Posted by Jtpsops on 11/22/2018 12:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by flyingman on 8/8/2009 3:18:00 PM (view original):
So this question has been turning over in my head for a while, and I was hoping someone could answer it:

How does the sim determine if an OF is a center fielder or a corner outfielder? Is it according to baseball-reference's fielding stats, or does the sim simply assume that, say, a A/A+ outfielder is a center fielder?

I'm likely going to need to play an OOP player at SS in a progressive I am in and I have two excellent center fielders. It would seem to me that they would be the best players to insert at SS, but I need to make sure the sim will recognize them as center fielders and not corner outfielders or generic outfielders.

Has there been any recent definitive analysis on this?

If I have good fielding OF that I'm considering playing at 3B, will it be considered a move in the wrong direction (COF > 3B) or in the right direction (CF > 3B)?

It was my understanding that WiS doesn't differentiate between OF positions. They said they were going to separate the OF positions in the 2012 SLB Update, but that obviously didn't happen.

Right. So are they all considered COFers? Or CFers? I'm trying to figure out which side of 3B they're lumped on for the spectrum.

Posted by Jtpsops on 10/4/2018 12:32:00 PM (view original):
I have the following players available, with an opening at SS. Would you take a chance on playing Bishop or Collins at SS for the offensive upgrade?

1931 Max Bishop (A-/B 2B, .294/.426.400)
1920 Eddie Collins (B/B+ 2B, .372/.438/.493)
1934 Eric McNair (C/B+ SS, .280/.321/.412)

What did you decide on this one? I think I would have taken the offense. You're obviously starting Collins somewhere, so you're basically comparing Bishop's offense to McNair's. Bishop gets you a few extra hits, McNair gets you a few extra doubles, so call it basically a wash in games they would play in terms of total bases. So basically over the course of a season Bishop turns 65 outs into walks. How many errors and - plays are equivalent to 65 walks? Maybe 55? Do we think Bishop is 55 errors and - plays worse than McNair at SS? It might be close to that, but my guess is Bishop is a small upgrade. That said, adding offense and subtracting defense also increases variance, so if you think you have a really good team then I might just go with McNair.

Posted by Jtpsops on 11/29/2018 10:56:00 AM (view original):
Right. So are they all considered COFers? Or CFers? I'm trying to figure out which side of 3B they're lumped on for the spectrum.

I'm pretty sure all OF are treated as COF, unfortunately.

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/29/2018 12:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 10/4/2018 12:32:00 PM (view original):
I have the following players available, with an opening at SS. Would you take a chance on playing Bishop or Collins at SS for the offensive upgrade?

1931 Max Bishop (A-/B 2B, .294/.426.400)
1920 Eddie Collins (B/B+ 2B, .372/.438/.493)
1934 Eric McNair (C/B+ SS, .280/.321/.412)

What did you decide on this one? I think I would have taken the offense. You're obviously starting Collins somewhere, so you're basically comparing Bishop's offense to McNair's. Bishop gets you a few extra hits, McNair gets you a few extra doubles, so call it basically a wash in games they would play in terms of total bases. So basically over the course of a season Bishop turns 65 outs into walks. How many errors and - plays are equivalent to 65 walks? Maybe 55? Do we think Bishop is 55 errors and - plays worse than McNair at SS? It might be close to that, but my guess is Bishop is a small upgrade. That said, adding offense and subtracting defense also increases variance, so if you think you have a really good team then I might just go with McNair.

This was a twist league. In the end, I opted to use a different team.

It would be a good idea for someone to post "the spectrum" here, i.e., how the deductions are handled incrementally, from one position to another. I think I've seen it or attempts to define it, somewhere.

From earlier in this thread:

Anytime a player is put in a position he didn't play that season, his fielding percentage is mapped to the new position (maintaininig the same level of play). Then he is assigned a 2% penalty to his fielding percentage. Each shift along the spectrum results in an additional 4% hit. The likelihood of turning double plays for out of position players also decreases. Putting a non-catcher behind the plate will result in many successful steals along with a ton of passed balls. Catchers are a special case, so we assign shift penalties based on the position they will be playing.

The additional 4% hit comes from moving the "wrong" way on the spectrum (i.e. to a position of greater difficulty).

The spectrum is: C > SS > 2B > CF > 3B > RF > LF > 1B > DH. For the purposes of WIS, I believe it is C > SS > 3B > OF > 1B > DH

Reading through this and asking a question.

2001 3B Jeff Cirillo A+/A-
2001 3B Corey Koskie B+/B+

One has to go to the OF and the other to play 3B. I assume I move Koskie. Where does he fall on this scale. I am not fully understanding it.

Posted by kneeneighbor on 1/3/2019 11:53:00 PM (view original):
Reading through this and asking a question.

2001 3B Jeff Cirillo A+/A-
2001 3B Corey Koskie B+/B+

One has to go to the OF and the other to play 3B. I assume I move Koskie. Where does he fall on this scale. I am not fully understanding it.

In this situation I don’t think there’s a wrong decision, but personally I’d move Koskie so I could keep my A+ defender at his natural position. Koskie would probably be a B-/B- defender at RF, which should be fine. Couple errors, couple + plays

Thank you. Was it ever determined if CF is more detrimental than playing a corner OF? As good as my infield is B-/B- might be my best outfielder.

They’re saying that all OF is being treated as COF so you should be fine. I have a ‘12 Johnny Evers (C/A-) playing CF, and thru 106 games he has 0 + plays and 4 - plays, if that helps at all

It does. Thanks.

Two questions regarding the 2% (and subsequent 4% hits) to fielding percentage as you move down the position spectrum:
1. Is range affected in the same way?
2. Is there also a fielding percentage adjustment by position? If not, why wouldn't you put 1B with .990+ at all of your lower-spectrum positions (like all 3 OF spots)? Even with large hits to his fielding percentage, that's still better than a lot of old-time OFs who were <.950.

An opinion on all of the "who would you rather move" questions:
I typically put my better fielder at the higher-volume position. For instance, in a standard OL I always reserve a starting spot for a AAA platoon, and I stash them in LF, regardless of their position. I'd much rather control who is playing 1B for me as they have much more volume than a LF whose range factor might be 2.0 at best.

Posted by JohnGPF on 1/3/2009 11:05:00 AM (view original):

[From the FAQ] If a player without any fielding grades listed for a particular position is inserted into that position, his skills at his primary position are translated to the new position. A designated hitter that did not play in the field is treated as a D-/D- first baseman. He is then slapped with a mandatory out of position penalty. From there, he is penalized for each spot he moves to the on the Bill James' Defensive Spectrum. For example, moving Ozzie Smith from SS to 2B would still yield an above average 2B. Moving Jim Thome to SS, on the other hand, would result in an atrocious SS. Moving Thome to LF would not be as drastic a penalty since SS is a more difficult position.

[from the 10/13/05 Developer Chat]

Hi, If understand correctly, you use the Bill James defensive spectrum in your code. When it comes to moving players who are ranked at one position to one that they are not, how does this affect them. Can I play a Catcher at 3B with minimal damage? How about LF? Could my A-/A+ AAA Shortstop excel in CF? I guess what I am really asking is how exactly do you figure out the fielding rates of out of position players?

Anytime a player is put in a position he didn't play that season, his fielding percentage is mapped to the new position (maintaininig the same level of play). Then he is assigned a 2% penalty to his fielding percentage. Each shift along the spectrum results in an additional 4% hit. The likelihood of turning double plays for out of position players also decreases. Putting a non-catcher behind the plate will result in many successful steals along with a ton of passed balls. Catchers are a special case, so we assign shift penalties based on the position they will be playing.

Besides his fielding percentage, does moving a player to a position he does not play affect his range? Will an A 2B who didn't play 2B that year be an A CF?

Range works the same way with different penalty values. 10% hit for being out of position, and a 15% hit for each shift on the spectrum (in the more difficult direction).

Posted by Jtpsops on 12/6/2018 11:54:00 AM (view original):
From earlier in this thread:

Anytime a player is put in a position he didn't play that season, his fielding percentage is mapped to the new position (maintaininig the same level of play). Then he is assigned a 2% penalty to his fielding percentage. Each shift along the spectrum results in an additional 4% hit. The likelihood of turning double plays for out of position players also decreases. Putting a non-catcher behind the plate will result in many successful steals along with a ton of passed balls. Catchers are a special case, so we assign shift penalties based on the position they will be playing.

The additional 4% hit comes from moving the "wrong" way on the spectrum (i.e. to a position of greater difficulty).

The spectrum is: C > SS > 2B > CF > 3B > RF > LF > 1B > DH. For the purposes of WIS, I believe it is C > SS > 3B > OF > 1B > DH

These should answer your question on 1B