstars from decades of play, I am glad some of the top players are allowed to move and learn additional positions.

It also matches what we see in the big leagues (maybe not often...but it happens).
Example, Dee Gordon was a Gold Glove 2nd basement but the Mariners asked him to move to CF because Robinson Cano was already at 2B. Dee had no real prior experience in CF but his talent allowed the Mariners to play him out of position and learn.
I believe you could train him to be a 90LF, 64CF, or 76RF player.

Are you suggesting, he should not be allowed to train OF positions because he never played there before? or not as high as his 2B position? or perform more poorly while he learns the position?

I don't have any statistical data but I feel like I am losing more games (more defensive errors) when I assign players to new positions and re-train them compared to when they are already at their peak defensive values.

I enjoy when I win games against whales because their batting All-Stars make defensive errors.

Great topic

[chazzycat]

Originally Posted by Xogo

Playing a 84 3B who has a 0 at RF, should be the same as if you are asking him to pitch. It makes no sense to me why I can take a card who is a 70 LF and play him in RF all season, and by the end of the season he has a better rating in RF than LF. For a game like PT, I would make it where you can only play cards in the positions they are eligible. Example of Edgar Martinez. Not a great 3B. But even in a Perfect League his rating will not be a problem, or playing him at 1B where he has no rating.

The only way a player would end up with a higher rating in a different position, is if he was always better suited for that position. Like moving a guy from LF to RF and seeing a better rating after 1 year probably means he has a strong arm, which is more important in RF than LF. He probably just played LF because that team had an ever better right fielder.



Also, the whole time the player is getting "trained up" on the new position his defense will suffer.

[LarryDu4]

Originally Posted by Xogo

better rating in RF than LF. For a game like PT, I would make it where you can only play cards in the positions they are eligible. .

I have a Ted Williams 1939 rookie card when he played all 149 games he appeared in at RF. During the rest of his career he only played 20 more games as a RF. Why shouldn't I have the ability to play him as a LF when, in fact that is where he played during the majority of his career?

P.S. I put him back in RF after I acquired J.D. Martinez to play LF...to me this is less "realistic" than playing Williams where he is really "out of position for the majority of his career.

[mess]

Originally Posted by chazzycat

Also, the whole time the player is getting "trained up" on the new position his defense will suffer.

Can confirm. I'm currently training up Shawn Green in in CF and he's got a -10+ ZR this season. Painful, but it will be nice to have the flexibility once he's trained up.

He was around 45 at CF at the All Star Break.

[Bunktown Ballers]

Being a stupidly crazy White Sox fan the minute I seen his new card I went dropped a dime and got it. I know the card will never match his numbers but he will be in my lineup. Thanks guys. Now waiting for the all too common All-Star card of BILL MELTON from 1971. I know he's no big deal but was my big deal the years of 1969 to 1975 for my Sox. My all-time favorite baseball player.
Anyways....Thanks
BB
Chicago Black Sox

[Bunktown Ballers]

Originally Posted by Xogo

I listened to the HOF stream last night. Id like to see something from the devs about all core ratings and impact in PT. I find PT plays different than OOTP. I heard one of the guest give their breakdown of the new cards. While I agree with the assessment, the points he was making about how the card would perform I dont agree with based on what Ive seen so far. And Ive been in PT since the start. One area specifically they mention is defense. I agree defense should be very important, but I dont see that in actual games. Ive seen and lost to many teams who are playing cards in positions they have no rating and it doesnt seem to matter one bit. Playing a 84 3B who has a 0 at RF, should be the same as if you are asking him to pitch. It makes no sense to me why I can take a card who is a 70 LF and play him in RF all season, and by the end of the season he has a better rating in RF than LF. For a game like PT, I would make it where you can only play cards in the positions they are eligible. Example of Edgar Martinez. Not a great 3B. But even in a Perfect League his rating will not be a problem, or playing him at 1B where he has no rating.

This last season a team in my league had every pitcher a starting pitcher and played 5 as starters and the rest as relievers with RANDY JOHNSON closing. Got sweep every time I played him. VERY VERY VERY discouraging. Several things should be tinkered with as far as being competive with others. I agree 100% with this poster, but no doubt that would hurt the bottom line for OOTP.

[zrog2000]

That Halladay is by my calculation, the 2nd best pitching card in the game. It now has a bid on it in the AH for 350,000 PP. Ends in 20 minutes.

[DonkeyKongSr]

Originally Posted by zrog2000

That Halladay is by my calculation, the 2nd best pitching card in the game. It now has a bid on it in the AH for 350,000 PP. Ends in 20 minutes.

Damn, missed it. You have the ratings from it? Also, anyone seen the Rivera in the wild? I wonder if it will take over best closer from Eck.

[zrog2000]

Originally Posted by DonkeyKongSr

Damn, missed it. You have the ratings from it? Also, anyone seen the Rivera in the wild? I wonder if it will take over best closer from Eck.

86/83/91 is all I put in my spreadsheet.

[Bunktown Ballers]

Originally Posted by DonkeyKongSr

Damn, missed it. You have the ratings from it? Also, anyone seen the Rivera in the wild? I wonder if it will take over best closer from Eck.

Eric Gagne (95) is a pretty dominant card too 128/71/69 - FB 91, Curve 108, Forkball 78


Roberto Osuna (78) is pretty lock down too

[DonkeyKongSr]

Originally Posted by zrog2000

86/83/91 is all I put in my spreadsheet.

Nice. He's Greinke with much better Control or Kevin Brown with slightly better movement and much better Control. Top 5 in both Movement and Control. Yeah, that's a very, very good card.