Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 9/18/2009It was proven, in another thread, that HBD teams commit 1 extra error every 18 games over MLB.   Considering how many owners play the slugger over the glove man, I'd say that's a little low.What proof do you have that poor field play exists now?   Or that it will occur in the future?

I am going with the idea that lower rating fielding coaches will mean players will not improve as much in glove as higher fielding coaches, which we will see. The next part I am going with is lower glove ratings will create more errors than higher glove ratings. I think those are two reasonable beliefs.

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 9/18/2009If you'll be honest and say you want 80+ FI for everyone(as everyone has HC/PC at 80+), I'll stop. Coach hiring is laughably easy right now, and that's fine, but, if we want to ensure everyone has good coaching, I'd suggest we just do away with it.

I dont really care if they make a change or leave it as is. I am just debating the merits of a large drop in fielding Coaches ratings(Edited to say what I meant) over the next 5 seasons.

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

Yet, as I think I've proven, the "drops" will still produce better coaches than we had in S1. For all I know, they'll be as good as we have now. But I'll lowball it for the sake of argument.

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 9/18/2009Yet, as I think I've proven, the "drops" will still produce better coaches than we had in S1.   For all I know, they'll be as good as we have now.  But I'll lowball it for the sake of argument.

There is no way that in 5 seasons they will be as good as they are now. Unless WIS makes a change. By my numbers 25-28 of the current fielding coaches will be retiring in the next 5 seasons of my worlds 13 or more seasons, you won't be able to get the quality of those coaches in 5 seasons.

Now? I think I said "S1".

Did worlds fold after S1?

This has nothing to do whether a world folds or thrives. If all Fielding instructors were a 1 rating the world would still not fold. That becomes another black or white remark, why can't someone propose something without it ending in a extreme?

I need to go you guys have a good night.

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

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 9/18/2009
I'm not interested in your projections for GD Bryant.

I'm telling you what happened. 5-6 seasons ago(18 months), there was much concern that, as players retired, there wouldn't be enough SS/C to field a team. Good worlds figured it out. There are plenty of both. FI wil be no different.

I love people with Blind Faith - they are so easily fleeced - just ask any Republican or Democrat in Washington

as stated before - without a correction by CS, in the near future there will be a numbers issue regarding FI in many worlds - if the game is rational this will cause a problem - whether there will ACTUALLY be a problem depends on the rationality of the programing which none of us are privaleged to know. CS should now be aware of the issue (much like problem issues in the past) and can choose to deal with it soon or ignore it and see what happens.

Personally I hope they ignore it because I would like to know if coaches ratings really have an impact. If this issue is alone we will soon find out. If they have no impact I am looking forward to saving money - much like can presently be saved by not funding advance scouting. Part of the game is learning what is "wasted" money. If this is really not an issue then annything above minimum coaching salary is wasted money.

You should read the rest of the thread.

I have no doubt that some worlds will have problems. If you don't do the right things every season, you are creating future problems.