It's easier for some to complain about the (perceived) lack of realism than to actually challenge their own preconceptions.

Personally, I have less trouble with McGwires, Sosas, and Belles hitting badly than I do with the HoJos hitting so well.

I'm not sure what you mean by "(perceived) lack of realism"?

In every league I've ever played here at WIS, even the Progressive leagues, the poor Pitcher's statistics are hugely worse than their actual R/L results. Usually about 20 pts above their lifetime opposing player batting averages, 25% more HR's than R/L, and ERA's skewed as much as a half pt. higher than normal. Now, I get that when pitching against all-star laden lineups the pitchers are going to have a tough time, but this even occurs within normal progressive (READ non-all-star laden line-ups) leagues. I never knew Wid Conroy would hit pitchers like Walter Johnson and Christy Mathewson so good! You calling that my "perception"?? I can furnish you the league stats!

Posted by toddcommish on 2/24/2016 12:17:00 PM (view original):
It's easier for some to complain about the (perceived) lack of realism than to actually challenge their own preconceptions.

Personally, I have less trouble with McGwires, Sosas, and Belles hitting badly than I do with the HoJos hitting so well.

I think I can agree with this statement, minus the perceived lack of realism part... The problem goes both ways... I think I just get frustrated because there can often be no leeway at all. There's often just pure and utter disaster if you don't follow the loopholes of the sim.

Oh well, it is what it is.

Posted by bottomlee on 2/24/2016 11:42:00 AM (view original):
"You can't look me in the eyes and say that Tom Seaver would have a 5.00+ ERA, with equal 5K to 5BB Ratio, no matter which era he played in. You can't tell me that if Mark McGwire played against deadball pitchers, that he wouldn't hit HRs.."

Not trying to attack you here, just trying to see if we can clear up some concerns....

This one comes up every so often, and I felt the same way when I started, but that has to be some give and take. Tom Seaver can't hav a 2.00 ERA and have Mcgwire hit 50-60 hr's. There's no Jose Lima's or John Wasdin's for Mcgwire to face. Also, Seaver is not pitching against any .225 hitters either.

The talent pool is so much greater in the sim than any normal team's lineup. Load up the '27 yankees and see what their salary totals to. Then look at any league you are joining. There is a huge disparity.

And this next part is a extremely small sample size, but is ammusing none the less... So, with every team in the sim having some form or another of an all-star lineup, here is Seaver's and Mcgwire's All-star statistics.....

Seaver with a 4.85 era and a 1.38 whip against all-star talent

All-Star Pitching

Glossary · SHARE · Embed · CSV · Export · PRE · LINK · ?

Year	Tm	Lg	Age	GS	W	L	W-L%	ERA	GF	CG	SHO	SV	IP	H	R	ER	HR	BB	IBB	SO	HBP	BK	WP	BF	WHIP	H9	HR9	BB9	SO9	SO/W
1967	NYM	NL	22	0	0	0		0.00	1	0	0	1	1.0	0	0	0	0	1	0	1	0	0	0	4	1.000	0.0	0.0	9.0	9.0	1.00
1968	NYM	NL	23	0	0	0		0.00	0	0	0	0	2.0	2	0	0	0	0	0	5	0	0	0	8	1.000	9.0	0.0	0.0	22.5
1969	NYM	NL	24
1970	NYM	NL	25	1	0	0		0.00	0	0	0	0	3.0	1	0	0	0	0	0	4	0	0	0	10	0.333	3.0	0.0	0.0	12.0
1971	NYM	NL	26
1972	NYM	NL	27
1973	NYM	NL	28	0	0	0		0.00	0	0	0	0	1.0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	4	1.000	0.0	0.0	9.0	0.0	0.00
1975	NYM	NL	30	0	0	0		27.00	0	0	0	0	1.0	2	3	3	1	1	0	2	0	0	0	6	3.000	18.0	9.0	9.0	18.0	2.00
1976	NYM	NL	31	0	0	0		4.50	0	0	0	0	2.0	2	1	1	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	7	1.000	9.0	4.5	0.0	4.5
1977	CIN	NL	32	0	0	0		9.00	0	0	0	0	2.0	4	3	2	0	1	0	2	0	0	0	12	2.500	18.0	0.0	4.5	9.0	2.00
1978	CIN	NL	33
1981	CIN	NL	36	0	0	0		9.00	0	0	0	0	1.0	3	1	1	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	6	3.000	27.0	9.0	0.0	9.0
12 Yrs (8 GP)				1	0	0		4.85	1	0	0	1	13.0	14	8	7	3	4	0	16	0	0	0	57	1.385	9.7	2.1	2.8	11.1	4.00

And bigmac hitting only .200 with 0 HR's against all star talent

All-Star Batting

Glossary · SHARE · Embed · CSV · Export · PRE · LINK · ?

Year	Tm	Lg	Age	GS	PA	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	SB	CS	BB	SO	BA	OBP	SLG	OPS	TB	GDP	HBP	SH	SF	IBB
1987	OAK	AL	23		3	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	.000	.000	.000	.000	0	0	0	0	0	0
1988	OAK	AL	24	as 1B	2	2	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	.500	.500	.500	1.000	1	0	0	0	0	0
1989	OAK	AL	25	as 1B	3	3	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	.333	.333	.333	.667	1	0	0	0	0	0
1990	OAK	AL	26	as 1B	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	.000	.000	.000	.000	0	0	0	0	0	0
1991	OAK	AL	27		DNP
1992	OAK	AL	28	as 1B	3	3	1	1	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	.333	.333	.333	.667	1	0	0	0	0	0
1995	OAK	AL	31		DNP
1996	OAK	AL	32		1	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1.000	1.000	1.000	2.000	1	0	0	0	0	0
1997	OAK	AL	33		2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	.000	.000	.000	.000	0	0	0	0	0	0
1998	STL	NL	34	as 1B	3	2	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	.000	.333	.000	.333	0	0	0	0	0	0
1999	STL	NL	35	as 1B	3	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	2	.000	.333	.000	.333	0	0	0	0	0	0
2000	STL	NL	36		DNP
12 Yrs (9 GP)					22	20	2	4	0	0	0	2	0	0	2	9	.200	.273	.200	.473	4	0	0	0	0	0

This kind of just proves my point more... Tom Seaver against all-stars in the 60s and 70s, Has a 4.85 ERA in 13 innings (not uncommon) and a 4:1 K to BB ratio. That's LEAPS AND BOUNDS better than any type of simulation with him in this sim. Even in an 80 mil league with a bunch of 200,000 AAA scrubs to pitch against.

I've taken him in all sorts of leagues and I'm lucky if he finishes below a 5 ERA with less than a 1:1 ratio. I'd love if my Seaver finished with even remotely close to the statistics of what you post.

As for McGwire, 20 ABs is too small of a sample size to comment on.

1971 Tom Seaver has an average ERA around 3.55 in OL based on performance history.
https://www.whatifsports.com/mlb-l/player_performance.asp?pid=2008015132

Funny this came up. I just used Seaver in a $100M draft soup league (25 different years/franchises) and he performed thusly:

Pitcher	Role	%	G	W-L	SV	IP	ERA	OAV	WHIP	K/9	BB/9	$
Tom Seaver '73 (R)	Starter #1	100	43	15-14	0	297.1	4.03	.260	1.29	7.45	2.42	10.15M

The team went 79-83. Here were the other three starters:

Jerry Reuss '80 (L)		100	43	14-17	0	243.2	3.99	.275	1.31	4.21	1.81	7.04M
Gary Peters '63 (L)		99 (100)	43	15-7	0	267.2	3.53	.258	1.34	6.39	3.03	9.04M
Larry Gura '81 (L)		100	36	12-14	0	212.2	5.21	.296	1.44	3.39	1.99	7.98M

I jettisoned the '71 Seaver from my plans when I picked up Hank Aaron (who came through with .288/.362/.530 and 38 HRs and 121 RBIs)

Posted by lilspike0738 on 2/24/2016 1:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bottomlee on 2/24/2016 11:42:00 AM (view original):
"You can't look me in the eyes and say that Tom Seaver would have a 5.00+ ERA, with equal 5K to 5BB Ratio, no matter which era he played in. You can't tell me that if Mark McGwire played against deadball pitchers, that he wouldn't hit HRs.."

Not trying to attack you here, just trying to see if we can clear up some concerns....

This one comes up every so often, and I felt the same way when I started, but that has to be some give and take. Tom Seaver can't hav a 2.00 ERA and have Mcgwire hit 50-60 hr's. There's no Jose Lima's or John Wasdin's for Mcgwire to face. Also, Seaver is not pitching against any .225 hitters either.

The talent pool is so much greater in the sim than any normal team's lineup. Load up the '27 yankees and see what their salary totals to. Then look at any league you are joining. There is a huge disparity.

And this next part is a extremely small sample size, but is ammusing none the less... So, with every team in the sim having some form or another of an all-star lineup, here is Seaver's and Mcgwire's All-star statistics.....

Seaver with a 4.85 era and a 1.38 whip against all-star talent

All-Star Pitching

Glossary · SHARE · Embed · CSV · Export · PRE · LINK · ?

Year	Tm	Lg	Age	GS	W	L	W-L%	ERA	GF	CG	SHO	SV	IP	H	R	ER	HR	BB	IBB	SO	HBP	BK	WP	BF	WHIP	H9	HR9	BB9	SO9	SO/W
1967	NYM	NL	22	0	0	0		0.00	1	0	0	1	1.0	0	0	0	0	1	0	1	0	0	0	4	1.000	0.0	0.0	9.0	9.0	1.00
1968	NYM	NL	23	0	0	0		0.00	0	0	0	0	2.0	2	0	0	0	0	0	5	0	0	0	8	1.000	9.0	0.0	0.0	22.5
1969	NYM	NL	24
1970	NYM	NL	25	1	0	0		0.00	0	0	0	0	3.0	1	0	0	0	0	0	4	0	0	0	10	0.333	3.0	0.0	0.0	12.0
1971	NYM	NL	26
1972	NYM	NL	27
1973	NYM	NL	28	0	0	0		0.00	0	0	0	0	1.0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	4	1.000	0.0	0.0	9.0	0.0	0.00
1975	NYM	NL	30	0	0	0		27.00	0	0	0	0	1.0	2	3	3	1	1	0	2	0	0	0	6	3.000	18.0	9.0	9.0	18.0	2.00
1976	NYM	NL	31	0	0	0		4.50	0	0	0	0	2.0	2	1	1	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	7	1.000	9.0	4.5	0.0	4.5
1977	CIN	NL	32	0	0	0		9.00	0	0	0	0	2.0	4	3	2	0	1	0	2	0	0	0	12	2.500	18.0	0.0	4.5	9.0	2.00
1978	CIN	NL	33
1981	CIN	NL	36	0	0	0		9.00	0	0	0	0	1.0	3	1	1	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	6	3.000	27.0	9.0	0.0	9.0
12 Yrs (8 GP)				1	0	0		4.85	1	0	0	1	13.0	14	8	7	3	4	0	16	0	0	0	57	1.385	9.7	2.1	2.8	11.1	4.00

And bigmac hitting only .200 with 0 HR's against all star talent

All-Star Batting

Glossary · SHARE · Embed · CSV · Export · PRE · LINK · ?

Year	Tm	Lg	Age	GS	PA	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	SB	CS	BB	SO	BA	OBP	SLG	OPS	TB	GDP	HBP	SH	SF	IBB
1987	OAK	AL	23		3	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	.000	.000	.000	.000	0	0	0	0	0	0
1988	OAK	AL	24	as 1B	2	2	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	.500	.500	.500	1.000	1	0	0	0	0	0
1989	OAK	AL	25	as 1B	3	3	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	.333	.333	.333	.667	1	0	0	0	0	0
1990	OAK	AL	26	as 1B	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	.000	.000	.000	.000	0	0	0	0	0	0
1991	OAK	AL	27		DNP
1992	OAK	AL	28	as 1B	3	3	1	1	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	.333	.333	.333	.667	1	0	0	0	0	0
1995	OAK	AL	31		DNP
1996	OAK	AL	32		1	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1.000	1.000	1.000	2.000	1	0	0	0	0	0
1997	OAK	AL	33		2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	.000	.000	.000	.000	0	0	0	0	0	0
1998	STL	NL	34	as 1B	3	2	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	.000	.333	.000	.333	0	0	0	0	0	0
1999	STL	NL	35	as 1B	3	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	2	.000	.333	.000	.333	0	0	0	0	0	0
2000	STL	NL	36		DNP
12 Yrs (9 GP)					22	20	2	4	0	0	0	2	0	0	2	9	.200	.273	.200	.473	4	0	0	0	0	0

This kind of just proves my point more... Tom Seaver against all-stars in the 60s and 70s, Has a 4.85 ERA in 13 innings (not uncommon) and a 4:1 K to BB ratio. That's LEAPS AND BOUNDS better than any type of simulation with him in this sim. Even in an 80 mil league with a bunch of 200,000 AAA scrubs to pitch against.

I've taken him in all sorts of leagues and I'm lucky if he finishes below a 5 ERA with less than a 1:1 ratio. I'd love if my Seaver finished with even remotely close to the statistics of what you post.

As for McGwire, 20 ABs is too small of a sample size to comment on.

Sorry, but it is not true. I have Seaver 1969 on a team now with 200 IP and a 2.69 ERA. MLB114695

On another team of mine, Seaver 1971 is 11-9 with a 3.28 ERA. MLB114663



In one of my Open League( MLB113151) teams, my four starters and their W-Ls and ERAs are:

Koufax 1964 3-1, 1.33
Verlander 2011 5-2, 3.22
Don Sutton 1980 4-1, 3.27
Joe Horlen 1964, 4-2, 1.84

The advantage of deadball pitchers is NOT performance per se, but cost-effectiveness. I brought this up in my long discussions of WHIP, OBP etc., in which I pointed out the difference between two different economic measures of productivity, for example in agriculture. One is production per acre or hectare (japanese and Scandinavian family farms are most productive by this measure) or production per worker-unit of time/cost, by which US agribusiness is most productive.

By this second measure, deadball pitchers are the best, but should they be compared to other pitchers with similar prices in the SIM (who are overpriced because by striking out more batters and usually walking more, they throw more pitches per inning) but by the former measure deadball pitchers should be compared in their performance to other pitchers of similar quality, not similar price.

This thread has devolved into:

1) Whining about how the SIM is offense-friendly.
2) Whining about not understanding how quality of opposition is better in the SIM versus real life.

I hope you don't mean my post just above yours uncleal, Mine was an attempt to show that the SIM works just fine and is not playing favorites, though there are some pricing issues that the new system may gradually work out. But I don't think I was whining. Maybe it was just the coincidence of postings, yours right after mine, that makes it seem you are addressing me?

Posted by uncleal on 2/24/2016 9:34:00 PM (view original):
This thread has devolved into:

1) Whining about how the SIM is offense-friendly.
2) Whining about not understanding how quality of opposition is better in the SIM versus real life.

I always love when people post this type of ignorance... I'm simply "whining" about some clear inconsistency I'm seeing, and that I think they could improve on areas that other SIMs seem to use just fine. People are welcome to disagree. I've been apart of this site since 2003 and have seen the dramatic shift in changes since nearly the beginning of Basketball and Football being introduced. Sorry I'm not as please with them as you?

I'm glad you could input your worthless two cents, before Mommy tucked you into bed. Now run along.

The pure fact that numerous people say that there's no effective way to implement arm strength (assists), yet the SIM uses a stat that uses the assists in it's calculation, is evidence that there's some inconsistency. The effect of this, is debatable and that's perfectly acceptable and fine.

10 OF assists and 3 errors is treated effectively the same as 3 OF assists and 10 Errors, in terms of the fielding grades here (they're both incorporated into the Fielding%). Where it differs is the Range rating. However; they're utilized in the SIM differently than shown, which adds to the confusion a bit. Since it's not publicly known how they calculate this in the SIM, it's all pure speculation on the effects it has. So obviously we're all going to differ in opinions.

For those of you who are unaware of how some of the stats are calculated:
Fielding% - (putouts + assists + errors) / Total Attempts
Range Rating - (Putouts + Assists) / Innings at position

Again, it is what it is... Simply an attempt to discuss the inconsistency and attempt to learn more about this SIM. Some people can have a intellectual debate, whereas others have to resort to "whining" comments. Thanks for the help, everyone.

Posted by italyprof on 2/25/2016 4:54:00 AM (view original):
I hope you don't mean my post just above yours uncleal, Mine was an attempt to show that the SIM works just fine and is not playing favorites, though there are some pricing issues that the new system may gradually work out. But I don't think I was whining. Maybe it was just the coincidence of postings, yours right after mine, that makes it seem you are addressing me?

Yes. Sorry. The post was effectively aimed at the OP here, who is still whining that the sim doesn't work the way he thinks it should work...

If he didn't want to be called a whiner he should consider not constantly saying the sim is wrong for doing what it does.

the sim is wrong for doing what it does

the sim is wrong for doing what it does

the sim is wrong for doing what it does

the sim is wrong for doing what it does

the sim is wrong for doing what it does

bagchucker is off his meds again
bagchucker is off his meds again
bagchucker is off his meds again
bagchucker is off his meds again
bagchucker is off his meds again


but he is the Poet Laureate of What If Sports. So I am glad he is here anyway.