Max Flack over Ruth in 1920?

[Joe Shlabotnick]

Why is the AI benching Babe Ruth against righties in 1920? He has astronomical ratings, as you veterans of historical leagues would know. In 1919, the Babe hit .380, with 43 homers, and a VORP of 138. I think he has established that he knows what he's doing. His OF arm is 100.

Yet ...the AI lineups show The Babe only starts against lefties as of mid-May. He sits on the bench against righties. Max Flack starts in front of him.

Looks to me like AI is over-valuing Flack's 97 defense in RF. Ruth is 100 defense in RF!

I am just about to give up on historical leagues. I seem to play for about three minutes, and then find something like this that just baffles me.

I have the game set on 3-year recalc, with the TCR at 1. That's the number one, which I understand should give me the greatest chance of historically accurate stats.

By the way, Cobb and Joe Jackson each hit about .445 a few years ago on these setting, another result that left me stunned.

Please don't tell me that the AI doesn't know who Babe Ruth is ... I realize that. But I would think it would notice a guy with five-star ratings and potential, with perfect 100 ratings in multiple categories, who can also play the field at an elite level.

[Jah]

Run into the same kind of thing in 1969...switch-hitting Pete Rose platooning with Bernie Carbo...Willie Mays platooning with Dave Marshall (?!).

[Joe Shlabotnick]

Wow, sorry to hear that.

Any feedback from people as to why this is happening?

If Babe Ruth in 1920 cannot get a starting job, then something is wrong.

[edm]

Do you have the ability to post the player pages for both players. I'd like to compare their ratings. Personally, I never let things like this bother me when doing historicals. If you keep going, I'm sure the Babe will get his AB's and will be up there near the top in HR's when it's all said and done. so long as he stays healthy.

[rasnell]

During game setup, did you change the percentages for how the AI evaluates talent? If you have the percentage too high for current stats, this could happen.

Garlon recommends 100 percent for "evaluation" and 0 for previous, current or two-year stats.

[Joe Shlabotnick]

Edm, I'll post the pages when I get home tonight.

Ras, I have 100% based on their evaluation and 0 on their recent performances, as Garlon suggests. Ruth is rated 5/5, and the other guy's a 2/2.

As of June, Ruth is leading the league in HR's and RBI's, even though he's not in the starting lineup against righties. I'm trying to not let this bother me ... but it still is.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Please make sure you use the latest patch!

[Joe Shlabotnick]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Please make sure you use the latest patch!

I am!

Thinking on this more, the thing that bothers me is ... if Ruth is getting benched vs. righties in 1920, my fear is that's just the tip of the iceberg in terms of bizarre decisions by the AI. I would be afraid to look at what other choices it is making.

I just thought it would be fun to check out Ruth, and was shocked to find that he's not even listed in the starting line-ups versus righties.

[TribeFanInNC]

I prefer to just deal with these issues with my imagination. Make up a story about how Max Flack is the next Babe Ruth or how Babe Ruth is drinking too much and can't play before the fifth inning half the time, then add it to your news.

Bambino ->

[Joe Shlabotnick]

Originally Posted by TribeFanInNC

I prefer to just deal with these issues with my imagination. Make up a story about how Max Flack is the next Babe Ruth or how Babe Ruth is drinking too much and can't play before the fifth inning half the time, then add it to your news.

Bambino ->

Good stuff.

But Max Flack can't be the "next Babe Ruth," since Babe Ruth is never going to be "Babe Ruth." Maybe Babe Ruth can become the next Max Flack.

[TribeFanInNC]

Even better, Max Flack is sabotaging the Babe to get more playing time by becoming his drinking buddy. But Flack is sandbagging, tossing most of his drinks into a plant, while Ruth is three sheets to the wind every night. Could be a conspiracy by Ban Johnson to get Ruth out of the AL.

Meanwhile, there is a palm tree at a bar in Manhattan that is looking a little brown and sickly...

Anyway, I see your point though. It seems like an odd usage of one of the best players ever. I wonder if this is the other side of using 100% evaluation. You said he hit .380 last year, but if you use 100% eval, the AI doesn't care what he did last year. I, like edm, would be interested in seeing the player pages.

[Joe Shlabotnick]

Originally Posted by TribeFanInNC

I wonder if this is the other side of using 100% evaluation. You said he hit .380 last year, but if you use 100% eval, the AI doesn't care what he did last year. I, like edm, would be interested in seeing the player pages.

I see your point. Maybe 100% evaluation is not the way to go ... maybe more like .... like what? Maybe I can do some experimenting ... keep changing the numbers on that page until the AI figures out to start Ruth!

I'm gonna run home at lunch and post those pages. I would really like to get this figured out. Pages will be up in about an hour.

[Joe Shlabotnick]

Here ya go ...

I had AI Player Evaluations set on 100/0/0/0. Today, I've tried giving more weight to last year's stats (20/10/70/0 was one I tried). I haven't found any combination yet that gets the AI to start Ruth against righties.

[TribeFanInNC]

Just in a brainstorm kinda mode, the differences I see are:

a) well, technically Flack is outhitting Ruth (.349 v .348) against righties
b) Flack is older
c) Flack has better speed and is a better baserunner

So, does the AI manager for Peoria value veterans or speed strongly? Since neither has a SB, I guessing not the speed thing. Or maybe he favors avg over power.

My only other thought is that somehow the fact that he only played 110 games in the field IRL has something to do with it (he was still pitching in 1920), although that doesn't seem right.

EDIT: Also, what happened differently between 1919 and 1920? - they both had 500 AB for Peoria in 1919; I'm assuming Ruth maybe played LF and Flack played RF?

[Joe Shlabotnick]

Also, isn't it odd that Ruth has more games played and 100 more AB than Flack, when Ruth is not the starter against righties?

That seems quite bizarre. I am simming, so I don't know what's going on .... it's as if Ruth does not start, but then enters many games early as a substitute.

By the way, I have coaches and scouts off.

[TribeFanInNC]

Maybe you should look at some of the box scores to see a usage pattern. Maybe he really is starting against righties, just the lineup page shows Flack as the primary starter against righties for whatever reason. Or as you said, maybe Ruth pinch hits when Flack comes up and stays in the game.

Interesting.

[swampdragon]

Ruth appears to be playing in virtually every game, but he isn't getting enough ABs per game to be starting. Two suggestions:

1. See if the patch helps. Better AI evaluation was on the list of fixes.
2. Give Flack an experience rating in LF. In real life, a player like Flack who's too good to sit would be moved to the other corner. I bet if Flack could play left, he'd be safely out of the way and Ruth would play full time. Unless Ty Cobb or some other superstar is playing left.

[Joe Shlabotnick]

Originally Posted by swampdragon

1. See if the patch helps. Better AI evaluation was on the list of fixes.

I'm using the patch. I'll keep simming and see what happens.

Not to be crabby or anything (OK, I am being crabby), but wouldn't this kind of thing (AI's accurate evaluation of talent) be at the heart and soul of the game? Why is it a problem that still needs patching after all these years (assuming that we all agree that the AI is making a dumb decision here)?

Originally Posted by swampdragon

Give Flack an experience rating in LF. In real life, a player like Flack who's too good to sit would be moved to the other corner. I bet if Flack could play left, he'd be safely out of the way and Ruth would play full time. Unless Ty Cobb or some other superstar is playing left.

Or Shoeless Joe Jackson, who is tearing it up in LF for the Jazz.

I shouldn't have to (I know, I'm being crabby again) go in and give this guy a rating in LF. Again, if the AI is making this kind of decision on the ONE specific situation I happened to look at, I cringe to think of what other decisions it is making.

[TribeFanInNC]

Originally Posted by Joe Shlabotnick

Or Shoeless Joe Jackson, who is tearing it up in LF for the Jazz.

I shouldn't have to (I know, I'm being crabby again) go in and give this guy a rating in LF. Again, if the AI is making this kind of decision on the ONE specific situation I happened to look at, I cringe to think of what other decisions it is making.

It sounds like maybe the AI is stuck a little bit because it is juggling three perfectly viable options at two spots. Sure, Flack is obviously not as good as the other two, but doesn't deserve to not play at all. In reality, Peoria should trade Flack to upgrade somewhere else. Maybe the AI will figure that out. Alternately, you can do it manually to preserve Ruth and Jackson's AB's.

Looks like Ruth is still getting a lot of AB's and is still young. I wouldn't sweat it a whole lot. Let us know how it turns out in a few years.

[pstrickert]

The AI is looking at the years 1919-21 for 3-year recalc:

RUTH

 Year Ag Tm  Lg  G   AB    R    H   2B 3B  HR  RBI  SB CS  BB  SO   BA   OBP   SLG *OPS+  TB   SH  SF IBB HBP GDP 
 1919 24 BOS AL 130  432  103  139  34 12  29  114   7    101  58  .322  .456  .657  219  284   3           6    
 1920 25 NYY AL 142  457  158  172  36  9  54  137  14 14 150  80  .376  .533  .849  256  388   5           3    
 1921 26 NYY AL 152  540  177  204  44 16  59  171  17 13 145  81  .378  .512  .846  239  457   4           4

FLACK

 Year Ag Tm  Lg  G   AB    R    H   2B 3B  HR  RBI  SB CS  BB  SO   BA   OBP   SLG *OPS+  TB   SH  SF IBB HBP GDP 
 1919 29 CHC NL 116  469   71  138  20  4   6   35  18     34  13  .294  .346  .392  121  184  11           3    
 1920 30 CHC NL 135  520   85  157  30  6   4   49  13 19  52  15  .302  .373  .406  122  211  13           7    
 1921 31 CHC NL 133  572   80  172  31  4   6   37  17 11  32  15  .301  .342  .400   96  229   7           4

Flack is an above-average player. IMO the AI overvalues him if it puts Flack in the lineup at the expense of Ruth. I agree with the OP. I simply see no way to explain this problem away.