Quote: Originally posted by alleyviper on 10/13/2009By adding HR/9# to the player search, does that mean pitcher home run rates are actually getting adjusted by era, or is it just another search variable and deadballers will still dominate in home run supression?

No underlying change here. This is just an addition to the player search.

The new salary spreadsheets will be available at 7:00 PM ET:

Position Players

Pitchers (note: there was an error in this spreadsheet up until about 9:30 PM ET)

Quote: Originally posted by inkdskn on 10/13/2009

Quote: Originally posted by tzentmeyer on 10/13/2009Normalized Fielding (cont'd):
Here are a few examples:
2009 Jason Bartlett, SS: 0.962
2009 SS average: .973
Pitcher from 1957: .9609
Batter from 1887: .871
Result: 0.9419

Barlett drops because he's below the league average and because the league average of both the pitcher and hitter are lower than his season's average.

1905 Honus Wagner, SS: .935
1905 SS average: .0.931
Pitcher from 1957: .9609
Batter from 1887: .871
Result: 0.928

Wagner drops a very small amount. He's better than his league average, but the disparity between the batter's league average and the pitcher's league average is stronger, so it results in a small dip.

But... Bartlett will have a marked advantage over Wagner, despite the fact that Wagner was better than his peers, and Bartlett was worse than his peers... seems ***-backward to me...

This system is the same as in our batter-pitcher matchup. It uses the actual numbers, but they are adjusted upward/downward based on the other factors. Wagner improves, but Bartlett degrades.

We didn't want to introduce a system where players only improved or remained the same. That's where the "relative" or "normalizing" comes in.

Quote: Originally posted by sgsmith on 10/13/2009Bartlett's advantage in that situation will be smaller after the update than it is now, though.tzent, in the example where Wagner's fld% goes from the old .935 up to .962 (pitcher from 2005, batter from 1991), what happens with Bartlett's?  

It goes to 0.9609 which makes Wagner a better fielding SS than Bartlett in that situation.

Quote: Originally posted by generics on 10/13/2009am i to understand that fielding and range grades will not change for the deadball players, only normalization?

Fielding grades have changed, because the value we now use for assigning the fielding percentage grade is the normalized fielding percentage (normalized against the historical average at the position).

Quote: Originally posted by Funksteady1 on 10/13/2009Hi tzent,
I'm dissapointed at the miniimum IP/162 total.
I was one of the owners who brought up the idea of a floor for IP and AB but stricktly to prevent certain types of flagrant abuse which was raised mainly by this problem, ticket #79562.But by raising the minimum to 1,250 you are seriously levelling the field of strategies and options. Personally, the way I draft and micro-manage I never need more than 1,160 Ip/162 to get through a season, unless I pick a very offensive ballpark. And because of what I consider good staff managing, I very rarely end-up having to use a pitcher under 98-100% stamina. By forcing me to draft nearly 100 more IP than what I need, you're taking away my managing advantage and levelling the overall field as far as options and strategies are concerned.
I thought 1,000 would be fine to prevent abuse and besides, nobody can get through a season under 1,125, I know I've tried to manage teams with the lowest possible IP, so I kind of consider myself an expert on the question.Still, looking forward to the release, keep up the good work and good luck!

The introduction of minimum IP/PA requirements for non-theme leagues is phase one of a two phase plan.

We will be shifting away from season fatigue being based on pitches to innings pitched in the near future.

The minimum requirements are intended to 1)prevent abuse from users who went in with awful teams which disrupted league play and 2)help new users to the site so they are not as easily burned by veteran users who have learned to manipulate/maximize the pitching fatigue system.

Some of you who excel at getting away with 900 or 1000 or 1100 IP may not be happy with this change now, but it is a good change and is a good setup for the next change, which is the shift from pitches to IP for seasonal fatigue.

Quote: Originally posted by greener88 on 10/14/2009It seems to me that the question WIS was trying to answer was,"How can we channel WIS managers "gamesmanship" towards more realistic baseball statistics rather than maneuvering to see how few ABs and IPs Sparky will let you get away with. I can't believe how LOW the requirements still are... not that I have a problem with anybody making the most out of the system.

Does WIS plan to add any additional tips for assessing fielding percentage in the draft center? How about a pop-up calculator or chart to help us estimate how a historically normalized fielding rating behaves with a hitter and pitcher from various eras?

We do, in fact, plan on adding a page with league averages and a simple plug-and-play number cruncher. It will be made available tomorrow.

Quote: Originally posted by Area51man on 10/14/2009I am in the same boat here.  Looks like all the smarty-pants guys that understand all of the underlying numbers wil be winning all of the titles.  I'm happy that the game is complex enough for their enjoyment, but it looks like it's gonna be over my head.  Maybe after 7 1/2 years, my WIS addiction is near it's end.  I wish it weren't so.

We don't believe this change is complicating things. It's consistent with how we handle the other matchup elements of our simulation engine. Fielding grades are based on these "normalized" numbers, so you'll get what you pay for. Guys with A+ fielding will make the fewest amount of errors, guys with D- fielding will make the most errors. Will there be some fluctuation in the totals based on competition in the league -- sure. But high rates fielders will always be better than low rated fielders. That part is still simple.

Hope that makes sense. Don't let the complicated explanation of the system confuse the simplicity of the fielding grades and engine results.

Quote: Originally posted by pinkie on 10/14/2009What of the years (1886-1888) when the number of balls for a base on balls and the number of strikes for a strikeout were other than four and three, respectively?1886:  NL 7 balls for a base on balls; AA  6 balls for a base on balls1887-1888:  5 balls for a base on balls; 4 strikes for a strikeoutShouldn't some adjustment be mad so the pitcher's bases on balls and strikeouts more resemble that of the years after 1888?  Say, for 1886 AA, 3 bases on balls for every two allowed?

That's a separate, minor difference. The fielding question had been around for a long time and affects all seasons.

I've been removing questions I've answered (by quotes). There were a few I removed because I answered them in other follow-ups.

The update is now live!

We hope everyone enjoys it. The dev chat is Friday for any of you who have questions after seeing the changes.

Thanks

These are the missing players from previous seasons that were added with the 2009 players:

1999 Castillo, Carlos
1999 Fetters, Mike
1999 Haney, Chris
1999 Silva, Jose
2001 Brandon Duckworth
1997 Bill Swift
1999 John Snyder
1997 Jim Pittsley
1999 Chris Brock
1999 Jose Silva
1998 Bryan Rekar
1999 Mike Lincoln
1997 Scott Aldred
1999 Kyle Peterson
1999 Dave Borkowski
1997 Tyler Green
1998 Frank Rodriguez
1998 Chad Ogea
1999 Jamie Arnold
1999 Alan Mills
1997 Bill Swift
2001 Dan Wright
1997 Carlos Castillo
1999 Carlos Castillo
1999 Masao Kida
1999 Mike Venafro
1999 Onana Masaoka
2001 Brandon Duckworth
1997 Willie Adams
1999 Doug Linton
1999 Ryan Glynn
1999 Peter Munro
1999 Chris Fussell
2001 Ruben Quevedo
1997 Luis Andujar
1997 Rick Krivda
2001 Nate Cornejo
1997 Felix Hernandez
1999 David Lee
1998 Scott Bailes
2001 Junior Herndon
1998 Bryan Ward
1999 Bryan Ward
1999 Tony Saunders
2001 Bobby Munoz
1998 Brian Barber
1999 Jason Ryan
1999 Chris Haney
1999 Mike Duvall
1999 Jin Ho Cho
1998 Greg Keagle
1998 Carlos Almanzar
1999 Carlos Almanzar
1998 Brian Rose
1999 Dan Reichert
1999 Matt Anderson
2001 Rick Bauer
2001 Ryan Drese
1999 Brett Hinchliffe
1997 Andrew Lorraine
1999 Mike Fetters
2001 Scott MacRae
1997 Jose Alberro
1999 Dan Wheeler
1997 Glenn Dishman
1998 Mac Suzuki
1999 Jeff Nelson

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

New and updated career players will come in the next week or two.

The MLB League Averages and Normalization Calculator page has been added today.

We hope this page helps all users better understand how normalization works.