Anderson Utilities - AUHOFpoints

[Comedian2004]

Released:

http://www.sim2005.com/AUHOF/default.htm

A point system that rates the players on everything possible, except how good their wife looks.

Will be 100 percent editable:

For instance:

For career hits, you may get points like this:

>1999 5
>2499 5
>2999 7
>3499 9
>3999 11
>4490 15

So, someone with 3218 hits would get 17 points (5+5+7). Then it would check the HR chart, then 2B chart, etc. You could even lose points if your career average was below a certain point.

In the above example, you can change any of the values and save the configuration, so different leagues could have different point systems and we can share the point systems.

The program would then give 4 reports:

1. All time HOF points leaders (with active players included if enough at bats)
2. Active HOF points leaders
3. HOF players that SHOULD NOT be in the HOF
4. HOF players that SHOULD be in the HOF and are not.

Coming to your computer soon....

[gbmoore121]

Sounds Great! Thank you!

[Operation Shutdown]

Any way you can set it up with the same ratings as the HOF Monitor as the default.

[Comedian2004]

I really did not like those ratings, as a lot of them are based on league average. I can go round and round about that.

The league average, IMHO, is a crock. First, you have pitchers batting in the NL. So, you would have to break it down between leagues.

2nd. The league average should just be based on the guy that started the game. Your team gets a lead, in the 7th inning, they start making defensive subs. Better fields, lousy hitters. This lowers the league aveage for hitting.

My HOF points for 6.x was very nice, as it truely showed the value of the hitter or pitcher.

Another thing, they give more points in the BR one based on your position played. In OOTP, position does not affect your hitting, at least it is not documented. So, a catcher is not going to be more fatigued in the 8th inning, compared to a right fielder, who handled 4 balls all game.

[gbmoore121]

Hey Comedian,

I agree with a lot of what you say above, but the game does take some sort of fatigue into play. When I look at my leaders for games, all positions besides catcher have a leader with between 157 and 162 games played. The leader for catchers is usually in the 135 to 140 range. This might not effect the per 162 average like a real wear and tear would, but it will lessen career totals.

That being said, I really like the flexility you put into your HOF program.

[fantom1979]

any update on this? looks very useful

[Comedian2004]

Not really, still in the works. I got sided tracked with the Autologo program.

This one is a pretty complicated one, so to break up the 'ho hum' of it, I write other ones and then go back to this one later.

[Syd Thrift]

FWIW, HOF Monitor points aren't based on how good a player is but whether or not he's a viable candidate according to the other people who've gotten into the Hall. IRL, there are too many pitchers from the deadball era and *way* too many hitters from the 20s and 30s due in large part because voters later on went gaga over stats without looking at the context (also because of Frankie Frisch, but that's a whole 'nother ballgame). To contrast, pitchers who would be borderline HOFers if they played as well relative to their league in the 50s and 60s as they did in the Depression era stay out because statistically they look like average guys with a good number of wins (example: Wes Ferrell, whose brother, ironically enough, is in the Hall as a catcher and probably shouldn't be).

So it's a neat idea, what you've got, but I for one would prefer something that reflected the fallibility of American sportswriters.

[tysok]

Originally Posted by Comedian2004

I really did not like those ratings, as a lot of them are based on league average. I can go round and round about that.

The league average, IMHO, is a crock. First, you have pitchers batting in the NL. So, you would have to break it down between leagues.

2nd. The league average should just be based on the guy that started the game. Your team gets a lead, in the 7th inning, they start making defensive subs. Better fields, lousy hitters. This lowers the league aveage for hitting.

My HOF points for 6.x was very nice, as it truely showed the value of the hitter or pitcher.

Another thing, they give more points in the BR one based on your position played. In OOTP, position does not affect your hitting, at least it is not documented. So, a catcher is not going to be more fatigued in the 8th inning, compared to a right fielder, who handled 4 balls all game.

Actually, HOF Monitor doesn't deal with league average information... but it does add for some positions. While it's not entirely a good thing for OOTP, it doesn't seem to skew the numbers as badly as it might.
HOF Standards does add something for all positions... which is definately not needed in the game I think.

[YoVivoPorSPORTS]

Just wondering if you are going to make it so that there can be qualifers. Here is an example.

Player A ends his career with a .240 career batting average and 3600 hits.

Player B ends his career with a .320 career batting average and 3000 hits.

Without qualifiers Player A ends up with more points based on his hits stats.

With qualifiers, depending on how they are set up, A and B end up with the same amount of poitns or B ends up with more points for hits than B because he accumulated a much better average even though he did not have as many hits.

If the program lacked qualifiers I think there would be many more players racking up many HOF points based solely on longevity while with qualifiers it could be set up so that players like Roberto Clemente would get a bunch of HOF points (or think Gale Sayers in football, he'd never be in if the length of work was not consdiered, he played under 100 games). And to avoid qualifiers allowing inferior players with just a few years with a hiugher average or something getting tons of points a minimum number of At bats or other stat could be implemented. It could also be implemented as it is in the MLB rulebook which I have in my hands which talks about how to determine the batting champ. This would obviously have to be modified so maybe a certain number of at-bats for am inimum number of years (basicalyl just multiply the number by one fewer than the number of years the player played [in case they missed a season for injury or something]) Anyways here's waht it says for Batting average and it is very similiar in terms of fielding title.

Here is the MLB Rulebook rule that I'm referring to. BTW Leauge Championship games basically refer to regular season games.

10.23a
The individual batting champion or slugging champion shall be the player with the highest batting average or slugging percentage, provided he is credited with as many or more total appearances at the plate in League Championship games as the number of games scheduled for each club in his league that season, multiplied by 3.1 in the case of a major league player. EXCEPTION: However, if there is any player with fewer than the required number of plate appearances whose average would be the highest, if he were charged with the required number of plate appearances or official at-bats, then the player shall be awarded the batting championship or slugging championship.

if you would like the example given in the rulebook I can post that on request and it also says the definition of total plate appearances.


I also have some other ideas like adding extra points for milestones like 3500 ks and 500 hr and then also for receiving awards (maybe that could be set up so that it can be set to add poiints for all awards or any number, like only give points for 3 or more of a specific award.)

-Andrew


PS. If you like my idea and want me to set up options or map out hte idea I'd be glad to do it.

[Comedian2004]

Actually, it is already in the program.

The player with a .320 average got extra points for the average. The higher your lifetime average, the more points. Big bonus at .400 also! And the other way also, if your average is below a certain amount, you lose points, the lower the average, the more points.

In fact, you hit 500 homeruns and average .220, you will have some lousy points!

Same thing with the K's, OBP, SLG, etc.

[YoVivoPorSPORTS]

Okay, but have you also made it so that someone with a high average, but only, say 2000 is not rewarded. Also are you going to include OPS as a stat in calculating points?

[Comedian2004]

Someone with a high average, but only 2000 hits is given bonuses for his high average. But, the hit points don't start until 2500.

I did not include this, as I think that is made up of two other stats that I already award points for.

Originally Posted by YoVivoPorSPORTS

Okay, but have you also made it so that someone with a high average, but only, say 2000 is not rewarded. Also are you going to include OPS as a stat in calculating points?

[rasnell]

You're missing a left and right scrollbar to see all of the pitching stats. Also, is there any way that clicking on a column will default to the descending view instead of ascending? You have to double-click to get the column going the descending way.

[Comedian2004]

I raised up the grid, so you should be able to see the sroll bars. If not, then hide the windows taskbar.

As far as the sort default, I have not found a way to get it to sort decending by default.


http://www.sim2005.com/AUHOF/default.htm