More Defensive ratings

Giants44 · 07-03-2002, 02:13 PM

I think there needs to be a high rating for truly spectacular defensive players. Maybe AA for players who are the type that win 2-3 gold gloves in their career. And AAA for guys who are perennial gold glovers. I don’t think players like say Ozzie Smith or Omar Vizqel are valued enough because there are always 10-15 players in a league that are rated as A, where clearly there are not 15 players in the history of baseball that are the quality of these type of players.

Along with that I would like to see Gold Glove added to the end of year awards.

Chitown3304 · 07-03-2002, 02:29 PM

I 2 would also liked to see gold gloves as an award after the season and also minor league player of the year

andymac · 07-03-2002, 06:28 PM

I would like to see fielding ratings go to the 10 point scale and every player should be rated at every position. Most players would be rated badly at positions other than their regular one, but every once in a while you should get someone who has a decent rating at every or most positions (a la Jose Oquendo). These ratings should fluctuate just like any other rating and once in a while you will get guys who would be rated higher than 10. These would be the Ozzie Smith type players. Just my thoughts, let me know what you think.

Andy

jblaze03fuel · 07-04-2002, 04:24 AM

i think a point scale would be confusing with all the numbers already related within the game. but i do however, want to see the gold glove award, the rolaids relief man, come back player of the year, minor leaguers of the year, etc....

DiversionX · 07-04-2002, 06:50 AM

What we need is a study to examine the correlation between Zone Rating statistics for players who routinely play multiple positions, specifically concentrating on seeing if those players ability to have high ZR at one position translates to another position.

andymac · 07-04-2002, 12:29 PM

The problem with doing it that way is you won't have the oddities. Every once in a while there should be a catcher who is an excellent outfielder(Eli Marrero). I'm not sure why the point system would be confusing, it would work the exact same way that power or any other hitting or pitching rating that is in the game. It doesn't make sense to me for any player to not have a rating at every position. If you put any professinal baseball player in right field they should be able to catch an easy fly ball that doesn't involve much movement, thus they should have a rating. Maybe this would be extremely hard to code, I'm not a programmer so I don't know, but if it is possible I think it would be a huge improvement to the way fielding is done currently.

Treches · 07-04-2002, 01:29 PM

It would be more appropriate if the developers made OOTP handle the defensive ratings in a more realistic way, especially when talking about outfielders. It isn't realistic to see all those outfielders who have great speed sporting an E or D defensive range, and viceversa.

This was quite a popular suggestion back then in OOTP2's days, but never made it.

DiversionX · 07-05-2002, 05:35 AM

Roger Cedeno is one of the fastest men in baseball and he has horrible range. Rey Ordonez is not very fast at all and he has amazing range. Range is not just about speed, it's about getting a jump on the ball, placement before the pitch and moving directly to the ball's presumed location.

JML · 07-05-2002, 12:48 PM

I've said it before and I'll say it again... I'd love to see every position player have 2 arm ratings: strength and accuracy.

DiversionX · 07-06-2002, 05:54 AM

If we're going to seperate arm into strength and accuracy, why not seperate defensive range into jump, placement and speed? It seems to me range is a factor of all three of those things.

JML · 07-06-2002, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DiversionX
If we're going to seperate arm into strength and accuracy, why not seperate defensive range into jump, placement and speed? It seems to me range is a factor of all three of those things.

I think one range factor makes sense, as it only affects one thing: Getting to a ball. 2 arm ratings would affect two things: Getting a ball to a place accurately and getting it there FAST.

While 2 arm ratings would add more to the game in terms of defensive ratings, Im not sure splitting up range into 3 factors would.

DiversionX · 07-06-2002, 09:00 PM

A player's arm rating concerns 2 things, getting a ball to another fielder accurately and on time, generally to make an out. A player's range concerns 2 things also, getting to a ball accurately and on time, so I personally feel if you're going to go as far as seperating arm between strength and accuracy, why not seperate a fielder between the various componants that make them up too. It's levels of abstraction, you are choosing to get more detail on arm and choosing to get more abstraction on range, and ultimately the detail should be in there with the option to turn it off.

JML · 07-06-2002, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DiversionX
A player's range concerns 2 things also, getting to a ball accurately and on time, so I personally feel if you're going to go as far as seperating arm between strength and accuracy, why not seperate a fielder between the various componants that make them up too.

OK, but which range ability relates to getting to the ball accurately and which relates to getting there on time? If you had jump, placement and speed in the field as separate abilities, how would that division relate to the 2 objectives you mentioned? It seems to me that all 3 would have equal impact on both objectives, getting to a ball accurately and getting to it on time.

DiversionX · 07-06-2002, 10:12 PM

Well let's look at arm ratings:

When all is said and done, most throwing plays are about throwing a runner out at a base, so it's about speed (arm strength) more often than accuracy. If you have an accurate arm, that means you're going to make less errors throwing the ball away and the player you're throwing to is going to make less errors trying to catch/scoop/block/stop the ball you're throwing. It seems to me in this way, fielding percentage should be divided into glovework errors and throwing errors, rather than splitting up the arm rating. Keep the same old arm strength, but differentiate between the two errors.

That should make you happy because you do have the division of arm ratings without actually having to make another rating.

In real world terms, there are guys who have an amazing ability to catch the ball and then make errors on the throw, this would be represented by an almost perfect (.998 or higher) glovework fielding percentage. There are other players that will miss the occaisional ground ball or popup, but never make a bad throw, this would be represented by an almost perfect throwing percentage.

I do see your point how range is an excellent abstraction of the three factors I mentioned earlier, but maybe seperate range a bit. Some infielders are better at going to their glove side. Some outfielders are amazing at going back on the ball but have problems with balls hit in front of them. That would probably be a better division of the range rating.

JML · 07-06-2002, 10:47 PM

Hmmm.. good point. It would make more sense to have two fielding percentages. But looking at it that way, it doesn't really make a lot of difference how a guy makes an error (fielding or throwing)... either way, it's still an error.

So I'll take my suggestion a step back... ALL fielders should have an arm (strength

) rating, not just C and OF.

BleacherBum · 07-11-2002, 07:14 PM

Of course, all this presumes that fielding is actually a big part of the game. In my experience, the way you win in OOTP is not with pitching and defense, but rather with pitching and power. Put a bunch of guys in the lineup who hit the deep fly, but can't field a lick, and you're in good shape. In fact, I've put guys totally out of position and still seem them field at a .930 or .940 rate.

JML · 07-11-2002, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BleacherBum
Of course, all this presumes that fielding is actually a big part of the game. In my experience, the way you win in OOTP is not with pitching and defense, but rather with pitching and power. Put a bunch of guys in the lineup who hit the deep fly, but can't field a lick, and you're in good shape. In fact, I've put guys totally out of position and still seem them field at a .930 or .940 rate.

You know that .930 fielding really sucks, right? (at least in a modern league) And you might not be noticing it, but those out-of-position players are probably allowing a lot of outs to turn into hits, by way of crappy range.

Scott Vibert · 07-11-2002, 11:02 PM

Defense is huge in this game.

In one of my online leagues I regularly finish in the top 2 in hitting and have a decent to good ERA, yet I finish towards the bottom, because of the shear crappiness of my defense.

Jason Moyer did a study that you can find in the General Discussions forum that indicated the impact that fielding has in OOTP.

Find this study and the debate it stirred up afterwards here:

http://www.400softwarestudios.com/bo...&threadid=2310

BleacherBum · 07-14-2002, 12:39 PM

.930 isn't great, but then look at the rest of the league, and many guys who know their position are at .950-.970. So the fielding pct. really isn't much of a drop off. I also realize that these guys in unfamiliar terrritory don't get to as many balls either.

But I guess what I'm finding is the CPU can't exploit my defensively challenged teams. I also find that my teams can be near the top of the league in pitching, even with those lousy fielders.

07-03-2002, 02:13 PM	#1 (permalink)
Giants44 All Star Starter Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 1,602	More Defensive ratings I think there needs to be a high rating for truly spectacular defensive players. Maybe AA for players who are the type that win 2-3 gold gloves in their career. And AAA for guys who are perennial gold glovers. I don’t think players like say Ozzie Smith or Omar Vizqel are valued enough because there are always 10-15 players in a league that are rated as A, where clearly there are not 15 players in the history of baseball that are the quality of these type of players. Along with that I would like to see Gold Glove added to the end of year awards.

07-03-2002, 06:28 PM	#3 (permalink)
andymac Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Effingham, IL Posts: 5,357	I would like to see fielding ratings go to the 10 point scale and every player should be rated at every position. Most players would be rated badly at positions other than their regular one, but every once in a while you should get someone who has a decent rating at every or most positions (a la Jose Oquendo). These ratings should fluctuate just like any other rating and once in a while you will get guys who would be rated higher than 10. These would be the Ozzie Smith type players. Just my thoughts, let me know what you think. Andy __________________ June Madness: Links FTB: andymac

07-04-2002, 06:50 AM	#5 (permalink)
DiversionX Minors (Double A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chapel Hill, NC Posts: 148	What we need is a study to examine the correlation between Zone Rating statistics for players who routinely play multiple positions, specifically concentrating on seeing if those players ability to have high ZR at one position translates to another position. __________________ For the owners, BY the owners - the BIG Baseball League http://www.big-baseball.com ******************************

07-04-2002, 12:29 PM	#6 (permalink)
andymac Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Effingham, IL Posts: 5,357	The problem with doing it that way is you won't have the oddities. Every once in a while there should be a catcher who is an excellent outfielder(Eli Marrero). I'm not sure why the point system would be confusing, it would work the exact same way that power or any other hitting or pitching rating that is in the game. It doesn't make sense to me for any player to not have a rating at every position. If you put any professinal baseball player in right field they should be able to catch an easy fly ball that doesn't involve much movement, thus they should have a rating. Maybe this would be extremely hard to code, I'm not a programmer so I don't know, but if it is possible I think it would be a huge improvement to the way fielding is done currently. __________________ June Madness: Links FTB: andymac

07-05-2002, 05:35 AM	#8 (permalink)
DiversionX Minors (Double A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chapel Hill, NC Posts: 148	Roger Cedeno is one of the fastest men in baseball and he has horrible range. Rey Ordonez is not very fast at all and he has amazing range. Range is not just about speed, it's about getting a jump on the ball, placement before the pitch and moving directly to the ball's presumed location. __________________ For the owners, BY the owners - the BIG Baseball League http://www.big-baseball.com ******************************

07-03-2002, 02:29 PM	#2 (permalink)
Chitown3304 Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 62	I 2 would also liked to see gold gloves as an award after the season and also minor league player of the year

07-04-2002, 04:24 AM	#4 (permalink)
jblaze03fuel All Star Reserve Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 919	i think a point scale would be confusing with all the numbers already related within the game. but i do however, want to see the gold glove award, the rolaids relief man, come back player of the year, minor leaguers of the year, etc....

07-04-2002, 01:29 PM	#7 (permalink)
Treches Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Damned Hell Posts: 2,108	It would be more appropriate if the developers made OOTP handle the defensive ratings in a more realistic way, especially when talking about outfielders. It isn't realistic to see all those outfielders who have great speed sporting an E or D defensive range, and viceversa. This was quite a popular suggestion back then in OOTP2's days, but never made it.

07-05-2002, 12:48 PM	#9 (permalink)
JML Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The act or process of locating. Posts: 2,156	I've said it before and I'll say it again... I'd love to see every position player have 2 arm ratings: strength and accuracy.

07-06-2002, 05:54 AM	#10 (permalink)
DiversionX Minors (Double A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chapel Hill, NC Posts: 148	If we're going to seperate arm into strength and accuracy, why not seperate defensive range into jump, placement and speed? It seems to me range is a factor of all three of those things. __________________ For the owners, BY the owners - the BIG Baseball League http://www.big-baseball.com ******************************

07-06-2002, 09:00 PM	#12 (permalink)
DiversionX Minors (Double A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chapel Hill, NC Posts: 148	A player's arm rating concerns 2 things, getting a ball to another fielder accurately and on time, generally to make an out. A player's range concerns 2 things also, getting to a ball accurately and on time, so I personally feel if you're going to go as far as seperating arm between strength and accuracy, why not seperate a fielder between the various componants that make them up too. It's levels of abstraction, you are choosing to get more detail on arm and choosing to get more abstraction on range, and ultimately the detail should be in there with the option to turn it off. __________________ For the owners, BY the owners - the BIG Baseball League http://www.big-baseball.com ******************************

07-06-2002, 10:12 PM	#14 (permalink)
DiversionX Minors (Double A) Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Chapel Hill, NC Posts: 148	Well let's look at arm ratings: When all is said and done, most throwing plays are about throwing a runner out at a base, so it's about speed (arm strength) more often than accuracy. If you have an accurate arm, that means you're going to make less errors throwing the ball away and the player you're throwing to is going to make less errors trying to catch/scoop/block/stop the ball you're throwing. It seems to me in this way, fielding percentage should be divided into glovework errors and throwing errors, rather than splitting up the arm rating. Keep the same old arm strength, but differentiate between the two errors. That should make you happy because you do have the division of arm ratings without actually having to make another rating. In real world terms, there are guys who have an amazing ability to catch the ball and then make errors on the throw, this would be represented by an almost perfect (.998 or higher) glovework fielding percentage. There are other players that will miss the occaisional ground ball or popup, but never make a bad throw, this would be represented by an almost perfect throwing percentage. I do see your point how range is an excellent abstraction of the three factors I mentioned earlier, but maybe seperate range a bit. Some infielders are better at going to their glove side. Some outfielders are amazing at going back on the ball but have problems with balls hit in front of them. That would probably be a better division of the range rating. __________________ For the owners, BY the owners - the BIG Baseball League http://www.big-baseball.com ******************************

07-06-2002, 10:47 PM	#15 (permalink)
JML Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The act or process of locating. Posts: 2,156	Hmmm.. good point. It would make more sense to have two fielding percentages. But looking at it that way, it doesn't really make a lot of difference how a guy makes an error (fielding or throwing)... either way, it's still an error. So I'll take my suggestion a step back... ALL fielders should have an arm (strength ) rating, not just C and OF.

07-11-2002, 07:14 PM	#16 (permalink)
BleacherBum All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 659	Of course, all this presumes that fielding is actually a big part of the game. In my experience, the way you win in OOTP is not with pitching and defense, but rather with pitching and power. Put a bunch of guys in the lineup who hit the deep fly, but can't field a lick, and you're in good shape. In fact, I've put guys totally out of position and still seem them field at a .930 or .940 rate.

07-11-2002, 11:02 PM	#18 (permalink)
Scott Vibert Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: My Computer Posts: 7,147	Defense is huge in this game. In one of my online leagues I regularly finish in the top 2 in hitting and have a decent to good ERA, yet I finish towards the bottom, because of the shear crappiness of my defense. Jason Moyer did a study that you can find in the General Discussions forum that indicated the impact that fielding has in OOTP. Find this study and the debate it stirred up afterwards here: http://www.400softwarestudios.com/bo...&threadid=2310 Last edited by Scott Vibert : 07-11-2002 at 11:04 PM.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

07-14-2002, 12:39 PM	#19 (permalink)
BleacherBum All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 659	.930 isn't great, but then look at the rest of the league, and many guys who know their position are at .950-.970. So the fielding pct. really isn't much of a drop off. I also realize that these guys in unfamiliar terrritory don't get to as many balls either. But I guess what I'm finding is the CPU can't exploit my defensively challenged teams. I also find that my teams can be near the top of the league in pitching, even with those lousy fielders.