Realism, Pitchers, Homeruns and Bullpen

[Loeffle]

Hi!

I already played a "phantasy game" in the demo version.

Now I started a historical game with the 2006 Minnesota Twins. A team which shouldn't be that bad, especially in regards of pitching.

Yet the game leaves me wondering. Even if my starting rotation is rock solid (compared to the one I had in the phantasy game) and I own the two best starters in the league (due to SISA Top 20 ranking), things go very wrong.

Boof Bonser gave up 7 home runs in 20.1 IP and Brad Radke 9 home runs in 20.1 IP. Johan Santana who is supposed to be the best starter in my game throws like a wild duck allowing opponents to bat .304.
Is this realistic? The Twins won their division last year ...

(I also gave up dozens of homers in my phantasy game)

On the other hand the AI is very strange. Most teams in my game use only a 4 man bullpen, so that they usually have no rested relievers yet. My tactics was to tire the starters as much as possible, so that they have to throw in tired relievers.

In my last game Anaheim's Kelvim Escobar (Endurance 69) was a bad as my starter Kyle Lohse. Such games happen ... Escobar gave up hits and BB's. The problem was that he didn't really tire, and threw only strikes from the 5th or 6th inning on. He ended up with 186 (!!!) pitches thrown. Is this a known bug?

Also annoying that teams like the Yankees virtually hit every second hit out of the park. I know that the Twins were not a power hitting team last season. But I dont understand why some of my players have power lover than 10, while some Yankees who didn't have 100 AB's during the last three season have contact power gap all over 50.

I used data from http://www.padresfanmods.net/

Any comments on what I'm doing wrong? Just bad luck?

[1998 Yankees]

Much depends on the setting illustrated below that you chose (or passed by without noticing, perhaps) when you set up your historical league. In future seasons, much will depend on the settings discussed in this thread:

Using historical rosters

However, "sample size" is a frequent response that I have read in these forums. The game is designed to give realistic results on average, over time.

It sounds from your post like you are basing your assessment on only a small portion of the season. I think if you play out the whole season, such aberrations that you described (which do occur in real life to the best players) will have evened out and the players you described will have performed close to how they did in reality.

But not exactly, not consistently all the time (which would be boring), and not necessarily for every player. There is a factor of randomness in this game which is either designed or tolerated according to your viewpoint.

[Loeffle]

Originally Posted by 1998 Yankees

Much depends on the setting illustrated below that you chose (or passed by without noticing, perhaps) when you set up your historical league. In future seasons, much will depend on the settings discussed in this thread:

Using historical rosters

However, "sample size" is a frequent response that I have read in these forums. The game is designed to give realistic results on average, over time.

It sounds from your post like you are basing your assessment on only a small portion of the season. I think if you play out the whole season, such aberrations that you described (which do occur in real life to the best players) will have evened out and the players you described will have performed close to how they did in reality.

But not exactly, not consistently all the time (which would be boring), and not necessarily for every player. There is a factor of randomness in this game which is either designed or tolerated according to your viewpoint.

Hi!

Thanks for your answer ... In my phantasy game I played until 15th June (Pitchers ERA was about 6.50 on average). But at least my offense was sound there.

In my Twins game I'm not that far as you saw already. I just wondered about some things like Jason Tyner Home Run Power 1, while guys who hit 3 homers in 500 AB's have Home Run Power 52 ...

I saw those option when I set up the historical leagues, but wasn't sure which to take (when I started I just wanted to "try", and not end my phantasy game).

I fear I took the wrong option

Francisco Liriano is 22 now and has 94/69/63, while his potential is the same ...

Does this mean all my players will stay on the level they have now, and never improove?

[Kelric]

Originally Posted by Loeffle

Does this mean all my players will stay on the level they have now, and never improove?

Nope. Some players will undoubtedly get better, most of them will get worse as they age, some will go up or down in mid-career due to injuries or luck.

Liriano simply may have reached his peak early on.

Also, something very important to remember: OOTP does not know names. It has no idea who Johan Santana is. All it knows is the ratings it is given. If Santana is rated a little more poorly than maybe he should be, that's a roster design issue (or non-issue, depending on your viewpoint). In OOTP, you may get a very nicely rated player have an absolute dog of a year (rare) or he may put together a career season.

Not everyone performs exactly as you expect them to all the time. That would get boring.

[Loeffle]

Originally Posted by Kelric

Nope. Some players will undoubtedly get better, most of them will get worse as they age, some will go up or down in mid-career due to injuries or luck.

Liriano simply may have reached his peak early on.

Also, something very important to remember: OOTP does not know names. It has no idea who Johan Santana is. All it knows is the ratings it is given. If Santana is rated a little more poorly than maybe he should be, that's a roster design issue (or non-issue, depending on your viewpoint). In OOTP, you may get a very nicely rated player have an absolute dog of a year (rare) or he may put together a career season.

Not everyone performs exactly as you expect them to all the time. That would get boring.

Ok, lets hope my 7 game losing streak ends against KC, who are even worse than me Just got swept by the Chicago White Sox ...

But what about this:

"In my last game Anaheim's Kelvim Escobar (Endurance 69) was a bad as my starter Kyle Lohse. Such games happen ... Escobar gave up hits and BB's. The problem was that he didn't really tire, and threw only strikes from the 5th or 6th inning on. He ended up with 186 (!!!) pitches thrown. Is this a known bug?"

[Powderguy]

Wow, that seems like some kind of bug on the AI's behalf. No way, should any pitcher this days pitch 186 pitches.

[Loeffle]

Originally Posted by Powderguy

Wow, that seems like some kind of bug on the AI's behalf. No way, should any pitcher this days pitch 186 pitches.

Yes ... and also that almost all teams have only four guys in the bullpen is a bit strange, no?

[Powderguy]

Originally Posted by Loeffle

Yes ... and also that almost all teams have only four guys in the bullpen is a bit strange, no?

You mean they only have 4 guys in the bullpen total? Or they have 7 guys in the bullpen (like all teams should) and only ever use the same 4?

[Loeffle]

Originally Posted by Powderguy

You mean they only have 4 guys in the bullpen total? Or they have 7 guys in the bullpen (like all teams should) and only ever use the same 4?

Yes, they have only 4 guys in the bullpen ... Makes 9 pitchers on the 25 man-roster and 16 field players ...

This was now true for Cleveland, Angels, Yankees, White Sox and now for the KC Royals too

[Kelric]

I've seen the AI do that at times. I think it's just quirkiness in the coding.

[injury log]

Originally Posted by 1998 Yankees

Much depends on the setting illustrated below that you chose (or passed by without noticing, perhaps) when you set up your historical league.

I believe, since he has started from a 2006 season, that the settings here won't matter- the game has no future seasons with which to judge potential, so potentials will be made equal to overall ratings regardless of the setting chosen. Since the overall ratings are designed to produce correct results for the 2006 season, all players should be 'that good' to start the year. Of course potentials will change a lot because of the game engine, though it's random who receives the boosts and who receives the hits.

I do find it very strange that there are 9-man pitching staffs, and 186 pitch games, which makes me think the League Setup is set up for a different era altogether. If you go to the Game menu --> Game Setup --> League Setup, and choose the 'Strategy' tab, check the settings for:

-Use of relievers
-Use of closers
-Pitcher endurance

These should probably be set to 'Very Often', 'Very Often' and 'Low' if you want to simulate contemporary MLB baseball.

[injury log]

dola,
And a question- which roster set are you using? Is it an import from the Lahman database, or a different roster set? Player performances will be determined by the ratings in the roster set. A Lahman import should give realistic results; a custom-made roster set may give good results, or may not- it depends on how well the players were rated by the roster maker.

[Loeffle]

Originally Posted by injury log

I believe, since he has started from a 2006 season, that the settings here won't matter- the game has no future seasons with which to judge potential, so potentials will be made equal to overall ratings regardless of the setting chosen. Since the overall ratings are designed to produce correct results for the 2006 season, all players should be 'that good' to start the year. Of course potentials will change a lot because of the game engine, though it's random who receives the boosts and who receives the hits.

I do find it very strange that there are 9-man pitching staffs, and 186 pitch games, which makes me think the League Setup is set up for a different era altogether. If you go to the Game menu --> Game Setup --> League Setup, and choose the 'Strategy' tab, check the settings for:

-Use of relievers
-Use of closers
-Pitcher endurance

These should probably be set to 'Very Often', 'Very Often' and 'Low' if you want to simulate contemporary MLB baseball.

Hi, used Lahman I guess. Just the one named in the padres fan download.

When I play such a historical game (like 2006 Twins), can I only "simulate" the 2006 season? Game over after the 2006 season?

I think I messed my game really up ...

What I wanted is to start a "career game" with the teams of 2006 season. As I like the Twins and thought they did well in 2006, they might have been a good choise for a fun game.
But 6 - 16 is not that good

[injury log]

You can keep playing for as long as you like- till the year 2707 if you want. The game will start generating fictional players though, either as free agents, or as players you can draft- otherwise with retirements and injuries, you might not have enough guys to fill the rosters.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by injury log

I believe, since he has started from a 2006 season, that the settings here won't matter- the game has no future seasons with which to judge potential, so potentials will be made equal to overall ratings regardless of the setting chosen. Since the overall ratings are designed to produce correct results for the 2006 season, all players should be 'that good' to start the year. Of course potentials will change a lot because of the game engine, though it's random who receives the boosts and who receives the hits.

I do find it very strange that there are 9-man pitching staffs, and 186 pitch games, which makes me think the League Setup is set up for a different era altogether. If you go to the Game menu --> Game Setup --> League Setup, and choose the 'Strategy' tab, check the settings for:

-Use of relievers
-Use of closers
-Pitcher endurance

These should probably be set to 'Very Often', 'Very Often' and 'Low' if you want to simulate contemporary MLB baseball.

This is likely the problem and explains the staffs set at 9. As an example my current MLB set up with endurance set at normal results in relievers rarely getting into more than 60 games. The majority pitch less than 50.

The AI will alway overuse pitchers (ie pitch count). I put pitch counts on certain guys just to prevent them from getting abused.

LOL be careful when setting pitch counts. I set one guy for 40 but must have missed the zero. Took me a few weeks to see that he was not pitching any innings.

[Loeffle]

Originally Posted by RchW

This is likely the problem and explains the staffs set at 9. As an example my current MLB set up with endurance set at normal results in relievers rarely getting into more than 60 games. The majority pitch less than 50.

The AI will alway overuse pitchers (ie pitch count). I put pitch counts on certain guys just to prevent them from getting abused.

LOL be careful when setting pitch counts. I set one guy for 40 but must have missed the zero. Took me a few weeks to see that he was not pitching any innings.

Yep, that was the problem I guess. Newbie mistake

Also the low ratings of the Twins seemed to be figured out. Had the wrong scouting ...

Started a new game with "right" options now. 2007 Brewers Hit in two games more homeruns than my 2006 Twins in 15 games ...

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Loeffle

Yep, that was the problem I guess. Newbie mistake

Also the low ratings of the Twins seemed to be figured out. Had the wrong scouting ...

Started a new game with "right" options now. 2007 Brewers Hit in two games more homeruns than my 2006 Twins in 15 games ...

No problem. Go easy on yourself. I've been playing since v6 came out and I doubt if I know half of what I need to. I also have gigs of abandoned leagues.

[Powderguy]

Originally Posted by Loeffle

Yep, that was the problem I guess. Newbie mistake

Also the low ratings of the Twins seemed to be figured out. Had the wrong scouting ...

Started a new game with "right" options now. 2007 Brewers Hit in two games more homeruns than my 2006 Twins in 15 games ...

Glad you got your problem fixed.

[Loeffle]

Originally Posted by Powderguy

Glad you got your problem fixed.

Yep Thought I would manage without reading 500 pages manual But you guys helped me a lot ...

3-1 with the Brew Crew. They hit homeruns, draw tons of walks and pitch decent so far