Quote: Originally Posted By robproc on 12/07/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By wetherjenius on 12/06/2009
I have a 74/94/67/83/71 player who is hitting .250 with 20 HRs and 58 RBIs in his first 100 games. I think the new changes may be affecting him.

I have 2 of them, and can point to at least another 10 guys around my league with the same thing.

It's a definite possibility that this update has hurt players that it shouldn't have. It's also possible that these guys are just having "bad years."

But when a guy who has had 3 straight 900+ OPS seasons and is now rocking about a .740, or a guy who normally rocks an .850 OPS with 400+ OBP and now can't even break a .200 BA, then I tend to think something is a bit fishy.

Call for Mr. Andruw Jones. Mr. Jones, to the white courtesy phone.

Quote: Originally Posted By toddcommish on 12/07/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By robproc on 12/07/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By wetherjenius on 12/06/2009
I have a 74/94/67/83/71 player who is hitting .250 with 20 HRs and 58 RBIs in his first 100 games. I think the new changes may be affecting him.

I have 2 of them, and can point to at least another 10 guys around my league with the same thing.

It's a definite possibility that this update has hurt players that it shouldn't have. It's also possible that these guys are just having "bad years."

But when a guy who has had 3 straight 900+ OPS seasons and is now rocking about a .740, or a guy who normally rocks an .850 OPS with 400+ OBP and now can't even break a .200 BA, then I tend to think something is a bit fishy.

Call for Mr. Andruw Jones. Mr. Jones, to the white courtesy phone

Gonna take him a while to get there...he's fat and slow now....

Quote: Originally Posted By kingjohndevi on 12/07/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By swamphawk22 on 12/07/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By kingjohndevi on 12/07/2009

Anyone with under 50 vR should not be in the majors unless he has a high vL and only hits against ies. Anyone with below a 50 in Contact AND Batting Eye should not be in the majors. This guy is below 60 on all 3, he SHOULD NOT BE IN THE MAJORS, he should be the MVP in High A until he is 30 and retires.

Is that clear enough for you?

Very Clear. The issue is are you correct.

The best people I see have cores in the 80-85 average. If the best is 80-85 and an average of around 55 is out of the majors doesnt that give a very narrow range of players?

Yes, but you're not considering the fact that there are Rookie, Low A, High H, AA, AAA and ML players. The range for ML players is very small because 5/6 of all players belong in one of the other levels. Only the top 1/6 of all players in a world belong in the ML, and guys with under 50 vR and under 50 for contact AND batting eye are not in that top 1/6

there are people in the minors with averages below 30. I am talking about major league guys.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

well if you take all the core stats as an average having a 95 and all 44s is simlar to having an average of around 60.

Quote: Originally Posted By swamphawk22 on 12/08/2009well if you take all the core stats as an average having a 95 and all 44s is simlar to having an average of around 60.

As someone already stated, you can overcome one or two weak ratings. But, to have 1 great rating offset a multitude of poor ratings does not make a good player. Nor should it.

People keep saying that. Before this update it wasnt true. I have multiple guys who had good offensive seasons with that type of ratings.

Patrick Greene 43-95-46-47-32 hit 60-59-45-61 HRs the last 4 years.

Kelvin Purcell 17-94-48-42-47 avaraged about .255 with 28 HRs the last 3 years

Had guys do well in this profile every year.

"The guy above averages about 50 for the hitting stats. The best guys seem to avearage around 80-85. That seems like a few numbers to go from under .200 to superstar!"

If it helps, you can always take the total of all 5 hitting stats and it'll seem like "bigger numbers" to go from .200 to superstar.

Someone that totals 250 will generally suck. Someone who total 400 will generally be good. That's 150 difference, is that a large enough number for you?

"Had guys do well in this profile every year."

And we already know WIS changed this, what's the issue?

Quote: Originally Posted By swamphawk22 on 12/08/2009
People keep saying that. Before this update it wasnt true. I have multiple guys who had good offensive seasons with that type of ratings.

Patrick Greene 43-95-46-47-32 hit 60-59-45-61 HRs the last 4 years.

Kelvin Purcell 17-94-48-42-47 avaraged about .255 with 28 HRs the last 3 years

Had guys do well in this profile every year.

Reportedly, that's what WIS changed. That profile will not do well going forward.

Problem I'm seeing is that elite hitters with high power are also sucking.

Quote: Originally Posted By swamphawk22 on 12/08/2009
People keep saying that. Before this update it wasnt true. I have multiple guys who had good offensive seasons with that type of ratings.

Patrick Greene 43-95-46-47-32 hit 60-59-45-61 HRs the last 4 years.

Kelvin Purcell 17-94-48-42-47 avaraged about .255 with 28 HRs the last 3 years

Had guys do well in this profile every year.

i'll repeat this for a 3rd time, but won't expect swamp to actually address it as it is clear he has no interest in truth, but only proving he's right (even though he just keeps proving how wrong he is)

swamp, if these players were performing so well, how come your offense has been putrid (never finishing higher than 21st in runs scored and usually worse than that)?

the answer is that you looked at HRs and saw a guy hitting 60 and assumed he was good, even though he wasn't...with the engine change your "good" players lost their only attribute of any worth and now even you can tell they aren't good...you're upset, i get it, we all do, but the idea you are somehow getting screwed is laughable

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

In our good world (Coop) the leading HR guy is going to be about or under 50. Only one guy is going to hit .330. The developers really screwed this one up.

Quote: Originally posted by tropicana on 12/08/2009Just because the guys in your world aren't sucking doesn't mean the ones in his aren't.  I think I hit that triple negative right... 

No, but so far there have been very different results in different worlds. So its possible the update isn't to blame for everything. If it was the update, the same results should be seen across the board

Quote: Originally Posted By firemanrob on 12/08/2009

Quote: Originally posted by tropicana on 12/08/2009
Just because the guys in your world aren't sucking doesn't mean the ones in his aren't. I think I hit that triple negative right...

No, but so far there have been very different results in different worlds. So its possible the update isn't to blame for everything. If it was the update, the same results should be seen across the board

Not really depending on what they changed. It is possible that coaches in some worlds think certain ratings are more important and have developed teams based on that. New people come in and look to good coaches and follow their lead. Some worlds may have focused more on splits, and others more on power and contact.