3/23/2014 8:10 AM
This has been discussed many times, but I'm looking for some opinions, since everyone has one....

I've had good success with moving good fielding 3b over to 2b....

So, I thought I could try a 2b over to SS.   Now I know I was going to take a hit, but not to this extreme.   Now, I'm trying to figure out, were my expectations to high, or is there something I'm missing?

A modern day 2b, with a mostly modern day pitching staff, with a .984% and a range of 5.65. at 2b (b/a-)....how bad do you think he would be as SS?
3/23/2014 10:33 AM
Are u talking about moving a player from 2B to SS who has no SS rating? If so, I wouldn't recommend it. I have found SS to be the most sensitive defensive position in the SIM...I get killed with errors there(even with guys who have a rating).. On the other hand, I've played guys with no defensive rating at 1B and had no problems with it.
3/23/2014 10:40 AM
So...let's see.

As I recall there are three things that happen here:
1.) The FP and RF get translated to the equivalent grade norms at the new position.  FP at SS is a bit lower than FP at 2B, and RF are comparable, so let's estimate that your guy starts with a baseline of .975 FP and 5.65 RF as a shortstop.
2.) There is a 2% penalty to FP and a 10% penalty to RF for being out of position: that takes us to .9555 FP and 5.09 RF
3.) There is an additional 4% penalty to FP and an additional 15% penalty to RF for going in the "wrong" direction on the defensive spectrum: that takes us to .9175 FP and 4.24 RF. 

So those are my estimates.  In other words, I would expect your guy to be pretty bad at shortstop.
3/23/2014 7:40 PM
I would be ecstatic with that contrarian......right now, in 50 starts, 1981 Jim Gantner, has a .851%, w/ a 4.72rf....0+, 5- plays, but I'm fine with that.   The 37 errors in 50 games kinda hurt though....
3/25/2014 2:45 PM
In a progressive, after 98 games, here's what I have for out of position SSs.

Joe Morgan, C/B+ at 2B:451 1/2 innings, 28 errors. 25 double plays, 0/8 plus/minus plays, .894 FP, 4.68 range
                 

Don Buford, B/B+ at 2B (primary), A+/D- at 3B (secondary): 360 2/3 innings, 12 errors, 26 double plays, 0/5 plus/minus plays, .947 FP, 5.34 range

For what it's worth, Morgan out of position at 3B has been almost as good as Buford was, even though Buford is rated there.
(Morgan, in 389 2/3 innings, has 17 errors, 8 minus plays. Buford, in 490 2/3 innings, has 2 errors and 17 - plays.)

So Morgan's at third base, and Buford at SS for now!

3/25/2014 2:46 PM
Long story short, from this small sample size,

the one letter grade higher in fielding percentage makes a big difference when going out of position.

That, and D- range can be ugly....

This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
3/26/2014 9:52 PM
Let's see...in the NWP, a single-season progressive, we are currently in 1983.

Our league fielding pct is .980.  Actual 1983 MLB fielding pct was .979.
In 1982, our league fielding pct was .981.  Actual MLB fielding pct was .979.
In 1981, our league fielding pct was .980.  Actual MLB fielding pct was .979.

The fielding in this sim is, in general, extraordinarily accurate.

You may be finding that players in open leagues, or theme leagues where players are used from across eras, to have greater variation.  Remember that the way WIS normalizes fielding, there are four variables that determine the likelihood of an error: the player's actual FLD PCT, the league average fld pct for that position from the defensive player's actual season, the league average fld pct for that position from the hitter's actual season, and the league average fld pct for that position from the pitcher's actual season.  So, stick a modern day player in a league with deadball pitchers, or deadball hitters, and he will make more errors than you expect.
3/27/2014 7:43 AM (edited)
You've provided nothing other than anecdotal evidence so far...why don't you do the work, and show it here, and then let's discuss what might be happening and why.

But to get you started, here, I'll again show some actual data from the same progressive:

1983 NWP: 10.3% of runs were unearned
1983 MLB: 10.6% of runs were unearned
1982 NWP: 9.8% uf runs were unearned
1982 MLB: 10.2% of runs were unearned
1981 NWP: 10.3% of runs were unearned
1981 MLB: 10.3% runs were unearned

So again, I do not find that the actual data support your claims. 
3/27/2014 10:31 AM

It appears you have exactly 1 active team....and as I look at it, the fielding percentages of your players are actually astonishingly accurate.  I also see nothing unusual about your number of unearned runs (10.7%, right in line with the norms I posted above).  If anything you are doing better than expected on both counts, given that your top 2 starting pitchers are both from the deadball era.

3/27/2014 10:42 AM
Cute.  We all do.

But then don't waste your (or anyone else's) time with specious claims unsupported by evidence or easily disprovable rants like "the fielding in this sim is, in general, a joke."
3/27/2014 11:56 AM
You've gotta love a guy who tells you you have no life because you took the time to explain something to him.  Especially a guy with "other teams under other names."
3/27/2014 5:36 PM
this reminds me of an old saying my mom use to say when i would argue with her as a child and i had no point " you buy them books and you buy them books and all they do is look at the pictures"
3/27/2014 5:44 PM
Question (with nothing to do with this bickering LOL): what about double plays? What factors affect them? I've always assumed that  a 2B-SS combo with high range ratings would result in more DPs. Any evidence of this?

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.