9/9/2012 9:36 PM
I'm 99% positive that you're wrong.    You're assuming our fake players can take bad angles and be in a poor throwing position.   That's seems ridiculously advanced for a sim game that costs $25 every three months.
9/10/2012 5:58 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/9/2012 9:36:00 PM (view original):
I'm 99% positive that you're wrong.    You're assuming our fake players can take bad angles and be in a poor throwing position.   That's seems ridiculously advanced for a sim game that costs $25 every three months.
You've lost me on your last post.  I've made no assumptions regarding angles or positioning or footwoork.  There are no angles,  positioning or footwork in HBD.  There is no geometry or physiology at all in HBD - just some algrebra and a hell of a lot a lot of arithmetic.

In your quiz question RF A has a range of 65 and RF B has a range of nine.  We assume they both have two feet,  two arms,  and we know,  because WIS tells us,  that  A is from Kansas and B is from the Dominican Republic.  But all that is irrelevant.  All that is relevant (in our controled experiment) is that A's range is 56 points,  or 722%,  greater than B's.  This could mean that A is capable of getting to 722% more balls than B (probably not),  or that he gets to balls 722% quicker than B (perhaps a little more likely,  but probably not).  Such speculation is academic.  All we need to know is that A's range is 56 points better than B's.  That enables us to know (within the context of a valid statistical sample with all other variables held equal)  that A is "rangeier" that B,  that in a 162 game season he is likely to get to more balls and achieve more putouts and assists than B.

You've constructed your quiz question so as to leave no doubt that A is a better defensive RF than B.  Why are we arguing about that?  I thought your hypothesis/arguement was that,  although A is a better defensive RF than B,  it's all right to go ahead and play B (the superior offensive player) in RF because in HBD RF defense is not statistically relevant enough to make it rational to play a defensivelly superior RF over an offensively superior C/RF.  (Or something like that.)

You may very well be correct on this.  But,  for the reasons discussed above (and some others I've left undiscussed) I find your theory statisically dubious.  I mean no offense.  So little is known about HBD's programming,  decision tree,  and the interplay of the multitude of variables in HBD,  it's doubtfual any theory such as yours can be statistically "proven."

In RL managers play hard hitting,  low range slugs in RF all the time.  (Remember when Jose Canseco got hit on top of the head with a fly ball?)   Some days they get away with it,  some days they don't.  But the smarter managers know they're a lot likelier to get away with it with a lefthander on the mound than with a righthander.  Baseball management has always been based on a tangle of tradeoffs,  compromises and hunches levened with an overlay of statistics.  Let's hope HBD is like that too. 
9/10/2012 6:38 AM
Tom, I think your stuff is wishful thinking for HBD. The rangier is guy is more likely to get to the ball than the low-range guy. I've never really seen any evidence that Range does more than that. If the guy gets to the ball, then maybe Glove is tested. If a guy gets to the ball for a hit and a runner is on 1st going to 3rd, then the Arm Strength and Arm Accuracy is consulted. A savvy owner might notice that his opponent has a rock in RF and adjust his base running aggressiveness to take advantage of that, but a whole game could take place without an opportunity to do so.

The whole program seems very 'station-to-station' if you will; not nearly as integrated and sophisticated as many of us would like it to be.

And I don't think even Canseco is at that poor of a player in the OF compared to some of the guys we're discussing; think worse than Greg Luzinski. More like David Ortiz in right.

9/10/2012 8:08 AM
My last post simply referred to how I think the game works.  

Ball hit to RF.   Player gets to it or he doesn't.    If he doesn't and it's deemed a ball that an average RF would field, he's given a negative play.   If he gets to it, his glove rating determines whether he fields it cleanly or kicks it.   If he kicks it, he is given and error.    This is where you're getting lost.   He fields it cleanly.  He is standing(or moving) with the ball in hand while runners run(under your aggressive baserunning scenario) or stop at the next station.   If they are running, it's all about his arm.   Doesn't matter if his range is 0 or 100, if his glove is 0 or 100.  He has the ball and he is preparing to throw.   Your baserunner will determine whether to run or stop based on your settings, his speed/baserunning, and, finally, the RF's arm strength.    His range/glove play no part at this point.
9/10/2012 8:08 AM
Agreed.  I think tom is assuming that the engine is much more complex than it probably is.

I think that the range rating, particularly with respect to OFers, just determines whether a ball is caught or whether it drops in for a hit.  High range guys are more likely to catch balls than are average range guys, and much more likely to catch balls than are low range (i.e. "rocks") guys.  I don't think there's any additional factor for balls that drop in for hits in terms of how far away the fielder was when the ball dropped in, which is what I think tom seems to be implying.
9/10/2012 10:58 AM
We're getting pretty deep in the weeds here.  And I am not shy about admiting that I am lost in the thicket.  But I think it's worth it.  I think this thread may be illuminating a fundamental HBD question,  i.e.,  Is defense worth much?  Or,  to put it another way,  can I get away with just focusing on rocks?  That's an age old question in real baseball as well as in HBD.

This existential question was answered decades ago in real MLB.  Defense wins championships.  Occasionally a Boston Red Sox will pop up and win a WS;  but in the long run the smart money is with the teams that can pick the apple,  It's a long season,  162 games,  and you can only hide Rico Petrochelli and Miguel Tejada just so long.  Eventually the ball will find them,  and the ball will hurt them,  and hurt their teams.  Hurt them hard.  That is why it's called hardball.

Therefore the core HBD existential question is: Do the HBD designers and programmers know this?  Do they know the base level Aristotlian Verity regarding the game they are attempting to simulate?  That is:  Do they know that defense wins championships?

That question is not as stupid as it sounds.  Another Aristotlian Verity is that Chicks Dig the Long Ball (So do the great majority of causual and young baseball fans.)  But the managers - the mensch - whose plaques are on the wall at Cooperstown (e.g.  McGraw,  Alston,  Weaver,  Herzog et al) got to Cooperstown because they always made sure their teams could pick the apple first and foremost.

So, to restate my question:  Are the creators and managers of HBD more like chicks or more like mensch?  Since,  as Mike points out,  HBD is only a $25,  mass market,  text game,  the smart bet is that they are more skewed toward chickiness than toward menschiness.  However,  I think you are much more likely to "prove" this deduction with a methodology derived from Jungian psychcology (As I have tried to illustrate,  in a silly,  superficial fashion,  in this post.)  than with a statistical methodology.  
9/10/2012 11:13 AM
I think you've misunderstood the entire purpose of C to RF.    I was simply looking for the "best" place to play a poor defensive C or DH-type in the field if one has a NL team.  RF is where they do the least damage defensively, IMO.   They are not up to par but, to me and my PPPS formula, RF is that place.  They cost you 60-70 outs per 1458 innings but, if their O works, it can be worth it. 

And, for the record, defense is VERY important.    I wouldn't advise skimping on D at SS.   I overvalue D at 2B/CF.   My defenses often cover for my average pitching.   But I think I can hide a C in RF.   I don't think I can hide a weak arm in RF. 
9/10/2012 11:29 AM
FWIW, I started this "experiment" because I signed Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Kevin Ryu.   He's never going to be a catcher you want playing more than 20-30 games behind the plate but I think his bat is going to be BL+ quality.   As a NL team, I had to figure out what to do with him.
9/10/2012 12:59 PM
You're a good guy,  Mike,  and a good writer too.  HBD Forum would be a much poorer place without your posts.  And I've no doubt your PPPS Forumla -  whatevet it is  -  is as good as or better than every other HBD Spread-Sheeter's formula.  But you're waaaaaaaaay too left brained.  The road to Nirvana,  Mike,  even Simulated Nirvana,  leads through the right hemisphere,  not the left.  So don't ever ask me what I've done for you lately,  Mike.  All  I've done for you is given you the means to save your soul.  (Right Brain,  Right Brain,  Right Brain.)  Besides,  if your PPPS is so smart,  ask it why the genius,  Professor Casey Stengel (a very right-brained individual),  played his MVP C,  Yogi Berra,  in LF rather than RF.
9/10/2012 1:39 PM
Stengel didn't play HBD.
9/10/2012 1:42 PM
too much talk about pps in here
9/10/2012 1:47 PM
What the toad said.    I'll refer you back to the early pages of this thread as to why RF over LF/1B.
9/10/2012 1:48 PM
Posted by tomfool on 9/10/2012 12:59:00 PM (view original):
You're a good guy,  Mike,  and a good writer too.  HBD Forum would be a much poorer place without your posts.  And I've no doubt your PPPS Forumla -  whatevet it is  -  is as good as or better than every other HBD Spread-Sheeter's formula.  But you're waaaaaaaaay too left brained.  The road to Nirvana,  Mike,  even Simulated Nirvana,  leads through the right hemisphere,  not the left.  So don't ever ask me what I've done for you lately,  Mike.  All  I've done for you is given you the means to save your soul.  (Right Brain,  Right Brain,  Right Brain.)  Besides,  if your PPPS is so smart,  ask it why the genius,  Professor Casey Stengel (a very right-brained individual),  played his MVP C,  Yogi Berra,  in LF rather than RF.
Except in real baseball, you can have your center fielder play more towards left to cover for a poor left fielder. It happens all the time. You can't do that in HBD.
9/10/2012 2:18 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/6/2012 9:10:00 AM (view original):
Season over.   Nieves cost me about 50 positive plays in RF and 80 in LF.   Pearson was 10 over average in RF and over 60 in LF.   This is based on a full 162 game, 9 inning season. 

 

 

inn

po

A

e

Plus

neg

Total

PPPS

Leo Mackowiak

RF

7

2

0

0

0

0

0.286

416.6

Gus Chong

RF

246

44

1

0

0

4

0.167

243.0

Chris Carter

RF

246

38

2

2

1

0

0.159

231.1

Rudy Leskanic

RF

64

7

2

0

0

0

0.141

205.0

Harry Michaels

RF

31.1

3

0

0

0

0

0.096

140.6

Matt Cook

RF

16

1

0

0

0

0

0.063

91.1

 

 

610.1

95

5

2

1

4

0.156

227.0

Frank Nieve

RF

415.1

57

1

2

0

7

0.118

172.1

Bingo Pearson

RF

421.2

63

3

0

3

0

0.164

238.8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Matt Cook

CF

8

4

0

0

0

0

0.500

729.0

Rudy Leskanic

CF

926.1

222

2

5

5

0

0.242

352.7

Bingo Pearson

CF

513

110

3

4

0

1

0.211

306.9

 

 

1447

336

5

9

5

1

0.232

338.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kevin O'Leary

LF

9

3

0

0

0

0

0.333

486.0

Gus Chong

LF

29

7

1

0

0

0

0.276

402.2

Leo Mackowiak

LF

27

7

0

0

0

0

0.259

378.0

Matt Cook

LF

16

4

0

0

0

0

0.250

364.5

Frank Hall

LF

465

88

3

3

2

0

0.194

282.2

James Arnold

LF

93.2

17

0

3

0

0

0.150

219.0

Rudy Leskanic

LF

9

1

0

0

0

0

0.111

162.0

Chris Carter

LF

17

1

0

1

0

0

0.000

0.0

 

 

665.2

128

4

7

2

0

0.191

278.4

Frank Nieve

LF

362.1

59

0

3

0

7

0.135

197.3

Bingo Pearson

LF

419.1

92

1

1

6

0

0.234

340.9

This is the answer to the question.

It's easy to get "extra" D in LF whereas the same high range guy doesn't do much for you in RF.

9/10/2012 3:12 PM
Geez,  people.  Lighten up.  You're ALL too left-brained.  The Stengel/Berra joke was a purely absurd throwaway line.  Surely my posts are not so illiterate as to leave you pondering whether I know HBD is not MLB -  or not?  Allow me to clarify:  I understand HBD is not MLB.

But further I understand that HBD is intended to be a simulation of MLB.  I believe WIS strives to be professional,  competent,  ethical and desires to deliver the best possible $25 MLB simulation they can to their customers.  A $25 online,  text sports simulation,  by definition,  implies a realitively simplistic,  paradigm-bound  game.  That is why there are so many baseball simulations.  Baseball,  with its wealth of statistics,  readily lends itself to programmed paradigms.  

But that does not mean we have to enslave ourselves to spread sheets.  Even in HBD, this little $25 cost accountant's wet dream, there is still room for "feel,"  room for art.  (That's why that great artist, Casey Stengel,  put Yogi in LF rather than RF.  It felt righter - as Casey would have said.)

Life -  even simulated life  -   is too short and too bountiful to go through it with your nose continually buried in a spread sheet.  HBD is a successful simulation in at least one sense -  those who want to play it in a right-brained fashion,  by feel and by art,  can enjoy it just as much as those who want to play it in a left brained fashion,  by spread sheets and calculations.  Indeed,  I would argue that,  as in all aspects of human activity,  right brained people,  with their more expansive,  outward directed outlooks, can enjoy HBD a bit more than left-brained peple.  Right brained people know it's not the destination,  but the journey,  that matters.

I like gazelles in RF.  There are few things in baseball prettier to see than a Roberto Clemente/Johnny Callison type running down fly balls in the corner and then whirling to make their epic,  Homeric throws to third base.  The sight of a C/DH type in RF (I will spare all you literalists by not mentioned names)  is almost physically repellent to me (although often good for a few laughs.  I was sad to see Manny Ramierez forced into retirement.  His bull fights with lazy fly balls were some of the best comedy routines of the last two decades.)

The beauty of baseball has always been that the spread sheet geeks, with their reams of PPPS, and the poets, with their gazes fixed on Illium's tall towers,  can  enjoy the peanuts and craker jacks together as simply fans.   
of 14

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.