Quote: Originally Posted By plague on 11/15/2009I am starting to wonder if a player with 88 power is equal to a player with 95 power. It feels almost like they just capped the max amount of power you can gain a advantage in home runs. I think more power should have a advantage and not just be capped.

And it seems that not only are they capping HRs, but they are capping offensive output by power players. They are hitting less overall. They are taking away HRs and giving them outs.

Quote: Originally Posted By swamphawk22 on 11/16/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By tropicana on 11/15/2009

Jesus swamp...

Greene, with 95 power: 46 VL, 47VR, 32 EYE
Purcell, with 94 power: 48 VL, 42 VR, 47 EYE
Tejera, with 92 power: 58 VL, 23 (!!!) VR, 60 EYE
Standridge, with 80 power: 50 VL, 48 VR, 57 EYE
White, with 68 power: 42 VL, 43 VR, 72 EYE

These guys all suck, man. They are all in your starting lineup with the exception of Tejera who appears to be in a platoon. You can get away with having maybe one guy like that in your starting lineup, but at times you have FIVE! That's just a poorly put together team.

Greene led the NL in homers last year. Purcell is a cheap LF. Tejera starts against leties. White is a great fielder.

swamp, did you even read what tropicana wrote? Did it sink in? here is a learning opportunity and you are too defensive to benefit from it.

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

Quote: Originally Posted By snake_p on 11/16/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By swamphawk22 on 11/16/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By tropicana on 11/15/2009

Jesus swamp...

Greene, with 95 power: 46 VL, 47VR, 32 EYE
Purcell, with 94 power: 48 VL, 42 VR, 47 EYE
Tejera, with 92 power: 58 VL, 23 (!!!) VR, 60 EYE
Standridge, with 80 power: 50 VL, 48 VR, 57 EYE
White, with 68 power: 42 VL, 43 VR, 72 EYE

These guys all suck, man. They are all in your starting lineup with the exception of Tejera who appears to be in a platoon. You can get away with having maybe one guy like that in your starting lineup, but at times you have FIVE! That's just a poorly put together team.

Greene led the NL in homers last year. Purcell is a cheap LF. Tejera starts against leties. White is a great fielder.

swamp, did you even read what tropicana wrote? Did it sink in? here is a learning opportunity and you are too defensive to benefit from it

This brings up an intersting point. Should you play the guys with good ratings or the guys with good stats. Greene is a good example. He was on my team when I got it. He had power and was a good fielder, for a 1B, so I put him in. He hit 60 HRs. Second year he hit 59 HRs. Third year he was injured, but still ended up with 45 HRs. Last year he hit 61. Should I play a guy with better ratings, or the guy who is doing well. Purcell is another guy. Backup C, he hit great, so I kept him on the team. Wanted a big raise, dropped him, no one else wanted him, resigned him cheap after season started. Hitting well.

WIS has always said that there are no hidden ratings, but in order for the game to play like it does I dont think this can be true.

So do you play the guys who are doing well, or the guys with good ratings?

play the guys who are doing well

try to stick with the guys with good ratings, but realize if they're not turning it around that you'd be better off getting rid of em eventually

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

players with the best ratings will, over time, have the best stats...HRs are not the end all be all...greene had years with sub .300 OBP...thats not good

Quote: Originally posted by swamphawk22 on 11/16/2009
I think I did have the worst OBP last year.

I could have told you that. Tropicana is exactly right: "You can get away with having maybe one guy like that in your starting lineup, but at times you have FIVE! That's just a poorly put together team."

I don't care what their defensive ratings might be; you are leaning way too heavily on home runs to carry your offense with that bunch, regardless of recent engine tweaks.

Quote: Originally Posted By swamphawk22 on 11/16/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By snake_p on 11/16/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By swamphawk22 on 11/16/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By tropicana on 11/15/2009

Jesus swamp...

Greene, with 95 power: 46 VL, 47VR, 32 EYE
Purcell, with 94 power: 48 VL, 42 VR, 47 EYE
Tejera, with 92 power: 58 VL, 23 (!!!) VR, 60 EYE
Standridge, with 80 power: 50 VL, 48 VR, 57 EYE
White, with 68 power: 42 VL, 43 VR, 72 EYE

These guys all suck, man. They are all in your starting lineup with the exception of Tejera who appears to be in a platoon. You can get away with having maybe one guy like that in your starting lineup, but at times you have FIVE! That's just a poorly put together team.

Greene led the NL in homers last year. Purcell is a cheap LF. Tejera starts against leties. White is a great fielder.

swamp, did you even read what tropicana wrote? Did it sink in? here is a learning opportunity and you are too defensive to benefit from it.

This brings up an intersting point. Should you play the guys with good ratings or the guys with good stats. Greene is a good example. He was on my team when I got it. He had power and was a good fielder, for a 1B, so I put him in. He hit 60 HRs. Second year he hit 59 HRs. Third year he was injured, but still ended up with 45 HRs. Last year he hit 61. Should I play a guy with better ratings, or the guy who is doing well. Purcell is another guy. Backup C, he hit great, so I kept him on the team. Wanted a big raise, dropped him, no one else wanted him, resigned him cheap after season started. Hitting well.

WIS has always said that there are no hidden ratings, but in order for the game to play like it does I dont think this can be true.

So do you play the guys who are doing well, or the guys with good ratings?

A guy who hits 60 home runs isn't inherently valuable. If those are the only hits he gets in a season, for instance, that isn't a good thing.

I also do NOT think a guy like Greene should be able to hit 60 home runs in a season. I find that horribly unrealistic.

What exactly about Greene says no to 60 HRs? He has a 95 power, very high. He has average L/R ratings. His eye is low. I think last year he batted .240 and had 150 Ks and hit 61 HRs. Why wouldnt a person with his ratings have those stats?

Mike Jacobs.

Dude, his splits are below 50, that's NOT average.

You wouldn't pitch a pitcher with those splits, would you?? Of course not! He'd get shelled.

eg. the average split (rotation and starting lineup) in Capra is 66.

Quote: I dont know what exactly to think about this, other than I got screwed. How can WIS radically change the way a game is played so certain players are far less valuable.

You didn't get screwed. This sort of comment pops up all the time in one of my leagues, every time someone has a slump. "I'm getting screwed." You're not. You know that WIS, periodically, will make large, game-changing updates to the sim. We've all seen it. Knowing this, you still chose to build a one-dimensional offensive team. Which is your choice, and good on you for making it. But by making it, you took a calculated risk every season you built them that way. You knew...and know...that these changes can and do happen. But you took the risk anyway. Is it a tough break that the change happened mid-season and, probably, has effected your offensive numbers? Sure. Did you get "screwed"? No...you took a risk, and now you are paying for taking that risk. Tough break...that's the way it goes. Now go start trading some of those guys for players that fit the new paradigm.

Quote: Originally Posted By dpausch on 11/17/2009You didn't get screwed. This sort of comment pops up all the time in one of my leagues, every time someone has a slump. "I'm getting screwed." You're not. You know that WIS, periodically, will make large, game-changing updates to the sim. We've all seen it. Knowing this, you still chose to build a one-dimensional offensive team. Which is your choice, and good on you for making it. But by making it, you took a calculated risk every season you built them that way. You knew...and know...that these changes can and do happen. But you took the risk anyway. Is it a tough break that the change happened mid-season and, probably, has effected your offensive numbers? Sure. Did you get "screwed"? No...you took a risk, and now you are paying for taking that risk. Tough break...that's the way it goes. Now go start trading some of those guys for players that fit the new paradigm.

Too long for miket.

Too sensible for swamp.

I like your post, though. Well summarized.