What's also not being mentioned (though has come up in past discussions) is that HBD owners put much less emphasis on arm strength and accuracy in catchers compared to MLB teams.

Posted by tecwrg on 1/6/2011 9:43:00 AM (view original):
What exactly is "broken" with the current SB engine?

I just looked at all three of my teams for the current seasons.  On all three teams, I'm averaging around 70% success.  I'm not seeing poor baserunners attempting to steal and constantly getting thrown out.  The "worst" baserunners (in terms of being thrown out more than they are successful) on my three teams are 0-2, 0-2, and 5-6 (SB-CS).

Here are the numbers for my teams:

Mantle (63 games in): 56 steals, 23 CS, 70.9% success rate - worst player is 0-2
MG (137 games in): 129 steals, 51 CS, 71.6% success rate - worst player is 0-2
Coop (162 games in): 106 steals, 49 CS, 68.4% success rate - worst player is 5-6

My "Base Stealing" setting is "4- Aggressive" for all three teams.

I don't see a problem.

So I'm curious as to what others perceive the problem to be.

I thought it was clear, and I've (and others with evidence) have shown it to be true before. In order to maintain an arbitrary percentage rate, players that a manager would never send are attempting steals. This is done to offset the fact that for some reason high Speed/Baserunning types are able to go 1219/83 (SB/CS) over the course of their career, (including a 165/6 season with 99 Speed and 83 Baserunning!). Simply put, unrealistic. What NEVER gets mentioned is that these outs that are created arbitrarily can actually be occuring during key situations in ballgames. Losing an out, or game, because your player who should never have been running was caught stealing in an effort for the engine to meet an arbitrary percentage of SB rates does NOT seem like an appropriate way to run a baseball simulation, where we all know every out is important. Why are we ok with throwing away even a handful of outs a season? Wouldn't we rather see a more realistic SB engine all together, indivdual settings or not?

As tec shows, he's only "throwing away" two outs per season in a couple of his worlds.   He has his settings adjusted in a way to make this happen.

As for players who'd "never run", I think we can all agree that Jorge Posada is as slow as the day is long.   In his long career, he has attempted a stolen base at least once in every season where he's gotten 200 PA.   The same can be said of Jason Giambi(who was pretty comparable to Posada as far as speed went) except for one season.    Bad, slow runners actually do attempt steals in MLB. 

@pstrnutbag - I'd like to see some examples of players who are running with wreckless abandon, i.e. the 0 SB, 23 CS guys.  The ones who you claim are offsetting the 165/5 guys.  Where are they?

Mike - I'd bet the majority of Giambi/Posada's steal attempts are back ends of double steals and times they've been picked off, for what it's worth. 

Overall, I'm satisfied with what we have now.  I'm afraid whenever WIS considers "wholesale changes."

Posted by tecwrg on 1/6/2011 12:29:00 PM (view original):
@pstrnutbag - I'd like to see some examples of players who are running with wreckless abandon, i.e. the 0 SB, 23 CS guys.  The ones who you claim are offsetting the 165/5 guys.  Where are they?

Did I say they were running with reckless abandon? Did I say anyone went 0-23? Don't insert phrases into my argument in an attempt to weaken it. I notice you handily ignore the questions I asked, and instead deflected into a fallacy I never even mentioned. A. If you would be so kind, are you ok with throwing away outs in baseball? Wouldn't you like to see a better product, regardless of individual settings? B. I would provide you with an example of players running with reckless abandon (i.e. 0-23 guys)....if I had ever actually mentioned any at all. What you CAN easily deduce is that even 1-2 attempts per season from a handful of guys is outs that are being thrown away not on basic gameplay, but to meet some arbitrary SB% rate. What I think we CAN agree on is 165/6 is simply not realistic, and he didn't even crack 85 Baserunning. I enjoy a good debate.  Let's stick to what's actually being discussed instead of reaching for extremes that were never even mentioned.

Posted by pstrnutbag44 on 1/6/2011 1:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 1/6/2011 12:29:00 PM (view original):
@pstrnutbag - I'd like to see some examples of players who are running with wreckless abandon, i.e. the 0 SB, 23 CS guys.  The ones who you claim are offsetting the 165/5 guys.  Where are they?

Did I say they were running with reckless abandon? Did I say anyone went 0-23? Don't insert phrases into my argument in an attempt to weaken it. I notice you handily ignore the questions I asked, and instead deflected into a fallacy I never even mentioned. A. If you would be so kind, are you ok with throwing away outs in baseball? Wouldn't you like to see a better product, regardless of individual settings? B. I would provide you with an example of players running with reckless abandon (i.e. 0-23 guys)....if I had ever actually mentioned any at all. What you CAN easily deduce is that even 1-2 attempts per season from a handful of guys is outs that are being thrown away not on basic gameplay, but to meet some arbitrary SB% rate. What I think we CAN agree on is 165/6 is simply not realistic, and he didn't even crack 85 Baserunning. I enjoy a good debate.  Let's stick to what's actually being discussed instead of reaching for extremes that were never even mentioned.

So are you saying that a handful of guys who go 0-2 is unrealistic?

Would it surprise you to know that in MLB in 2010, there were 64 different players who stole no bases while attempting at least one time?

Nick Hundley (Padres) was 0-5.
Casey Blake (Dodgers) was 0-4.
Four guys were 0-3.
Eleven guys were 0-2.
Forty-seven guys were 0-1.

So again . . . what is happening in HBD that is deliberately "offsetting" the high-end runners that is not realistic?

And as for my reference to 0-23 . . . true, you did not mention anything like that.  But unless we were to find players in HBD seeing that kind of failure rate, then it's difficult (to me) to make any kind of a valid argument that something is being done in HBD to offset the high-success guys such that an overhaul of the SB engine is warranted.

The only tweak I would do is to correct the pickoff logic.

If corrected, the 85/2 guy becomes 85/8 to 85/10. Jumbo never gets picked off, because he is already touching 1st.

The pick off logic seems to follow the SB success logic. Incorrect.

I have spoken.

Posted by burnsy483 on 1/6/2011 12:34:00 PM (view original):
Mike - I'd bet the majority of Giambi/Posada's steal attempts are back ends of double steals and times they've been picked off, for what it's worth. 

Overall, I'm satisfied with what we have now.  I'm afraid whenever WIS considers "wholesale changes."

Probably.  Still counts as a steal attempt.

In fact, we once had an owner who was 0-6 on the season in SB.   All were pick-offs.

Posted by mhulshult on 1/6/2011 9:32:00 AM (view original):
What's also not being mentioned (though has come up in past discussions) is that HBD owners put much less emphasis on arm strength and accuracy in catchers compared to MLB teams.

This point was completely ignored by the complainers.  What is the AS/AA rate for the catchers in their leagues?  If the group average is less than the "recommended ratings", it would contribute to the higher attempt/success rates.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/6/2011 9:30:00 AM (view original):
That's the issue, mhul.   Currently, there isn't a big "problem".    You get a few oddball results but, for the most part, it works pretty well.    So what's being asked for a is a MAJOR overhaul of the system for a minor tweak in results.    It makes very little sense from a business standpoint. 

I'll refer back to this for anyone who thinks we have to have a fix.

Businesses don't do major overhauls to products for a minor tweak in results.  GM will not recall every engine built between 2005-2010 because they've discovered that the design is causing their customers to get .0042 MPG less than they should.

Posted by toddcommish on 1/6/2011 1:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by mhulshult on 1/6/2011 9:32:00 AM (view original):
What's also not being mentioned (though has come up in past discussions) is that HBD owners put much less emphasis on arm strength and accuracy in catchers compared to MLB teams.

This point was completely ignored by the complainers.  What is the AS/AA rate for the catchers in their leagues?  If the group average is less than the "recommended ratings", it would contribute to the higher attempt/success rates.

2010 MLB saw around 1.69 steal attempts per game, with a 72.3% success rate.

Most recent season in Cooperstown saw around 1.77 steal attempts per game (4.7% more) but with only a 70.8% success rate.

So only a slightly higher number of attempts with a slightly worse success rate.  Pretty much a wash.

I was also going to post the results from Moonlight Graham for the current season, but those numbers are completely skewed by one team that's already attempted 452 steals in 138 games (with an 84.7% success rate).  The funny thing is: that team has scored the least number of runs of all 32 teams in the world, so it's not exactly a winning strategy for them.

He's also playing .471 ball after finishing 82-80 last season when he was 464/71.  Stupid Brit.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/6/2011 1:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/6/2011 9:30:00 AM (view original):
That's the issue, mhul.   Currently, there isn't a big "problem".    You get a few oddball results but, for the most part, it works pretty well.    So what's being asked for a is a MAJOR overhaul of the system for a minor tweak in results.    It makes very little sense from a business standpoint. 

I'll refer back to this for anyone who thinks we have to have a fix.

Businesses don't do major overhauls to products for a minor tweak in results.  GM will not recall every engine built between 2005-2010 because they've discovered that the design is causing their customers to get .0042 MPG less than they should.

Extremely poor comparison. By this logic, there should never be, nor should there ever have been, an update to HBD. This is a game that we all know requires constant tinkering to perfect. Hence updates. I think a possible step in the right direction was mentioned above, and it certainly didn't sound like a MAJOR overhaul. Slightly tinkering with the logic for Pickoffs. Sounds pretty minor to me. Progress doesn't have to be so scary.

Posted by tecwrg on 1/6/2011 1:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pstrnutbag44 on 1/6/2011 1:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 1/6/2011 12:29:00 PM (view original):
@pstrnutbag - I'd like to see some examples of players who are running with wreckless abandon, i.e. the 0 SB, 23 CS guys.  The ones who you claim are offsetting the 165/5 guys.  Where are they?

Did I say they were running with reckless abandon? Did I say anyone went 0-23? Don't insert phrases into my argument in an attempt to weaken it. I notice you handily ignore the questions I asked, and instead deflected into a fallacy I never even mentioned. A. If you would be so kind, are you ok with throwing away outs in baseball? Wouldn't you like to see a better product, regardless of individual settings? B. I would provide you with an example of players running with reckless abandon (i.e. 0-23 guys)....if I had ever actually mentioned any at all. What you CAN easily deduce is that even 1-2 attempts per season from a handful of guys is outs that are being thrown away not on basic gameplay, but to meet some arbitrary SB% rate. What I think we CAN agree on is 165/6 is simply not realistic, and he didn't even crack 85 Baserunning. I enjoy a good debate.  Let's stick to what's actually being discussed instead of reaching for extremes that were never even mentioned.

So are you saying that a handful of guys who go 0-2 is unrealistic?

Would it surprise you to know that in MLB in 2010, there were 64 different players who stole no bases while attempting at least one time?

Nick Hundley (Padres) was 0-5.
Casey Blake (Dodgers) was 0-4.
Four guys were 0-3.
Eleven guys were 0-2.
Forty-seven guys were 0-1.

So again . . . what is happening in HBD that is deliberately "offsetting" the high-end runners that is not realistic?

And as for my reference to 0-23 . . . true, you did not mention anything like that.  But unless we were to find players in HBD seeing that kind of failure rate, then it's difficult (to me) to make any kind of a valid argument that something is being done in HBD to offset the high-success guys such that an overhaul of the SB engine is warranted.

Nope. I'm saying that some players, if we were to have true managerial control over our teams, would not even be leading off by more than a step. It's really very simple. No need to overcomplicate things. I am also saying that the success rate for guys with 99 Speed & 83 Baserunning seems to be a little high, and since the overall numbers are in line, there must be outs given up SOMEWHERE to compensate for that percentage. Wasting outs in baseball is already a sin, why should we lose them to meet arbitrary SB % rates?