Quote:
|
Originally Posted by treedom
Man, I'm glad that I prefer fictional cause this historical stuff sounds like a lot of work to setup.
That's some infield the Mutuals have.
And, the season is really that short? Isn't there a prob with development when you have so few games?
|
The work isn't really all that much: maybe 1-2 hours per season at this point, a little more later. And I love this stuff, so I hardly consider it work. The Mutuals' infield remains their strength, although Death to Flying Things has moved on after having been released by New York, and Dickey Pearce is now far past his prime, since he was 35 years of age in 1871 - the oldest everyday player.
The season really is that short - I'm using the actual schedules from Retrosheet. As for the development, you can be the judge of that - my general feeling is that (a) historical players don't tend to need as much development since they appear in the database as of the year of their actual debut and (b) since the schedule still runs from May to October (actually early November in some of these years in the 1870s) there's still ample time for talent increases and decreases. I'm now in the 1874 season, which is up around 60 games. By the early 1880s, schedules aren't that much shorter than they are today, so it shouldn't be a lingering problem. A far greater issue is how one hot or cold streak can make a player look like a superstar or a total loser. Cap Anson had one year where he struggled to get above .250 - and about half of the top players have had a season like that.