Posted by zbrent716 on 6/24/2010 2:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/24/2010 2:38:00 PM (view original):
Without clicking the team, I'm sure the owner built an extreme team.   leppy did it with a power team(I think he hit 700 homers).  

You can use extremes when advocating change.   Bell curve.

But if leppy hit 700 HR, I have to imagine it was during a time when HR were "broken" - or if not "broken" not consistent with what was designed/intended, hence the decrease in power output of the engine. If anything, Leppy's 700 HR team hurts your argument. That extreme team was an indication that something should be changed, just as the SB team is.

Nope.  He just acquired all the 90 power/eye guys he could get and put them in a homer park in a 'tard world.  I don't know if we will see anyone get 700 again but, if you built an extreme team under the same circumstances, you'd definitely see 500-600 homers.   And, as you know, that's not realistic.  Should all changes be based on extreme circumstances?

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/24/2010 2:42:00 PM (view original):
zbrent, I usually carry a good D catcher.   And use him against teams that like to steal.   Teams don't finish a 3 game series with 10 steals against me.   A good catcher curtails running.

nutbag, I'm against drastic change because it never produces the intended result.   If the overall numbers were horrible, I'd say it has to be done.  In this case, you have two reasons not to do it.   1.  WifS says their servers can't handle it.  Until you provide their server specs, I think it's a dead issue  2.  HBD CS% is reasonably similar to MLB CS%.   If owners would use legit C, I bet it would be dead on. 

Mike, you're just wrong on that. On your current teams in your current seasons, you haven't had a good D catcher start once at the ML level. I can't see last season's game log for Osvaldo, but I'd be willing to bet that the top SB guys ran just fine on him last season, because I seriously doubt you have some code that makes your good D catchers more effective than everyone else's.

Again, his overall # will even out to what a good catcher should do. The ****** guys will run less and get caught more often. Even the average SB guys will get caught more. But the elite SB guys don't care who is behind the plate. The Solanos of the World run wild on everyone.

Mike, your skirting a major issue. You are saying it's ok to arbitrarliy take an out away using a slow baserunner to offset the actual overall SB%. This has an effect on in-game play, thus having the potential to impact specific games, standings, etc. Wouldn't it make much more sense to fix the problem? It's NOT a rarity, either. I have 2 teams that consistently nab 400+ while getting caught less than 100 times. There are TONS of high speed/baserunning players out there. In fact, one could even argue that thinking there may be a flaw in the engine, players such as myself are "gaming" the system. Taking advantage of an unintended flaw to gain an advantage. That's something you'd want to correct, right? Again, what manager would send a guy he KNOWS is incapable of stealing a bag just to offset his other player who's not getting caught stealing?

I said usually.  Since the power change, I've had some struggles offensively.  Since I'm not giving up D in CF or SS, it's at C.   There's no magic code I use.  I've just noticed that my good D catchers limit SB attempts.

I'm not skirting an issue.  I'd be damned if I'd give up 100 baserunners a year to steal 400 bases.   That's batshit insane. 

Actually, it's it somewhere around a net effect of 0, isn't it? A lot of running with no real benefit?

I seem to recall 80% success (or thereabouts) as being the cutoff.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/24/2010 3:09:00 PM (view original):
I said usually.  Since the power change, I've had some struggles offensively.  Since I'm not giving up D in CF or SS, it's at C.   There's no magic code I use.  I've just noticed that my good D catchers limit SB attempts.

I'm not skirting an issue.  I'd be damned if I'd give up 100 baserunners a year to steal 400 bases.   That's batshit insane. 

Not skirting? Ok, how about refusing to answer direct questions? Having comprehension difficulties? ;-)

Ask a direct question without all the fluff.  You know I read about 3 lines from you.   And I think giving up 4+ complete games of baserunners is stupid. 

I'll do my best to simplify it for you:

Why accept giving up outs in different game situations to maintain some arbitrary SB% in "trade-offs"?

You wouldn't send David Ortiz out to steal a base 10 times a season, knowing he'll get caught, just to offset the fact that Ellsbury might have 80 SB and isn't getting caught much (hypothetical scenario). What manager/GM would operate his team under that philosophy?

Taking advantage of an unintended flaw to gain an advantage. That's something you'd want to correct, right?

There you go, Mike. Broken down into 3 easy questions for you.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/24/2010 3:56:00 PM (view original):
Ask a direct question without all the fluff.  You know I read about 3 lines from you.   And I think giving up 4+ complete games of baserunners is stupid. 

4+ complete games, at 27 outs per game equals 108...which is less than "less than 100".  Apparently, math comprehension isn't your strong suit either.....you even added a plus to the four....

Posted by schuyler101 on 6/24/2010 2:18:00 PM (view original):
Can anyone seriously say that when this team exists that the engine is "just fine"

http://www.whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/FranchiseProfile.aspx?fid=639

529 SB's and 93 CS in season 16!

Highest stolen base total in MLB in  the last 10 years was the 2007 NY Mets 200 Stolen bases and 46 CS

Going back the 85 Cardinals had 314 SBs and 96 CS.  Can't find a leaderboard but I believe thats the all-time record

So in one of my 2 leagues we have a team that stole 200 bases more than the all-time MLB team record holder while getting caught no more than they did.

 He's clearly not even trying then, i went 670/751 (89%) in MG. As with all things in HBD, the issue isnt the engine per se, but the player generation, and as always user preference.

Team's dont attempt similar things in RL because

• Baseball adopts change at a glacial pace
• If GMs fall flat on their face going against conventional wisdom, they lose their jobs. its easier to say you failed trying what everyone else would do than trying something new.
• They can't evaluate players to the degree of accuracy that you can in HBD.
• They can't evaluate extreme skills to the same degree of accuracy.

Saying SB logic is broken is like looking at a 3D film without the glasses and sayings its broken.
You're only looking at a fraction of the issue, you need to evaluate catchers, how many catchers have you ever seen with AA/AS >90? How many have you ever seen in the ML? Given you see 100SP, 90+BR players, surely you should see equiavalent extreme def. catchers somewhere?
Does the engine generate too many extereme players for a scenario, if you generate a lot of players that can do soemthing someone will find a way to utilize that, perhaps SB logic isnt broken at all, but the player generation is prone to outputting certain types of player.

As with all things inputs go into a system and then that creates an output, you must evluate all inputs before concluding something, something that people didnt do when there were too many HRs, or now when there are too many SBs.

I don't know if this has already been suggested but I did state this in that survey.

Have Base Stealing setting only apply to players who have a Speed rating and/or Baserunning Skill of a stated value or better. Whether this is set in the Engine or determined by the owner, doesn't matter or something similiar
Maybe 2 ratings?? One for guys with Speeds over 80 and One for guys under 80... whatever

This way it is not assigned to any one player, it is assigned to ANY player that meets the criteria. Just a thought. Mostly likely will get shot down but I thought I 'd put this idea out there.

Not sure if this has been said before or not because I didnt have timet o read through the 6 pages on this post, but to add to the tech side..  Admin has said that they cant include this because of data/processing time.  This is really a bad answer.  For the amount of stats and ratings they keep on every single player it would not modify the system that dramatically to add 1 extra field to every player.  If within the player ratings they added a manager controlled rating level which was baserunning aggressiveness it would only increase the data storage about 1/50th the size that it already is.  That should not be a limiting factor...