Doesn't take a lot of extra time to be an OL 1-trick pony copycat cookie-cutter team. Yes, some will briefly adjust better than others during each 2-week dynamic pricing updates and then along with all be forced to adjust again, and good for them, and more props for it than the nil currently offered the former. The better mousetrap has a name, as well as more future variety in player pool use, as well as a more level playing field including newbs who usually show up and soon after disappear from shock and dismay. Its for now in the R-n-D shadows eagerly awaiting re-release has a name. Say it's name. Welcome back, dynamic pricing.

Posted by DoctorKz on 1/2/2021 6:07:00 PM (view original):
The undoing of the built in advantage that deadball pitchers have on home runs and extra base hits in general needs to be addressed. That would be a great equalizer. Modern pitchers would immediately see greater use, and effectiveness. The comparison of Nola to Bernhard is a good example.

Enough with the complaining about cookies. We will always look to gain an edge. Bargains will be sought, and found. Don't ***** about people taking the extra time to build a better mousetrap. Your only argument is to fight fire with fire.

dynamic pricing (implemented competently) would fix this problem. it would also fix the issue of speed not being expensive enough, players who are bad fielders at their primary position but good fielders at their secondary position not being expensive enough, OF/1B with a bad fielding rating and good range not being expensive enough, and every other extremely well-known inefficiency, without requiring a complete pricing code rewrite that would undoubtedly create some new, obvious inefficiency by accident.

there will always be cookies but it takes a while for them to become well known. frequent pricing changes will really separate the owners who know how to find value and the owners who just know how to copy other successful owners. this will have the added benefit of a wide variety of players used in open leagues, making the game more appealing for new owners. another owner and I both quit Sim Hockey after one open league because everyone had the same guys on their roster and we concluded it was a solved, boring game and moved on. I certainly don't think Sim Baseball is a solved game, but I wouldn't blame a new owner who saw the same guys on everyone's roster in an open league and came to that conclusion.

Posted by TulsaG on 1/2/2021 1:30:00 PM (view original):
As I demonstrated in an earlier post:
If salaries must remain the same, then one of 2 things will happen,
Either A: thousands of players will see negligible decreases while 2000 Pedro and 21 Ruth go up by 10+M

or B: The players no one uses now become more interesting, but now 95 Maddux costs 50-60M

The ratio of never used players to bargains is not 1:1, not even close. Once that ratio gets very high, the system breaks because you can no longer lower the prices of the never used players by any meaningful amount without making the more popular players salary's completely ridiculous.

I've said from the start, why not just recognize who the most used players are and either A: manually increase THOSE prices or B: adjust the formula to account for that and let it happen naturally. Also note: The fact that 1921 Ruth is on literally every single team with a $200M+ cap should never be factored in since at that level all the teams are going to pretty much look the same.

The other only solution is to allow the total salaries to decrease over time.

If we only utilize OL/CL in the dynamic pricing, then scenario B would never happen. There’s no way anyone is paying even $25m for a 200 IP pitcher on an $80m team.

This problem only occurred because higher cap leagues had their input on the pricing model and as you noted, consist of mostly the same player, and honestly would continue to consist of those same players into much higher price points than they’re at even now.

As for scenario A, yeah, that could happen, but with the higher cap leagues not included, the effect wouldn’t/shouldn’t be as drastic. You’ll see the equilibrium point much quicker for individual players which will cause people to look for value buys quicker, as well. Shoot, even now, most of my search is in looking for value buys because most players have been priced to absurd levels from the previous dynamic pricing. I run lots of platoons because guys with <500 PA didn’t seem to be effected as much.

Posted by PennQuaker on 1/2/2021 1:57:00 PM (view original):
Does fixing the problem with dead ball pitchers shutting off power help with this issue somewhat? 1902 Bill Bernhard is one of the most popular cookies in the sim. He gave up 0.16 HR/9 IRL with 122 OAV+, 166 ERA+, and 150 HR/9+ and costs $35,456 per IP. 2018 Aaron Nola has been used 61 times in the sim. He gave up 0.72 HR/9 IRL and has 125 OAV+, 170 ERA+, and 152 HR/9+ and costs $34,825 per IP. He's the closest comparable to Bernhard in each of these three + categories with at least 200 IP/162.

Bernhard's average performance in the sim is .roughly 254 OAVG, 3.20 ERA, 1.23 WHIP and 0.28 HR/9 in around 1,100 seasons. Nola's average performance is .236 OAVG, 3.44 ERA, 1.24 WHIP, and 0.72 HR/9.

The HR/9 for these two pitchers should be far closer. Nola isn't used more because of the far higher HR/9 figure. If Bernhard and Nola's sim HR/9 were more equalized, which is appropriate given their comparable HR/9+ and similar cost per IP (Bernhard about 2% higher), wouldn't that help with the cookie issue and spread price changes over a larger pool of players because more players would be used?

Warren Spahn, Lefty Grove, Jim Palmer, and Tom Seaver are four all-time great pitchers who are seldom used in competitive theme leagues because their nominal HR/9 and OAVG are too high. These and other great modern pitchers are outperformed by mediocre dead ball pitchers. I have to believe that having more options to build a successful team would not only make the sim more interesting but would reduce cookies as well because more players would be used.

The extra errors your team makes from having Bernhard don’t show up in his stats because errors count as outs for OAV, aren’t a H or BB for WHIP and lead to unearned runs that aren’t factored into ERA, but Bernhard will give up more than enough errors to compensate for the difference in HRs allowed.

This is why so many have long believed deadball pitchers to be underpriced, when they often weren’t. Joss was never the value he was presumed to be. People were only looking at those slash stats and not on total runs allowed, and those are often significantly different.

I'm all for fixing dynamic pricing. I hope some of these new players understand we have been here trying to get improvements for the better part of 15 years now. Try to show a bit of patience with the new guys running this, and with us.

Posted by just4me on 1/2/2021 8:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by TulsaG on 1/2/2021 1:30:00 PM (view original):
As I demonstrated in an earlier post:
If salaries must remain the same, then one of 2 things will happen,
Either A: thousands of players will see negligible decreases while 2000 Pedro and 21 Ruth go up by 10+M

or B: The players no one uses now become more interesting, but now 95 Maddux costs 50-60M

The ratio of never used players to bargains is not 1:1, not even close. Once that ratio gets very high, the system breaks because you can no longer lower the prices of the never used players by any meaningful amount without making the more popular players salary's completely ridiculous.

I've said from the start, why not just recognize who the most used players are and either A: manually increase THOSE prices or B: adjust the formula to account for that and let it happen naturally. Also note: The fact that 1921 Ruth is on literally every single team with a $200M+ cap should never be factored in since at that level all the teams are going to pretty much look the same.

The other only solution is to allow the total salaries to decrease over time.

If we only utilize OL/CL in the dynamic pricing, then scenario B would never happen. There’s no way anyone is paying even $25m for a 200 IP pitcher on an $80m team.

This problem only occurred because higher cap leagues had their input on the pricing model and as you noted, consist of mostly the same player, and honestly would continue to consist of those same players into much higher price points than they’re at even now.

As for scenario A, yeah, that could happen, but with the higher cap leagues not included, the effect wouldn’t/shouldn’t be as drastic. You’ll see the equilibrium point much quicker for individual players which will cause people to look for value buys quicker, as well. Shoot, even now, most of my search is in looking for value buys because most players have been priced to absurd levels from the previous dynamic pricing. I run lots of platoons because guys with <500 PA didn’t seem to be effected as much.

This last paragraph is so true. I don't really look at how good a player is any more, I just look at how skewed his price is.

then you're part of the problem

step aside

Posted by bagchucker on 1/3/2021 9:48:00 PM (view original):
then you're part of the problem

step aside

I love baseball and regularly join themes where value isn't the name of the game. Sometimes I draft players I like over players who are a better "value" based on inflation. I never play OLs.

But surely, I'm not required to be a fool and ignore the way the game is currently constructed.

Posted by jfranco77 on 1/2/2021 12:37:00 PM (view original):
But taking $10,000 away from 1000 guys that are literally never used , and adding 10mil to 95 Maddux, isn’t really balancing things out.

Exactly

Posted by TulsaG on 1/2/2021 1:30:00 PM (view original):
As I demonstrated in an earlier post:
If salaries must remain the same, then one of 2 things will happen,
Either A: thousands of players will see negligible decreases while 2000 Pedro and 21 Ruth go up by 10+M

or B: The players no one uses now become more interesting, but now 95 Maddux costs 50-60M

The ratio of never used players to bargains is not 1:1, not even close. Once that ratio gets very high, the system breaks because you can no longer lower the prices of the never used players by any meaningful amount without making the more popular players salary's completely ridiculous.

I've said from the start, why not just recognize who the most used players are and either A: manually increase THOSE prices or B: adjust the formula to account for that and let it happen naturally. Also note: The fact that 1921 Ruth is on literally every single team with a $200M+ cap should never be factored in since at that level all the teams are going to pretty much look the same.

The other only solution is to allow the total salaries to decrease over time.

I just finished 3 leagues with caps over $200M. I won a total of 329 games... '21 Ruth isnt even on my radar in those leagues. Just saying....

Posted by PennQuaker on 1/2/2021 1:57:00 PM (view original):
Does fixing the problem with dead ball pitchers shutting off power help with this issue somewhat? 1902 Bill Bernhard is one of the most popular cookies in the sim. He gave up 0.16 HR/9 IRL with 122 OAV+, 166 ERA+, and 150 HR/9+ and costs $35,456 per IP. 2018 Aaron Nola has been used 61 times in the sim. He gave up 0.72 HR/9 IRL and has 125 OAV+, 170 ERA+, and 152 HR/9+ and costs $34,825 per IP. He's the closest comparable to Bernhard in each of these three + categories with at least 200 IP/162.

Bernhard's average performance in the sim is .roughly 254 OAVG, 3.20 ERA, 1.23 WHIP and 0.28 HR/9 in around 1,100 seasons. Nola's average performance is .236 OAVG, 3.44 ERA, 1.24 WHIP, and 0.72 HR/9.

The HR/9 for these two pitchers should be far closer. Nola isn't used more because of the far higher HR/9 figure. If Bernhard and Nola's sim HR/9 were more equalized, which is appropriate given their comparable HR/9+ and similar cost per IP (Bernhard about 2% higher), wouldn't that help with the cookie issue and spread price changes over a larger pool of players because more players would be used?

Warren Spahn, Lefty Grove, Jim Palmer, and Tom Seaver are four all-time great pitchers who are seldom used in competitive theme leagues because their nominal HR/9 and OAVG are too high. These and other great modern pitchers are outperformed by mediocre dead ball pitchers. I have to believe that having more options to build a successful team would not only make the sim more interesting but would reduce cookies as well because more players would be used.

Personally, I think using deadball pitchers isnt as great of a strategy as the majority on WIS seem to believe.
First of all, the optimal offenses do not use HR hitters... If the best offenses don't hit very many HRs, then why should you pay to prevent HRs?

Those HR suppressing deadballers also allow more errors (which is another element that needs fixing- literally makes no sense to link fielding to the pitcher on the mound) and ppl tend to dismiss that fact when looking at the numbers.

I don't really care what era the player comes from, just the stats... and I'd rather have a pitcher with a low OAV & low WHIP that gives up a few solo shots than a pitcher that sacrifices WHIP for suppressing HRs.

Prioritizing deadball pitchers and/or suppressing HRs is a mistake that I'm glad many of you continue to make.

Posted by bagchucker on 1/3/2021 9:48:00 PM (view original):
then you're part of the problem

step aside

Yeah, bc using common sense to build a team is a 'problem'

Posted by milest on 1/4/2021 9:29:00 AM (view original):

Posted by jfranco77 on 1/2/2021 12:37:00 PM (view original):
But taking $10,000 away from 1000 guys that are literally never used , and adding 10mil to 95 Maddux, isn’t really balancing things out.

Exactly

Previously noted : " . . . , but there's a cap of 10% adjustment increase or decrease per player per adjustment period. This was noted in the How It Will Work main section of dynamic pricing talking points, link at the top of this thread. "

Nobody's price is going up 10M.

I will say this however about milest and unfortunately too few others; I have nothing against their success in Themes or other exotic higher level play with its more level playing field. I play themes at my W/L peril and regularly lose 90-100 there. That's on me.

My gripe is the OL 1-trick ponies. Dynamic pricing will certainly lend an assist there, specially if as the thinking goes it's done every 2-weeks. Roll it out already.

Posted by milest on 1/4/2021 9:58:00 AM (view original):

Posted by bagchucker on 1/3/2021 9:48:00 PM (view original):
then you're part of the problem

step aside

Yeah, bc using common sense to build a team is a 'problem'

Even if you didn't know about or understand dynamic pricing, anyone could look at deGrom and a similar pitcher pre-2016 and see that deGrom was way cheaper for some reason. And presumably they would then pick deGrom.