Learning New Position Difficulty Recommendations

kq76 · 07-01-2003, 10:26 AM

I'd like to get some opinions on how difficult it should be to learn new positions. I understand some fielders should never be able to learn another position well even if their primary position is difficult, but I'd like to know the general consensus of the difficulty of learning a new position. For example, in general I believe RFs should be able to learn LF and 1B with little difficulty, but I think C should be difficult for anyone to learn. My own opinions follow and for the most part I've used the generally accepted defensive spectrum of: 1B - LF - RF - 3B - CF - 2B - SS - C (easiest to most difficult to learn), with some exceptions (no one can learn catcher, IFs generally learn IF easier than OF and vice versa with OFs).

primary position > learnable new positions

C > 3B, RF, LF, 1B
SS > 2B, 3B, CF, RF, LF, 1B (everything but catcher)
2B > SS, 3B, CF, RF, LF, 1B (everything but catcher)
CF > RF, LF, 3B, 1B
3B > 1B, RF, LF
RF > LF, 1B
LF > 1B
1B > LF

Ultimately I'd like .400 to consider the ideas in this thread for OOTP, but the initial purpose of it is to make recommendations to one of my leagues on what positions to allow GMs to teach players.

TIA

tcblcommish · 07-01-2003, 11:52 AM

1B - LF - RF - 3B - CF - 2B - SS - C (easiest to most difficult to learn)

1B is that easy? Positioning would be tough to learn right away. I would think LF would be the easiest. Anyways, I agree that players shouldn't be able to just learn any position the same. There should be harder positions to learn.

kq76 · 07-01-2003, 11:58 AM

I think I agree with you that LF is easier to learn than 1B and that's partly why I said 1B can learn LF and not RF. That spectrum is what others made up, I was just loosely following it.

pallison14 · 07-01-2003, 12:39 PM

Not to be a pain, but Biggio successfully transitioned from C to 2B to CF. I seem to recall talks about Pudge moving to 2B as well a few years back. Basically,I think catchers today are a lot more athletic than in years past, and more than a few of them are able to transition to other positions.

While I think it should be extremely hard to do, I don't think it should be impossible in the game.

sixto · 07-01-2003, 12:43 PM

I would like to use this opportunity to reiterate my desire to see OOTP completely overhaul the way it handles defensive capabilities. See 1,211,407 other threads on the subject for my feelings on the matter.

kq76 · 07-01-2003, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pallison14
Not to be a pain, but Biggio successfully transitioned from C to 2B to CF. I seem to recall talks about Pudge moving to 2B as well a few years back. Basically,I think catchers today are a lot more athletic than in years past, and more than a few of them are able to transition to other positions.

While I think it should be extremely hard to do, I don't think it should be impossible in the game.

You're right, within the game other position transitions should at least be possible to mimic players like Craig Biggio and Pete Rose, just not likely. I was more thinking about my online league where some positions are learnable, but most are not.

KurtBevacqua · 07-01-2003, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sixto
I would like to use this opportunity to reiterate my desire to see OOTP completely overhaul the way it handles defensive capabilities. See 1,211,407 other threads on the subject for my feelings on the matter.

I second Sixto's call. My suggestion is to change the way Spring Training is run. Make points against offensive work separate from defensive. Just because a guy is trying to learn a new position in Spring Training doesn't mean he makes sacrficices in batting practice. And having to use five points is an awful lot to sacrfice. I guess you could move all your fielding points to learn a new position, but it seems to me you would wind up working one end against the other, take all your fielding points away to make an adjustment for fielding.

Larry Mahnken · 07-02-2003, 01:32 AM

While, for the most part, it is rare to see a player move to the right across the defensive spectrum, it's not unheard of, and does not defy any specific sabermetric theory. The defensive spectrum is really more of a concept of offensive value.

Basically, as you go to the left of the spectrum, it becomes easier to find a good hitter. As you go to the right, good hitters are more difficult to find, and thus, more valuable. Alex Rodriguez is not as good a hitter as Jim Thome, but since the 30th best first baseman in baseball is a lot better hitter than the 30th best shortstop, A-Rod's overall value is more than Thome's, even before you consider that A-Rod is a Gold Glover.

Basically, it's a good idea to sacrifice some defense on the right side for offense, and a horrible idea to sacrifice any offense for defense on the left side.

And Bill James came up with the concept, if anyone's wondering.

Joshv02 · 07-02-2003, 06:57 AM

2 cents:

The ability to learn a new position should also be based on phenotype and other attributes. So, a 260# 1B -- let's call him... Prince-- would be somewhat odd looking chasing Texas leaguers in left. But, a 5'9 185# catcher who runs at 'b/b', may move sucessfully elsewhere.

LF is probably more valueable (and presumably more difficult to learn) than 1B: looking at UZR ratings, you see a greater spread --derivation from the norm of 0-- among LFers than 1B. The worst LFer (Ward) can be called Prince, Sr.

Plutoro · 07-02-2003, 08:07 AM

AROD is a better hitter then Thome IMO

Career Wise AROD is a .308 hitter, Thome is in the .280's, AROD gets more RBI AND HR's then Thome, and last year is the only year Thome hit for a higher average. Plus the fact AROD does have some stealing abilities and better overall speed, and the fact hes so young that it doesn't even matter he plays gold glove shortstop he is still better then Thome.

CBL-Commish · 07-02-2003, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sixto
I would like to use this opportunity to reiterate my desire to see OOTP completely overhaul the way it handles defensive capabilities. See 1,211,407 other threads on the subject for my feelings on the matter.

I'll second that.

At the very least I'd like to see a single 'OF' position, with maybe a preferred position for each outfielder, and who plays where would just be determined by range, arm, and preferred position. It's slightly absurd that an A/A centerfielder would need to play a significant number of games in left or right before getting any rating there at all. Similar arguments can be (and have been) made about SS's moving to 2B, etc.

joncarlos · 07-02-2003, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by kq76

primary position > learnable new positions

C > 3B, RF, LF, 1B
SS > 2B, 3B, CF, RF, LF, 1B (everything but catcher)
2B > SS, 3B, CF, RF, LF, 1B (everything but catcher)
CF > RF, LF, 3B, 1B
3B > 1B, RF, LF
RF > LF, 1B
LF > 1B
1B > LF

CF to 3B is a little wierd, I would probably not bother with that one. Also I don't think RF/LF are different enough to warrant leaving out LF > RF.

Even LF/RF > CF can be done, but maybe (since you run the league) you could require a speed rating of B or higher to do it. Something similar could be done with 1B > RF/LF (speed rating of C or higher)

Occasionally 3B can move to 2B also (A Boone, B Mueller).

SpaceNinja · 07-02-2003, 02:40 PM

I agree that adding positional 'skills' would be a nice upgrade to the game for hardcore players... just offhand, the stats could be E-A for outfield glove, outfield arm, infield glove, infield arm, catcher glove, catcher arm, reflexes, and the speed stat that's already used. In fact, the reflexes stat could be the same as stolen base ability...

So, a player with a good glove and good reflexes could be turned into a second-baseman or shortstop... if he didn't have reflexes, he might be a third baseman, and if he didn't have an arm, he might be moved to first.

These stats could be relatively fluid as well, so a young player can change position frequently as he works through the minors (as usually happens for even the best of prospects: for instance, Delgado was a catcher throughout the minors, and Chipper Jones was a shortstop), and older players would often eventually deteriorate at their chosen position and be forced to move.

It would be interesting and add to realism, but it would also be a bitch for Markus to put together and turn off casual fans, so I'm just dreaming here.

sixto · 07-02-2003, 04:14 PM

Troy Glaus was a college SS. David Eckstein was a college 2B. Pat Burrell played 3B and was expected to play 1B in the pros but got thrown out in LF and is half decent.

Four things (at least) don't translate from real life to OOTP:

1. players lose their range, especially at range-dependent positions, rapidly, often showing significant decline by age 30, and are forced to move to less range-dependent positions and make way for younger, more agile players.

2. Players' positions are determined during their minor-league careers, not before it.

3. A player's fielding ability, as represented by fielding percentage, typically improves over his career, as opposed to staying set at one spot.

4. Players often train at a new position out of necessity and intelligent redistribution of talent, and, a player's suitability for a certain position is often based, as mentioned above, on the defensive spectrum, at least subconsciously. In other words, 1st base is a great place for Kevin Millar, Carlos Delgado, Frank Thomas, Jack Cust, Paul Konerko, etc etc to end up playing. Because this is poorly modeled, I find OOTP to be sorely lacking in big-bat 1Bs.

holyroller · 07-02-2003, 04:21 PM

http://www.bigbadbaseball.com/glossary/#D

"Defensive Spectrum
First coined by Bill James. A method of ranking defensive positions by how much of the defensive responsibility they take. That is, shortstops have a lot more defensive responsibility than first baseman do. The Defensive Spectrum goes, left to right:

DH-1B-LF-RF-3B-CF-C-2B-SS."

In general, players can move from right to left on the spectrum without problems. Left to right switches can happen, but are rare and generally not successful.

soonertony · 07-02-2003, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Plutoro
AROD is a better hitter then Thome IMO

Career Wise AROD is a .308 hitter, Thome is in the .280's, AROD gets more RBI AND HR's then Thome, and last year is the only year Thome hit for a higher average. Plus the fact AROD does have some stealing abilities and better overall speed, and the fact hes so young that it doesn't even matter he plays gold glove shortstop he is still better then Thome.

Thome
Career OBP: .414
Career SLG: .567

Rodriguez
Career OBP: .380
Career SLG: .578

Rodriguez has seen both his on-base and slugging rise above his career levels the last two seasons because 1) they were at his age 26 and 27 seasons, which is normally the peak, and 2) he played them in the Ballpark in Arlington, a hitters paradise. His stealing ability doesn't have anything to do with the argument, because one would expect middle infielders to have greater stealing ability than first basemen.

Bluenoser · 07-02-2003, 06:27 PM

Gary Carter was an OF'er before he became a catcher, albeit in the minors, but still.....

Nutlaw · 07-03-2003, 10:54 AM

From my experience teaching players new positions in the minor leagues (quite frequently), the current system seems very reasonable. As is, it is much easier for an outfielder to learn another position in the outfield than it is for him to learn second base. It's easier for a shortstop to learn second base than it is to learn the outfield. Learning catcher takes a long time. It all seems to make good sense.

joncarlos · 07-03-2003, 11:23 AM

I just had Bill Hall, who is an A-or-B rated SS, learn 2B in about a month, AND he's a 'B' there. So kudos to the developers for that!!

sebastian0622 · 07-03-2003, 12:23 PM

my $.02

I believe OOTP does a fair job of developing a player's position during his minor league career. I like having my 2B learn 3B to see if he can handle it there, for instance.

However, I think each player should have hidden ratings for his potential to convert to the different positions, and they should be based loosely on the defensive spectrum. So, most CFs, but not all, shouldn't be allowed to convert to SS. You could try it in the minors, at which time a check against the hidden ratings is made, and if he can't convert, you get an email from your scout saying that the conversion isn't going to well and is going to be scrapped.

07-01-2003, 10:26 AM	#1
kq76 Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 11,993	Learning New Position Difficulty Recommendations I'd like to get some opinions on how difficult it should be to learn new positions. I understand some fielders should never be able to learn another position well even if their primary position is difficult, but I'd like to know the general consensus of the difficulty of learning a new position. For example, in general I believe RFs should be able to learn LF and 1B with little difficulty, but I think C should be difficult for anyone to learn. My own opinions follow and for the most part I've used the generally accepted defensive spectrum of: 1B - LF - RF - 3B - CF - 2B - SS - C (easiest to most difficult to learn), with some exceptions (no one can learn catcher, IFs generally learn IF easier than OF and vice versa with OFs). primary position > learnable new positions C > 3B, RF, LF, 1B SS > 2B, 3B, CF, RF, LF, 1B (everything but catcher) 2B > SS, 3B, CF, RF, LF, 1B (everything but catcher) CF > RF, LF, 3B, 1B 3B > 1B, RF, LF RF > LF, 1B LF > 1B 1B > LF Ultimately I'd like .400 to consider the ideas in this thread for OOTP, but the initial purpose of it is to make recommendations to one of my leagues on what positions to allow GMs to teach players. TIA __________________ My OOTP Wishlist \| My FAQ List OOTP Wiki \| Your Recommended Team Nicknames, By City (A Crowdsourced Project) For Beta/Devs: Full screen (1920x1080) Last edited by kq76; 07-01-2003 at 10:30 AM.

07-01-2003, 11:58 AM	#3
kq76 Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 11,993	I think I agree with you that LF is easier to learn than 1B and that's partly why I said 1B can learn LF and not RF. That spectrum is what others made up, I was just loosely following it. __________________ My OOTP Wishlist \| My FAQ List OOTP Wiki \| Your Recommended Team Nicknames, By City (A Crowdsourced Project) For Beta/Devs: Full screen (1920x1080)

07-01-2003, 12:39 PM	#4
pallison14 Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 452	Not to be a pain, but Biggio successfully transitioned from C to 2B to CF. I seem to recall talks about Pudge moving to 2B as well a few years back. Basically,I think catchers today are a lot more athletic than in years past, and more than a few of them are able to transition to other positions. While I think it should be extremely hard to do, I don't think it should be impossible in the game. __________________ Commissioner, NGBL - Putting the FUNK in defunct. New York (AL), UBL

07-02-2003, 06:57 AM	#9
Joshv02 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: , " Posts: 3,082	2 cents: The ability to learn a new position should also be based on phenotype and other attributes. So, a 260# 1B -- let's call him... Prince-- would be somewhat odd looking chasing Texas leaguers in left. But, a 5'9 185# catcher who runs at 'b/b', may move sucessfully elsewhere. LF is probably more valueable (and presumably more difficult to learn) than 1B: looking at UZR ratings, you see a greater spread --derivation from the norm of 0-- among LFers than 1B. The worst LFer (Ward) can be called Prince, Sr. __________________ Brookline Maccabees. RIP

07-02-2003, 08:07 AM	#10
Plutoro Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 276	AROD is a better hitter then Thome IMO Career Wise AROD is a .308 hitter, Thome is in the .280's, AROD gets more RBI AND HR's then Thome, and last year is the only year Thome hit for a higher average. Plus the fact AROD does have some stealing abilities and better overall speed, and the fact hes so young that it doesn't even matter he plays gold glove shortstop he is still better then Thome. __________________ SMLB-San Diego Padres: Pre-season 2003, currently rebuilding (year 1 of 5). 15-22 now, Klesko and Burroughs are hot each hitting .325 plus, Bartosh and Keisler both making strong cases for RoY in the early season.

07-01-2003, 11:52 AM	#2
tcblcommish Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 3,438	1B - LF - RF - 3B - CF - 2B - SS - C (easiest to most difficult to learn) 1B is that easy? Positioning would be tough to learn right away. I would think LF would be the easiest. Anyways, I agree that players shouldn't be able to just learn any position the same. There should be harder positions to learn.

07-01-2003, 12:43 PM	#5
sixto Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,263	I would like to use this opportunity to reiterate my desire to see OOTP completely overhaul the way it handles defensive capabilities. See 1,211,407 other threads on the subject for my feelings on the matter.

07-02-2003, 01:32 AM	#8
Larry Mahnken Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: York, PA Posts: 56	While, for the most part, it is rare to see a player move to the right across the defensive spectrum, it's not unheard of, and does not defy any specific sabermetric theory. The defensive spectrum is really more of a concept of offensive value. Basically, as you go to the left of the spectrum, it becomes easier to find a good hitter. As you go to the right, good hitters are more difficult to find, and thus, more valuable. Alex Rodriguez is not as good a hitter as Jim Thome, but since the 30th best first baseman in baseball is a lot better hitter than the 30th best shortstop, A-Rod's overall value is more than Thome's, even before you consider that A-Rod is a Gold Glover. Basically, it's a good idea to sacrifice some defense on the right side for offense, and a horrible idea to sacrifice any offense for defense on the left side. And Bill James came up with the concept, if anyone's wondering.

07-02-2003, 02:40 PM	#13
SpaceNinja Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 92	I agree that adding positional 'skills' would be a nice upgrade to the game for hardcore players... just offhand, the stats could be E-A for outfield glove, outfield arm, infield glove, infield arm, catcher glove, catcher arm, reflexes, and the speed stat that's already used. In fact, the reflexes stat could be the same as stolen base ability... So, a player with a good glove and good reflexes could be turned into a second-baseman or shortstop... if he didn't have reflexes, he might be a third baseman, and if he didn't have an arm, he might be moved to first. These stats could be relatively fluid as well, so a young player can change position frequently as he works through the minors (as usually happens for even the best of prospects: for instance, Delgado was a catcher throughout the minors, and Chipper Jones was a shortstop), and older players would often eventually deteriorate at their chosen position and be forced to move. It would be interesting and add to realism, but it would also be a bitch for Markus to put together and turn off casual fans, so I'm just dreaming here.

07-02-2003, 04:14 PM	#14
sixto Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,263	Troy Glaus was a college SS. David Eckstein was a college 2B. Pat Burrell played 3B and was expected to play 1B in the pros but got thrown out in LF and is half decent. Four things (at least) don't translate from real life to OOTP: 1. players lose their range, especially at range-dependent positions, rapidly, often showing significant decline by age 30, and are forced to move to less range-dependent positions and make way for younger, more agile players. 2. Players' positions are determined during their minor-league careers, not before it. 3. A player's fielding ability, as represented by fielding percentage, typically improves over his career, as opposed to staying set at one spot. 4. Players often train at a new position out of necessity and intelligent redistribution of talent, and, a player's suitability for a certain position is often based, as mentioned above, on the defensive spectrum, at least subconsciously. In other words, 1st base is a great place for Kevin Millar, Carlos Delgado, Frank Thomas, Jack Cust, Paul Konerko, etc etc to end up playing. Because this is poorly modeled, I find OOTP to be sorely lacking in big-bat 1Bs.

07-02-2003, 04:21 PM	#15
holyroller Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: OTBL Forums Posts: 3,532	http://www.bigbadbaseball.com/glossary/#D "Defensive Spectrum First coined by Bill James. A method of ranking defensive positions by how much of the defensive responsibility they take. That is, shortstops have a lot more defensive responsibility than first baseman do. The Defensive Spectrum goes, left to right: DH-1B-LF-RF-3B-CF-C-2B-SS." In general, players can move from right to left on the spectrum without problems. Left to right switches can happen, but are rare and generally not successful. __________________ Back to work, but not drawing a paycheck. TonyJ et. al.'s alias “I confused it with the chicken’s neck,” Mocanu, who was admitted to the emergency hospital in Galati, was quoted as saying. “I cut it ... and the dog rushed and ate it.”

07-02-2003, 06:27 PM	#17
Bluenoser Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In The Moment Posts: 14,446	Gary Carter was an OF'er before he became a catcher, albeit in the minors, but still.....

07-03-2003, 10:54 AM	#18
Nutlaw Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 9,538	From my experience teaching players new positions in the minor leagues (quite frequently), the current system seems very reasonable. As is, it is much easier for an outfielder to learn another position in the outfield than it is for him to learn second base. It's easier for a shortstop to learn second base than it is to learn the outfield. Learning catcher takes a long time. It all seems to make good sense.

07-03-2003, 11:23 AM	#19
joncarlos All Star Reserve Join Date: May 2003 Location: Pittsburgh PA Posts: 693	I just had Bill Hall, who is an A-or-B rated SS, learn 2B in about a month, AND he's a 'B' there. So kudos to the developers for that!!

07-03-2003, 12:23 PM	#20
sebastian0622 Banned Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,465	my $.02 I believe OOTP does a fair job of developing a player's position during his minor league career. I like having my 2B learn 3B to see if he can handle it there, for instance. However, I think each player should have hidden ratings for his potential to convert to the different positions, and they should be based loosely on the defensive spectrum. So, most CFs, but not all, shouldn't be allowed to convert to SS. You could try it in the minors, at which time a check against the hidden ratings is made, and if he can't convert, you get an email from your scout saying that the conversion isn't going to well and is going to be scrapped.