Why is range factor based upon total chances per game instead of per 9 innings? All the utility guys and part-timers get screwed...
9/4/2010 10:21 PM
Not sure what you mean by part-timers and utility guys.   Certainly there are plenty of PT and utility guys by SIM standards who have great range factors.  A quick check of OF's alone shows there are 33 with A+ range costing under $1 MM, beginning with Garry Maddox at $300K and change (used to be $200K before the update).  They all qualify as SIMS PT and utility guys in my book.

So I guess you're referring to RL utility players.  Correct me if I'm wrong (and I may be), but I don't think there are all that many late inning defensive specialists noted primarily for their range.  Most players who typically come into games only in the late innings are guys whose overall skills just haven't bubbled up to full time starter level (or, in their waning years, have declined from that level).  Some of them happen to have speed and the good range that typically accompanies speed; most don't.

Where these PT, late inning players do fulfill a specialist function, the skill sets that teams look for tend to be hitting, running and fielding cleanly with minimal errors, pretty much in that order.  It's very expensive for teams to carry players on their rosters strictly for their gloves, and even more so just for their range.

Who would you consider to have great range whose range factor is screwed by the way SIM chooses to calculate it?
9/5/2010 2:23 AM
Here's a perfect example (but there are legions):

1979 John Castino

He started 106 games at 3B, and had a 3.23 RF/9.  This should result in "B" range.  However, he also appeared in another 37 games that he did not start.  This dropped him to 2.53 RF/G, giving him the "D-" range he's saddled with in this SIM. 

9/7/2010 11:34 PM (edited)
Here's another example:

1978 Dwayne Murphy

He started only 7 games out of 45 that he played in the OF.  His RF/9 was 3.02, which should be an "A+;" however, since he appeared in so many games as a late inning defensive replacement, his RF/G was only 1.11, and his SIM range is "D-". 
9/6/2010 2:58 AM
I thought some of you HOFers and long-timers would've known what's up with this...no one wants to weigh in?

9/7/2010 7:33 PM

That logic doesn't seem to have affected 2002 Darin Erstad.

9/7/2010 10:26 PM
There is no logic to explain the 2002 Erstad.  He played 5 games, 8.1 innings and he made 9 putouts. 

His rf/g = 1.80, which should make him a "D-" based upon how they're rating other players.

His rf/9 = 9.72, which should make him a "C+" if they based range on innings instead of games...yet SIM gives him a 15.04 range factor, which appears to be a made up number.

I sent in a ticket asking them to explain Erstad...we'll see what they say.

9/7/2010 11:41 PM (edited)

Erstad's numbers aren't the only ones seemingly messed up.  How about this:

1998 Ken Griffey Jr.  1B = A/A  problem is, he only appeared in one inning at 1B, and had no chances. 

2000 Garrett Anderson   1B = A/A...HE HAS NOT APPEARED IN A SINGLE INNING AT 1B DURING HIS ENTIRE MLB CAREER...

9/8/2010 12:01 AM
Posted by nonenone00 on 9/7/2010 11:41:00 PM (view original):
There is no logic to explain the 2002 Erstad.  He played 5 games, 8.1 innings and he made 9 putouts. 

His rf/g = 1.80, which should make him a "D-" based upon how they're rating other players.

His rf/9 = 9.72, which should make him a "C+" if they based range on innings instead of games...yet SIM gives him a 15.04 range factor, which appears to be a made up number.

I sent in a ticket asking them to explain Erstad...we'll see what they say.

Well then, great job on the research.  Kudos to you.  As for a non sarcastic answer, I have notriced some of the RRF descrepencies for subs (I'm a Cardinals fans so some of Oquendo's stats were a tip off for me) but didn't give it much of a thought since at the time range meant almost nothing in the sim.  I'm guessing a lot of other experienced players were like me: we noticed certain players were off but never did anything about it. 

9/8/2010 1:59 AM (edited)
9/8/2010 2:17 AM

I figure they use rf/g because rf/9 isn't available for players from earlier generations. 

Boogerlips - is it accurate that you started playing in Oct. 2007?  That's about when I quit playing and took a long break from SIM.  Range was huge then.

9/8/2010 7:09 AM
This post is currently being reviewed by site administration.

The use of offensive language, spamming threads, and off-topic posts are prohibited and will result in a loss of posting privileges.
9/8/2010 1:16 PM
I would definitely send in a ticket if you find range factor discrepencies between a player and their real life numbers.  Just provide CS with a reference to the players actual stats when you send the ticket.  They have made adjustmetns to the letter grades for several players that I submitted in the past. 
9/8/2010 2:27 PM
Just to throw this in, Roberto Clemente is generally considered one of the best, if not the best, defensive OF to ever patrol RF, yet his defensive ratings in SIM, both fielding and range, are generally mediocre.  Could that be at least partly because his reputation rests largely on his rifle throwing arm that the SIM has difficulty accounting for in its defensive ratings?
9/8/2010 4:13 PM
Yes - fielding grade is based on fielding percent, while range is based on rf/g...throwing arm is not included in the mix.  I think former Twin Bob Gorinski was a little better in RF than Clemente, but it's close.
9/8/2010 4:29 PM
12 Next ▸

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2025 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.