2027 - Season - New York, New York! (No File)

[cougnix]

I'm just getting the hang of the ratings and how we have it. I for one do NOT want to change how it is now unless we did a complete restart. Just sayin'

[trendon]

While I think going 'stats only' is a bad idea, I absolutely agree that what we have is too obvious. 1-20 with a better mix of stats/ability would be far more entertaining.

At the very least, it would be the first step before going stats-only.

I think your scouting should play a role in the number. But I don't think the number should be pin point accurate. It's ok to me if the stats + scout can tell you that a player is a 8/10 guy (using 1-10) and the reality is that he's a 7 or a 9. My concern would be that stats only, combined with some slumping play would be very deceiving. I'd have to look at our mix now and what the options are to know exactly where I'd like to see it. But we're definitely thinking in the right direction.

My solo league is almost entirely stats-only with scouting on. It is a historical league so I have stats from before 1901 but my team is full of created players. I have to rely on what my scout says and it has worked pretty well. I temporarily left defensive ratings on, then I turned them off, and I just recently turned them back on since I don't think there is any harm done knowing how well a player plays defense or runs the bases. Offensive stats, though? Never going on. I have enough info to survive.

[ReignOnU]

So right now we are setup like this:
30% - Ratings
30% - Current Year
30% - Last Year
10% - 2 Yrs Ago

You have yours setup with 0% - Ratings?

If so, you're still getting some kind of 'potential' rating in which your scout evaluates the player and projects them out? Somehow this is different than you eyeballing the progression (or not) of stats through the system?

I find it interesting that our ratings are still pretty accurate (at least for players on your own team).

Stars - Overall/Potential
Ratings - 1-20 or 1-10

Those would be preferred, imo.

[shel311]

While I think going 'stats only' is a bad idea, I absolutely agree that what we have is too obvious. 1-20 with a better mix of stats/ability would be far more entertaining.

At the very least, it would be the first step before going stats-only.

Sounds intriguing. How do you deal with prospects? Seems like that would be where it's pretty tough, but ML guys with no ratings you could get by.

Amateur? They have four years of school.

Minors? It would almost force us all to get better at minor league management.

But when, say, looking at the amateur draft pool, you basically almost have to click on every player to see his 4 year stats.

I definitely agree with you on theory, but I think it would be really difficult to sorty and rank guys without ratings.

[shel311]

So right now we are setup like this:
30% - Ratings
30% - Current Year
30% - Last Year
10% - 2 Yrs Ago

Every time I start my own sim, which I do once per month and never finish the 1st month of the season before I quit lol...I usually go something like:

10% ratings
50% current year
25% last year
15% 2 yrs ago

No real reason, that's just the numbers that sound right to me.

[Cnasty]

Restart!!!

We know so much more than we did when we started and love the idea of stats only or lower ratings.

But you will never get everyone to change. There are too many history lovers.

[GeorgesGoons]

2. In my opinion, the ratings are not tied into stats enough. It should be heavily weighed with stats. This affects many aspects of the game, namely what Joe is talking about.

Not exactly sure I am understanding this completely. But to have a "check on learning" would this fall into your scenario:

1B Steve Bryant - He was a 50/51 (ish) guy. My guess is that's mainly because gap/power/eye was 45/20/40 potential but still hit .379 as a rookie and .354 his second year, with OPS of .912/.845 and OPS+ of 143/132 his two years.

So you are esentially saying he hit like a 70+/70+ guy and that with our current set up it did not reflect this?

If I am not understanding this correctly can you point me in the right direction.

[cougnix]

While I think going 'stats only' is a bad idea, I absolutely agree that what we have is too obvious. 1-20 with a better mix of stats/ability would be far more entertaining.

At the very least, it would be the first step before going stats-only.

Sounds intriguing. How do you deal with prospects? Seems like that would be where it's pretty tough, but ML guys with no ratings you could get by.

Amateur? They have four years of school.

Minors? It would almost force us all to get better at minor league management.

But when, say, looking at the amateur draft pool, you basically almost have to click on every player to see his 4 year stats.

I definitely agree with you on theory, but I think it would be really difficult to sorty and rank guys without ratings.

You know you can change to stats in the sort right?

[Ry]

Restart!!!

We know so much more than we did when we started and love the idea of stats only or lower ratings.

But you will never get everyone to change. There are too many history lovers.

I to would like a restart using different ratings and putting everyone here in equal standing.

[GeorgesGoons]

Restart!!!

We know so much more than we did when we started and love the idea of stats only or lower ratings.

But you will never get everyone to change. There are too many history lovers.

I to would like a restart using different ratings and putting everyone here in equal standing.

I am sure that over 50% of the people here are in more than one league. Could we see what the potential of starting another league would do to bring more blood into the NDL's new format as a gaming site? Some questions would be, who would run it and how many people would be interested and how many we can bring in from outside the NDL to keep it growing in the right direction.

[nick]

you guys need to go learn the 20/80 system and how they determine it before u can argue this stuff. It takes into account defensive arm, base running, and depending on position diff things. So a player could be in the 60's and its cause he has a cannon arm/fast, and like most solid 1Bs, theyre in the 40-50 range cause they have no defense and slow as shit.

the high overall 1Bs usually have outrageous contact/power. EYe is also a big thing.

http://www.hsbaseballweb.com/pro-scouti ... system.htm

Below is a ranking (from most important to least) of each tools’ importance to each position:

Catcher: Defense, Arm Strength, Batting Ability, Power, Plate Discipline, Speed

Shortstop: Defense, Arm Strength, Speed, Batting Ability, Plate Discipline, Power

Centerfield: Batting Ability, Defense, Speed, Power, Arm Strength, Plate Discipline

Second Base: Defense, Batting Ability, Speed, Plate Discipline, Power, Arm Strength

Third Base: Power, Batting Ability, Arm Strength, Defense, Plate Discipline, Speed

First Base: Power, Batting Ability, Plate Discipline, Defense, Arm Strength, Speed

Right Field: Power, Batting Ability, Arm Strength, Plate Discipline, Defense, Speed

Left Field: Batting Ability, Power, Plate Discipline, Speed, Defense, Arm Strength


http://baseballnewshound.com/?page_id=268

[shel311]

Restart!!!

We know so much more than we did when we started and love the idea of stats only or lower ratings.

But you will never get everyone to change. There are too many history lovers.

I to would like a restart using different ratings and putting everyone here in equal standing.

Someone not named Mbyrd needs to start it up!

[Cnasty]

you guys need to go learn the 20/80 system and how they determine it before u can argue this stuff. It takes into account defensive arm, base running, and depending on position diff things. So a player could be in the 60's and its cause he has a cannon arm/fast, and like most solid 1Bs, theyre in the 40-50 range cause they have no defense and slow as shit.

the high overall 1Bs usually have outrageous contact/power. EYe is also a big thing.

http://www.hsbaseballweb.com/pro-scouti ... system.htm

Below is a ranking (from most important to least) of each tools’ importance to each position:

Catcher: Defense, Arm Strength, Batting Ability, Power, Plate Discipline, Speed

Shortstop: Defense, Arm Strength, Speed, Batting Ability, Plate Discipline, Power

Centerfield: Batting Ability, Defense, Speed, Power, Arm Strength, Plate Discipline

Second Base: Defense, Batting Ability, Speed, Plate Discipline, Power, Arm Strength

Third Base: Power, Batting Ability, Arm Strength, Defense, Plate Discipline, Speed

First Base: Power, Batting Ability, Plate Discipline, Defense, Arm Strength, Speed

Right Field: Power, Batting Ability, Arm Strength, Plate Discipline, Defense, Speed

Left Field: Batting Ability, Power, Plate Discipline, Speed, Defense, Arm Strength


http://baseballnewshound.com/?page_id=268

Thank you God of the OOTP and bearer of multiple rings!

[GeorgesGoons]

you guys need to go learn the 20/80 system and how they determine it before u can argue this stuff. It takes into account defensive arm, base running, and depending on position diff things. So a player could be in the 60's and its cause he has a cannon arm/fast, and like most solid 1Bs, theyre in the 40-50 range cause they have no defense and slow as shit.

the high overall 1Bs usually have outrageous contact/power. EYe is also a big thing.

http://www.hsbaseballweb.com/pro-scouti ... system.htm

Below is a ranking (from most important to least) of each tools’ importance to each position:

Catcher: Defense, Arm Strength, Batting Ability, Power, Plate Discipline, Speed

Shortstop: Defense, Arm Strength, Speed, Batting Ability, Plate Discipline, Power

Centerfield: Batting Ability, Defense, Speed, Power, Arm Strength, Plate Discipline

Second Base: Defense, Batting Ability, Speed, Plate Discipline, Power, Arm Strength

Third Base: Power, Batting Ability, Arm Strength, Defense, Plate Discipline, Speed

First Base: Power, Batting Ability, Plate Discipline, Defense, Arm Strength, Speed

Right Field: Power, Batting Ability, Arm Strength, Plate Discipline, Defense, Speed

Left Field: Batting Ability, Power, Plate Discipline, Speed, Defense, Arm Strength


http://baseballnewshound.com/?page_id=268

This is highly usefull, if this is 100% accurate for OOTP. Didn't know this and had no desire to go out and find it as work/family consume all my time. Thanks Nick

[trendon]

So right now we are setup like this:
30% - Ratings
30% - Current Year
30% - Last Year
10% - 2 Yrs Ago

Every time I start my own sim, which I do once per month and never finish the 1st month of the season before I quit lol...I usually go something like:

10% ratings
50% current year
25% last year
15% 2 yrs ago

No real reason, that's just the numbers that sound right to me.

When we started, I did what the bosses of the first league I was ever in did. They started it with an inaugural draft where the ratings percentage was very high and then it decreased over time to factor in stats much, much more. My leagues that I do solo are very similar to yours before I simply went stats-only.

[DRiccio21]

i'm torn on the topic.

i don't disagree that it may be too obvious the way we have the the ratings now but at the same time i think there is a LARGE, overwhelmingly large, percentage of owners who don't understand how the ratings (specifically overall) work.

when i'm trying to trade my AAA pitchers i get the same comment from EVERYONE (he's a 30 or 40 or 50 overall... i have no interest in that guy) which forces me to try to trade Christensen or Garcia... but then i get that 'they are too old'(and we spin our wheels). so while i think the ratings are too obvious and i do think we've come a long way, i still think we have a long way to go in the learning curve the way we have it now. until guys realize there are tons of 30 overall guys that are FAR better than 60 rated guys we are going to keep spinning wheels. we have WAYYYY too many good players in the database, imo. i haven't fact checked but based on how easy it is to find a replacement level + player is absurd.

as for Joe's comment, i agree with him... patience is a big part of executing a strategy... but thats part of a sim league, guys will do things differently than others.. i've made this comment before, i'm really impressed more guys who have sucked for so long keep playing and haven't quit or made excuses when they struggle... its probably the most impressive part of our league and the biggest endorsement of how good this game is.

[SIRLOIN]

i'm torn on the topic.

i don't disagree that it may be too obvious the way we have the the ratings now but at the same time i think there is a LARGE, overwhelmingly large, percentage of owners who don't understand how the ratings (specifically overall) work.

when i'm trying to trade my AAA pitchers i get the same comment from EVERYONE (he's a 30 or 40 or 50 overall... i have no interest in that guy) which forces me to try to trade Christensen or Garcia... but then i get that 'they are too old'(and we spin our wheels). so while i think the ratings are too obvious and i do think we've come a long way, i still think we have a long way to go in the learning curve the way we have it now. until guys realize there are tons of 30 overall guys that are FAR better than 60 rated guys we are going to keep spinning wheels. we have WAYYYY too many good players in the database, imo. i haven't fact checked but based on how easy it is to find a replacement level + player is absurd.

as for Joe's comment, i agree with him... patience is a big part of executing a strategy... but thats part of a sim league, guys will do things differently than others.. i've made this comment before, i'm really impressed more guys who have sucked for so long keep playing and haven't quit or made excuses when they struggle... its probably the most impressive part of our league and the biggest endorsement of how good this game is.

The fun part of it is that their is so much to learn. I think I like the finding new Talent part the most. And I think I am beginning to grasp the money end of it. I enjoy learning the other aspects of ootp. I am humbled by Trendon,Gabe,Ryan and Reign's skills at ootp! they are truly masters. Beefy

[I_S33M_THAB33T_U]

Shit, I am no Master..



But @ Shels comment of starting another one, I was in this thought, Of starting a new 1, But still need to learn how to run the damn thing.

Gabe and Trendon both have offered to show me, But that is about as far as it has went. Would consider a 1901 start. Obviously less teams but would grow as the MLB did in RL, And I would also stick with the more RL type players. But would consider other options.

[DRiccio21]

Ya know, in all of my years of playing this game (since OOTP 2007), I have never seen a pitcher with ratings like Thomas.

[doc]

Restart!!!

We know so much more than we did when we started and love the idea of stats only or lower ratings.

But you will never get everyone to change. There are too many history lovers.

I to would like a restart using different ratings and putting everyone here in equal standing.

Topic for winter meetings. Might be something we all agree on.