 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Sim Forums » Baseball Enhancements » Out of Position Players Should Penalize Hitting
gsdm
From what I can see, the Sim Dynasty team has a lot of stuff on their plate already, but I figured it couldnā??t hurt to add one more thing :)
Out of Position Players Should Penalize Hitting
January 17, 2003 at 05:30PM View BBCode
I've seen some references to this in some of the other discussions. My team which has all-star caliber players at each position is getting out-hit on occasion by teams with 1b playing as C, or 4 SS in the field, etc. I've noticed this quirk, so I've started using my backup SS to play 2b and my backup 3b to play 1b versus certain pitchers. I think it would be more realistic to see players offensive skills affected by playing a new position (as well as their defensive penalties). More trading would occur if you forced owners to have players at their natural positions; otherwise, if someone luckily drafts all stud pitchers and a ton of good outfielders/shortstops/3B, they can easily win a pennant. Also, single season leagues whose owners drop out before season starts would be more likely to be beat by "every" team, since they would have never properly adjusted their lineups and it would not effect the pennant races as much and allow the other owners to enjoy the game more.From what I can see, the Sim Dynasty team has a lot of stuff on their plate already, but I figured it couldnā??t hurt to add one more thing :)
tysonlowery
What do other people think?
January 17, 2003 at 08:10PM View BBCode
This could be accomplished rather easily (I think) in the programming.What do other people think?
FiveToolPlayer
January 17, 2003 at 09:07PM View BBCode
I think it's a decent idea. Penalties shouldn't be too drastic though. If a LF is playing RF, his hitting shouldn't be penalized much.
andrew
January 17, 2003 at 09:20PM View BBCode
I don't know, it seems that instead of penalizing a players offensive ability we could just make it even harder to play out of position. gsdm makes a good point of using this to penitalize goast teams though.
geoffrey13
How about off-season training as well? Send someone to the instructional league to learn a new position or something.
hitting
January 17, 2003 at 09:43PM View BBCode
If there is a penalty it should be tiny. Maybe only a noticeable penalty if someone is making a very hard switch like 1B to C or something. Most switches shouldn't be so tough that someone will stop hitting.How about off-season training as well? Send someone to the instructional league to learn a new position or something.
gsdm
Also, one suggestion I read in another post about describing in more detail where a hit got through the infield would make it easier to see the impact of out of position players in the field. I can't tell what impact it's making in my games, because not many errors are occurring. At least in batting, when you see an A+ CF playing C go 0-12 in one series, you'd realize the effect of him playing at such a difficult position...
Adjustments should be similar to defense chart...
January 17, 2003 at 10:04PM View BBCode
The penalties don't have to be drastic. I wouldn't have a problem with no penalties for a lf, cf, rf swapping positions (although there are cases in MLB where even these light switches have been blamed for sub-par perfromance - see Terrence Long in OAK). One the other hand, the penalties should be extremely drastic for any position player moving to C, or else everyone could put any stud in to Catch! SS and 3b should also have harsh penalties (Edgar Alfonzo's power dropped off considerably moving from 2b to 3b). Moving to 2b or OF is less of a impact, but a player feeling comfortable at his position does impact his performance (see Chuck Knoblauch post MN days). 1b could have the least penalties, since in the majors, that's where most top sluggers who can't field end up (if they are in NL). If you really want to simulate true performance on the field, I think feeling comfortale at your position in the field has to come into play, at least a little.Also, one suggestion I read in another post about describing in more detail where a hit got through the infield would make it easier to see the impact of out of position players in the field. I can't tell what impact it's making in my games, because not many errors are occurring. At least in batting, when you see an A+ CF playing C go 0-12 in one series, you'd realize the effect of him playing at such a difficult position...
andrew
January 17, 2003 at 10:11PM View BBCode
You are certainly right about switching to catcher. That should have a considerable effect on offensive numbers. Likewise maybe a catcher who plays 1B could improve a little at the plate.
celamantia
January 18, 2003 at 12:30AM View BBCode
I can't see why defensive issues should affect offense.
geoffrey13
Back in 1988, after George Bell had won the MVP in 1987 the Jays wanted him to move from LF to DH. He didn't want to and the ensuing argument definitely affected both his hitting and fielding. He didn't have a great year with the bat and was godawful in the field. (even worse than usual, which was really really bad!!)
So it can make a difference. If the player spends a lot of extra time taking grounders they would lose BP time. If they're not comfortable at their position they might be thinking about a missed grounder when they should be concentrating on what the pitcher is doing to them. Of course there are a myriad of other reasons why a player would go into a slump as well. So seeing as our players all live in a perfect world with no distractions they shouldn't have too much trouble switching positions, should they? :D
mindset of the player
January 18, 2003 at 01:53AM View BBCode
It really all depends on the mind set of the player...and seeing as our players don't have minds it shouldn't matter!!!!Back in 1988, after George Bell had won the MVP in 1987 the Jays wanted him to move from LF to DH. He didn't want to and the ensuing argument definitely affected both his hitting and fielding. He didn't have a great year with the bat and was godawful in the field. (even worse than usual, which was really really bad!!)
So it can make a difference. If the player spends a lot of extra time taking grounders they would lose BP time. If they're not comfortable at their position they might be thinking about a missed grounder when they should be concentrating on what the pitcher is doing to them. Of course there are a myriad of other reasons why a player would go into a slump as well. So seeing as our players all live in a perfect world with no distractions they shouldn't have too much trouble switching positions, should they? :D
gsdm
http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?mode=player&playername=nobody&id=31164
He is a 1b drafted in 39th round of Casey Stengel draft. He is playing Catcher and batting leadoff on a so called "ghost" team, and he is out performing my 9th round LF who is leading All-Star vote getter in left field who is playing at his assigned position and leading off on my team which has an overall average of .301 compared to the "ghost" team's .261 team average.
Also note that my LF playing at his natural position has 4 errors compared to the 1b playing Catcher (3 errors).
http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?mode=player&playername=nobody&id=30937
If the goal is to make ABE simulate games as realistically as possible, then I think it's worth some time in investigating how to compensate teams who actively manage their teams and use players who fit into positions. If it were easy to play any field position in the majors, then there would be no need for minor leagues, just tryouts each spring and pick 15 best hitters and 10 best pitchers and allow manager to pick names from a hat to set the day's lineup.
Well, that's my opinion from the cheap seats. I guess you veteran dynasty players may have other views...
I'm just glad to see a rookie can shake things up in the clubhouse every once in a while :)
Making the Simulation More Accurate
January 18, 2003 at 03:35AM View BBCode
One of the reason's I'm suggesting this improvement is due to players like:http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?mode=player&playername=nobody&id=31164
He is a 1b drafted in 39th round of Casey Stengel draft. He is playing Catcher and batting leadoff on a so called "ghost" team, and he is out performing my 9th round LF who is leading All-Star vote getter in left field who is playing at his assigned position and leading off on my team which has an overall average of .301 compared to the "ghost" team's .261 team average.
Also note that my LF playing at his natural position has 4 errors compared to the 1b playing Catcher (3 errors).
http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?mode=player&playername=nobody&id=30937
If the goal is to make ABE simulate games as realistically as possible, then I think it's worth some time in investigating how to compensate teams who actively manage their teams and use players who fit into positions. If it were easy to play any field position in the majors, then there would be no need for minor leagues, just tryouts each spring and pick 15 best hitters and 10 best pitchers and allow manager to pick names from a hat to set the day's lineup.
Well, that's my opinion from the cheap seats. I guess you veteran dynasty players may have other views...
I'm just glad to see a rookie can shake things up in the clubhouse every once in a while :)
khakurat
we have some serious shortages at several positions in the mays league, but once owners are able to modify players positions, i don't think increased penalties for out-of-position-play would be a bad thing.
January 18, 2003 at 03:41AM View BBCode
i think you're making a lot of assumptions there geoffrey. that's how i explain performance problems with my guys: digibooze, digiwhores, digidrugs, etc. and since the idea is to simulate the real game, gsdm's suggestion has a lot of merit. i don't think the penalties to should be overwhelming, and if they were instituted along with the position modifications tyson has been suggesting, i think they could both prove excellant enhancements.we have some serious shortages at several positions in the mays league, but once owners are able to modify players positions, i don't think increased penalties for out-of-position-play would be a bad thing.
jer2911
I would be strongly against anything that would seriously affect a player's offensive output. I think that there should be a more realistic way than this to curb playing players drastically out of position.
January 18, 2003 at 07:15AM View BBCode
I dont really think there should be a penalty there. If there was one, it should be barely noticable for most position switches, (if any at all), and only for a major switch, (CF to C, C to SS, etc.), but even that should be minor.I would be strongly against anything that would seriously affect a player's offensive output. I think that there should be a more realistic way than this to curb playing players drastically out of position.
andrew
Also just to clarify my position on this issue, I don't think switching positions should effect (affect?) offence except for maybe switching to catcher simply because of how much that position wears on a player.
January 18, 2003 at 07:49AM View BBCode
One last thing gsdm, there is a logic built in that makes players on goast teams preforme significanly worse after their owner hasn't checked in for at least 2 weeks. So you should be starting to see a drop of in those "ghost" teams stats around now.Also just to clarify my position on this issue, I don't think switching positions should effect (affect?) offence except for maybe switching to catcher simply because of how much that position wears on a player.
Bob
Even more important, IMHO, is that playing out of position should lead to more hits by the opposition. Right now I think the impact is limited to # of errors committed and # of baserunners thrown out. Let's face it, if you put Ivan Rodriguez (who is a great defensive catcher) at SS, his limited range will prevent him from getting to many ground balls that an average SS would turn into a groundout. Those plays don't show up as errors, they turn up as hits. I think that adding that sort of functionality is the best way to penalize defenders playing out of position.
January 18, 2003 at 11:50AM View BBCode
Not sure if I agree that offense should be impacted if a player plays out of position. If so, the impact should be slight and only when playing significantly out of position. However, I totally agree with gsdm that we need to make it tougher for players to play out of position. I think the defensive penalties need to be much stiffer -- particularly once Tyson finishes the upgrade that will allow players to learn a new position.Even more important, IMHO, is that playing out of position should lead to more hits by the opposition. Right now I think the impact is limited to # of errors committed and # of baserunners thrown out. Let's face it, if you put Ivan Rodriguez (who is a great defensive catcher) at SS, his limited range will prevent him from getting to many ground balls that an average SS would turn into a groundout. Those plays don't show up as errors, they turn up as hits. I think that adding that sort of functionality is the best way to penalize defenders playing out of position.
gsdm
At least everyone seems to agree that they don't notice the drawbacks of out of position players on their defense very much. When I see that a 1b and LF in my league both playing C have less errors than my All-Star LF playing in his natural position, I'm definitely for more drastic penalties for any player moving to C!!!
Well, off to the next topic...
At least make defensive penalties stiffer...
January 19, 2003 at 12:14AM View BBCode
Well, it seems that the "Legends" are divided among the effect of a player out of his natural position on his hitting performance. I guess my "examples" weren't compelling enough.At least everyone seems to agree that they don't notice the drawbacks of out of position players on their defense very much. When I see that a 1b and LF in my league both playing C have less errors than my All-Star LF playing in his natural position, I'm definitely for more drastic penalties for any player moving to C!!!
Well, off to the next topic...
jkuo
Now come to think of this "weakness" of mine, I would say it's mostly due to the fear of having more errors that would mock up the game bad even that no offence can compensate, NOT the fear of they not performing at plate...
But then, as a matter of fact, I should be thinking about how playing out of position could potentially affect a player's ability to hit the ball at plate...and you should be too.
Because if you are not, you should be asking for the ability to place pitchers anywhere in the line-up playing out of position (say 1B, or even C) because sometimes some pitchers can hit better than other fielders and it should be tempting to put them #3 or #4 in the line-up?! Or maybe you should assume a pitcher can only hit as well as he can only when he is pitching, i.e. playing in his natural position.
I think I am not making a great argument here, but I think there should be a penalty in hitting for playing out of positions, but i have to agree the penalties should be less on offense than on defence and the proportion of penalties should be the same, i.e. if a CF play LF is incurring almost no defensive penalty, there shouldn't be too much penalty on the defence.
But if on the other hand a C is playing CF, which means LOTS of defensive penalties, the same should apply to the offensive penalty.
well
January 31, 2003 at 03:34AM View BBCode
i think a lot of good points are being made here and i am slightly swinging to the offensive penalties because i for one wouldn't switch players out of their natural positions by too far even though they have great offensive ability and if they don't switch position, i just won't play them.Now come to think of this "weakness" of mine, I would say it's mostly due to the fear of having more errors that would mock up the game bad even that no offence can compensate, NOT the fear of they not performing at plate...
But then, as a matter of fact, I should be thinking about how playing out of position could potentially affect a player's ability to hit the ball at plate...and you should be too.
Because if you are not, you should be asking for the ability to place pitchers anywhere in the line-up playing out of position (say 1B, or even C) because sometimes some pitchers can hit better than other fielders and it should be tempting to put them #3 or #4 in the line-up?! Or maybe you should assume a pitcher can only hit as well as he can only when he is pitching, i.e. playing in his natural position.
I think I am not making a great argument here, but I think there should be a penalty in hitting for playing out of positions, but i have to agree the penalties should be less on offense than on defence and the proportion of penalties should be the same, i.e. if a CF play LF is incurring almost no defensive penalty, there shouldn't be too much penalty on the defence.
But if on the other hand a C is playing CF, which means LOTS of defensive penalties, the same should apply to the offensive penalty.
disciple
Also, once the player has learned his new position, the hitting penalty should go away for the new position AND his old position - he shouldn't be penalized if the manager puts him back in at his old position.
utility players
January 31, 2003 at 12:51PM View BBCode
As long as the penalty doesn't affect the utility player concept (generic infielders, generic outfielders), I agree with a moderate penalty when the player is playing way out of position.Also, once the player has learned his new position, the hitting penalty should go away for the new position AND his old position - he shouldn't be penalized if the manager puts him back in at his old position.
loser
What do you think?
position groups
February 08, 2003 at 09:05AM View BBCode
Wouldn't it make the most baseball sense to group the positions? Just off the top of my head, middle infielders, corner guys, OFs, and C all by themselves. Pretty slight penalties for switching w/in the same group, pretty drastic for going to another one altogether (notwithstanding the learning a new position deal).What do you think?
gsdm
Good Idea
February 08, 2003 at 01:28PM View BBCode
Position Groups are definitely a good compromise. I think it addresses the concerns of the Dynasty Players having flexibility on their teams and it also addresses my interest in the topic for one year leagues.
Zukatesta
It seems to me the sim is missing something simple and obvious early on: a player has the ability to become a quality defensive player, or a slugger, or whatever, early on, and generally improves toward that goal while remaining stagnant, at least relatively, in areas he has less aptitude for. That is to say, a light-hitting, slick fielding shortstop rarely ever does develop any significant ability to hit, while the fat, lumbering, slugging first baseman never does move to shortstop.
If you want it to be realistic, rather then imposing penalties that don't really exist, I would be inclined to curtail improvements in selected areas of a player's development. For example, that guy drafted at shortstop who has all the defensive ability in the sim, but is a D rated hitter across the board, will never really develop enough hitting to be an asset anywhere other than SS. One the flip side, the A/A slugger with the D glove will never, no matter what, be able to gather enough ability to play anywhere other than first base. Maybe third base. And the only way to groom a superstar for any position and batting order duty? Give him across the board skills, and a lot of coaching points.
February 13, 2003 at 06:23PM View BBCode
I like position groups, but it excludes the rare occasions when a catcher does move out to second base, ala Craig Biggio.It seems to me the sim is missing something simple and obvious early on: a player has the ability to become a quality defensive player, or a slugger, or whatever, early on, and generally improves toward that goal while remaining stagnant, at least relatively, in areas he has less aptitude for. That is to say, a light-hitting, slick fielding shortstop rarely ever does develop any significant ability to hit, while the fat, lumbering, slugging first baseman never does move to shortstop.
If you want it to be realistic, rather then imposing penalties that don't really exist, I would be inclined to curtail improvements in selected areas of a player's development. For example, that guy drafted at shortstop who has all the defensive ability in the sim, but is a D rated hitter across the board, will never really develop enough hitting to be an asset anywhere other than SS. One the flip side, the A/A slugger with the D glove will never, no matter what, be able to gather enough ability to play anywhere other than first base. Maybe third base. And the only way to groom a superstar for any position and batting order duty? Give him across the board skills, and a lot of coaching points.
Pages: 1