This wouldn't be so hard, would it? Topic

jimmystick
Posts: 827 (0)
Hall of Famer
88
Prospect
A lot of users clamor for individual baserunning and stolen base aggressiveness.  WIS has said that this will never happen and I believe their reason was stress on the servers.

We don't know their algorithms, and we don't know what kind of hardware they use.  But I thought of an idea today that I believe makes sense and wouldn't cause a ton of stress to the servers.

On the player settings page, there are check mark boxes for defensive replacement, pinch hit, pinch run, etc...  How about just add another check box for "steal bases."  This way, I can set my stealing aggressiveness to "very aggressive" and uncheck every box on that page except for the 2 or 3 players with 90+ speed/baserunning that I actually want to steal, and then only the guys I want to steal actually will.  

I don't know.... seems pretty easy to me.
1/4/2011 10:26 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
-1

What you would end up with would be a handful of baserunners who steal successfully 90+% of the time, with nobody else attempting steals.

How realistic would it be to see worldwide success rates of 90+%?  This would essentially nullify the need for defensive catchers.

Be careful what you wish for.
1/4/2011 10:52 PM
mhulshult
Posts: 982 (0)
Hall of Famer
5 3 63
Prospect
I think this is much more realistic from a management standpoint than what we have today.  What's probably not realistic is that 100 BR and 100 speed means nearly 100% success.  The highest SB% for MLB players with greater than 20 SB last year was 91%.  Rickey Henderson had a career 80% success rate.  Perhaps 100 BR and 100 speed should mean something closer to 90%.

But given the stolen base logic that's in place today, tec's argument is a valid one.
1/5/2011 8:49 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
This comes up every 2-3 months.   It requires a complete overhaul of the SB engine.   As it stands, the SB% in HBD is very close to MLB.   If we stop the slugs from running and turn the rabbits loose, HBD changes entirely.

So, if WifS decides to allow individual settings, they need to overhaul the SB engine first.   And, if your speedster who is successful 125 of 130 now is suddenly 103 for 130, you're likely to slow him down.   And we're back to square one.
1/5/2011 9:02 AM
mhulshult
Posts: 982 (0)
Hall of Famer
5 3 63
Prospect
Which is strange, because if I had a guy who was 103 for 130, I'd send him every time.  But I guess if you go from 125 of 130 to 103 of 130, you'll react.
1/5/2011 9:31 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

I just used that number because it was a game's worth of outs.   I'd be happy about 80% myself.   As it stands right now, I adjust based on 75%(more or less).   Speed it up if we're over, slow it down if we're under.   

1/5/2011 9:48 AM
jimmystick
Posts: 827 (0)
Hall of Famer
88
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 1/4/2011 10:52:00 PM (view original):
-1

What you would end up with would be a handful of baserunners who steal successfully 90+% of the time, with nobody else attempting steals.

How realistic would it be to see worldwide success rates of 90+%?  This would essentially nullify the need for defensive catchers.

Be careful what you wish for.
Point well taken tec.  I am one of those who is frustrated with the engine more than anything.  I want my fast guys to go go go go, but I don't like to go aggressive or very aggressive because I can't live with guys getting thrown out who, if it were real life and I was in the dugout, I would NEVER give the steal sign to.  

My suggestion was more of something to relieve the supposed stress on WIS's servers.  I still think there's a compromise out there.  I don't like it the way it is right now.
1/5/2011 8:47 PM
pstrnutbag44
Posts: 417 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 102
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 1/4/2011 10:52:00 PM (view original):
-1

What you would end up with would be a handful of baserunners who steal successfully 90+% of the time, with nobody else attempting steals.

How realistic would it be to see worldwide success rates of 90+%?  This would essentially nullify the need for defensive catchers.

Be careful what you wish for.

This seems to often get neglected, but why isn't more attention being given to the fact the SB engine is obviously broken if we are getting "realistic" results w/out realistic outcomes? Justifying the sending of baserunners who NO manager in his right mind would have steal by saying it helps meet some arbitrary stat is an absurd thing for us to be satisfied with. The SB engine NEEDS to be reworked so that you don't have the insane SB totals from some guys that need to be artificially offset by doing something that simply would not happen in MLB. It's simply hogwash for us to accept this level on unrealism in our simulation. We deserve a more thorough product. Simply meeting an arbitrary number through causing unrealistic baseball situations doesn't seem right to me. Maybe it does to others. Besides, this is a game that prides itself on the micromanagement of every aspect of your dynasty. So, fix the engine and give us that ability. They need to catch up with the other games that have had these types of settings for over a decade now...

1/5/2011 11:10 PM
_andrewbody_
Posts: 77 (0)
Rookie
8
Prospect
Posted by pstrnutbag44 on 1/5/2011 11:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 1/4/2011 10:52:00 PM (view original):
-1

What you would end up with would be a handful of baserunners who steal successfully 90+% of the time, with nobody else attempting steals.

How realistic would it be to see worldwide success rates of 90+%?  This would essentially nullify the need for defensive catchers.

Be careful what you wish for.

This seems to often get neglected, but why isn't more attention being given to the fact the SB engine is obviously broken if we are getting "realistic" results w/out realistic outcomes? Justifying the sending of baserunners who NO manager in his right mind would have steal by saying it helps meet some arbitrary stat is an absurd thing for us to be satisfied with. The SB engine NEEDS to be reworked so that you don't have the insane SB totals from some guys that need to be artificially offset by doing something that simply would not happen in MLB. It's simply hogwash for us to accept this level on unrealism in our simulation. We deserve a more thorough product. Simply meeting an arbitrary number through causing unrealistic baseball situations doesn't seem right to me. Maybe it does to others. Besides, this is a game that prides itself on the micromanagement of every aspect of your dynasty. So, fix the engine and give us that ability. They need to catch up with the other games that have had these types of settings for over a decade now...

+1
1/5/2011 11:19 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
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.
1/6/2011 9:43 AM (edited)
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
The outliers are the problem.

Rank Player G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB HBP SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS STRK L STRK
1 Horacio Sosa (ARI) 132 507 107 155 34 2 18 60 52 19 57 85 2 .306 .389 .487 .876 0 10
2 Clarence Cummings (OK) 119 509 76 128 9 1 0 34 41 1 76 85 6 .251 .309 .273 .582 1 16
3 Peter Leyritz (ARI) 134 508 92 126 19 3 24 73 48 10 88 57 6 .248 .323 .439 .762 5 7
4 Timothy Flanagan (JAX) 122 500 69 133 6 3 0 30 54 8 80 55 10 .266 .347 .290 .637 4 14

I'm sure most of us can live with #3/#4.   But #1/#2 are stupid.   Of course, those who want individual settings want #1/#2 to steal more often while never sending their plodding players.
1/6/2011 9:12 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

Flip side of the same world:

Rank Player G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB HBP SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS STRK L STRK
1 Vin Quevedo (NO) 137 567 87 163 26 4 18 74 67 9 103 28 14 .287 .371 .443 .813 1 13
2 Sammy Cox (TRE) 137 565 83 142 22 3 21 73 52 2 111 20 14 .251 .316 .412 .729 0 7
3 Benjamin Richards (CHA) 137 568 95 180 27 2 15 63 66 8 101 22 13 .317 .396 .451 .846 4 19
4 Jumbo Perez (HEL) 126 477 49 128 18 2 19 69 37 1 73 2 13 .268 .320 .434 .754 5 8
5 Yamil Pescado (NO) 137 540 77 152 15 6 7 48 62 5 94 36 13 .281 .361 .370 .731 0 16
6 Brian Crosby (TEX) 137 593 97 173 25 8 36 102 53 2 87 17 13 .292 .351 .543 .894 1 12

Only Jumbo, with his 30 speed/58 BR, is a real problem.   Of course, Helena is 106/80 so they should be changing their settings anyway.  They can't steal.

1/6/2011 9:20 AM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
OK.  So a handful of outliers are a minor problem. 

But I can live with that more than I could if the outliers were on the other end of the bell curve, i.e 1 SB with 32 CS.

Still . . . it's no reason to rewrite the entire engine.  A minor tweak at best to the high-end of the curve to see a slightly higher percentage of CS.  Or just leave it as is.
1/6/2011 9:22 AM
mhulshult
Posts: 982 (0)
Hall of Famer
5 3 63
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 1/6/2011 9:12:00 AM (view original):
The outliers are the problem.

Rank Player G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB HBP SO SB CS AVG OBP SLG OPS STRK L STRK
1 Horacio Sosa (ARI) 132 507 107 155 34 2 18 60 52 19 57 85 2 .306 .389 .487 .876 0 10
2 Clarence Cummings (OK) 119 509 76 128 9 1 0 34 41 1 76 85 6 .251 .309 .273 .582 1 16
3 Peter Leyritz (ARI) 134 508 92 126 19 3 24 73 48 10 88 57 6 .248 .323 .439 .762 5 7
4 Timothy Flanagan (JAX) 122 500 69 133 6 3 0 30 54 8 80 55 10 .266 .347 .290 .637 4 14

I'm sure most of us can live with #3/#4.   But #1/#2 are stupid.   Of course, those who want individual settings want #1/#2 to steal more often while never sending their plodding players.
If individual settings are implemented the engine should be adjust so we see numbers closer to 75-12 though.
1/6/2011 9:23 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
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. 
1/6/2011 9:30 AM
1|2|3...7 Next ▸
This wouldn't be so hard, would it? Topic
△Top△Bottom

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.