 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Baseball Beta Testing » Beta News » Is Anyone Paying Attention?
CaseyStengel
Either the Beta League is in a major batting slump or Admin has given up trying to resolve this anomaly.
Is Anyone Paying Attention?
July 27, 2013 at 05:12PM View BBCode
Do these stats look normal? Does Major League Baseball produce equivalent stats?Either the Beta League is in a major batting slump or Admin has given up trying to resolve this anomaly.
CaseyStengel has attached this image:
tm4559
the sad thing is, i think he is actually on the right track. i think the really good pitchers should put up really good numbers, that was kind of the goal. its too good for them, and its too good for the ones that are not so good (low a and a- pitchers are putting up too good numbers).
there is also a thing at work because of the development we are. using. the variable development, i don't know if it works right with respect to pitchers and hitters. the problem is if a hitter happens to be a gem, it spreads the improves out to much.
if a pitcher happens to be a gem, it just has those two skills. and if it stays in the minors, it gets like 60-80 chances. and we are pretty much seeing, if it stays in the minors, its going to improve better there, no matter what curve its on.
because of the higher number of chances (this relates to the vd, not because the vd has anything to do with the chances, but because folks realize there is a great payoff with pitchers, more pitchers are drafted, they all get full development, there just ends up being way to many of them, some of them of course are on a development curve that ultimately finds them very good.) even if a pitchers is not a gem, the chances are it ends up pretty good. it just has a short career.
we can also see that some of the better rated hitters are kind of head and shoulders above their weaker counterparts. that is a good thing. i think the dominant player part of the code is working fairly well.
its levels, the whole thing is tilted too far to the pitchers, how much, its hard to say. as i say, there is more than the matchup at work here, you got irregular talent on the teams, variable development, the improvement scedule for pitchers is messed up should be fixed with respect to the number of chances in the minors.
this is not that big of a thing over on the regular side of the site, because with cp, these thing aren't going to stay in the minors and get all those chances, resources are too short. the folks that like system 3, they probably like it and they should just be allowed to have it, its their money. it might even be realistic, i don't know.
all that being said, i believe if someone that had time to tinker with it a little (the matchup, i mean, it seems tyson might not have time or has lost interest in it, thats ok, its his thing to pursue) it could be fixed up pretty easy. if i could acess the code, i think i could tinker with the matchup until the numbers came up pretty good. as i say, i think its all gone in the right direction-better players do much better. its a trick of getting some sort of a top layer of really good players (a small group, to be sure, it should be small but they should be kind of clearly dominant) and then some kind of shades of good to even poor (it seems we have a plenty of that among the hitters) between all the other players. they would fall into a really wide range, pitchers and hitters.
but the matchup, its obviously not there now, when the teams play in the playoffs, and the pitchers are so dominant some team scores three runs in five games, its just obviously off. the pitchers can't be that good.
July 27, 2013 at 05:57PM View BBCode
well its been messed up for a while.the sad thing is, i think he is actually on the right track. i think the really good pitchers should put up really good numbers, that was kind of the goal. its too good for them, and its too good for the ones that are not so good (low a and a- pitchers are putting up too good numbers).
there is also a thing at work because of the development we are. using. the variable development, i don't know if it works right with respect to pitchers and hitters. the problem is if a hitter happens to be a gem, it spreads the improves out to much.
if a pitcher happens to be a gem, it just has those two skills. and if it stays in the minors, it gets like 60-80 chances. and we are pretty much seeing, if it stays in the minors, its going to improve better there, no matter what curve its on.
because of the higher number of chances (this relates to the vd, not because the vd has anything to do with the chances, but because folks realize there is a great payoff with pitchers, more pitchers are drafted, they all get full development, there just ends up being way to many of them, some of them of course are on a development curve that ultimately finds them very good.) even if a pitchers is not a gem, the chances are it ends up pretty good. it just has a short career.
we can also see that some of the better rated hitters are kind of head and shoulders above their weaker counterparts. that is a good thing. i think the dominant player part of the code is working fairly well.
its levels, the whole thing is tilted too far to the pitchers, how much, its hard to say. as i say, there is more than the matchup at work here, you got irregular talent on the teams, variable development, the improvement scedule for pitchers is messed up should be fixed with respect to the number of chances in the minors.
this is not that big of a thing over on the regular side of the site, because with cp, these thing aren't going to stay in the minors and get all those chances, resources are too short. the folks that like system 3, they probably like it and they should just be allowed to have it, its their money. it might even be realistic, i don't know.
all that being said, i believe if someone that had time to tinker with it a little (the matchup, i mean, it seems tyson might not have time or has lost interest in it, thats ok, its his thing to pursue) it could be fixed up pretty easy. if i could acess the code, i think i could tinker with the matchup until the numbers came up pretty good. as i say, i think its all gone in the right direction-better players do much better. its a trick of getting some sort of a top layer of really good players (a small group, to be sure, it should be small but they should be kind of clearly dominant) and then some kind of shades of good to even poor (it seems we have a plenty of that among the hitters) between all the other players. they would fall into a really wide range, pitchers and hitters.
but the matchup, its obviously not there now, when the teams play in the playoffs, and the pitchers are so dominant some team scores three runs in five games, its just obviously off. the pitchers can't be that good.
tm4559
except the two divisons would play with different code.
and i would first play where eight teams played 10 seasons or so with the code just lke it is, and the other eight teams (the other division) would run each season making changes to the code, and compare the results, and keep on until you got it right. i know the seasons can just be made to run right on through, in minutes. that is how i would do it, if the code were mine.
July 27, 2013 at 06:20PM View BBCode
(ultimately, as i pointed out before, the differences in talent on teams makes it hard. if i was going to do it, i would start by cloning/creating 16 teams of a very definite kind of makeup, all identical. each team would contain some dominant pitchers (by grade, say A+, whatever) and hitters (of both sorts, A+/A with speed and A/A+ with speed, even a few straight 100 monsters, vs right and left, and then there would be hitters and pitchers to fill it out like we are used to seeing, everything from a+/c+ to c+/a+ pitchers and hitters and the stops in between and of course a-/a- things. but each team would be exactly the same, the injuries would be turned off, not development/improvement, they wouldn't get older nothing, all the settings the same, and the pitchers would all go off in the same order, ever lineup the same, everything would be completely normal across every, single team.except the two divisons would play with different code.
and i would first play where eight teams played 10 seasons or so with the code just lke it is, and the other eight teams (the other division) would run each season making changes to the code, and compare the results, and keep on until you got it right. i know the seasons can just be made to run right on through, in minutes. that is how i would do it, if the code were mine.
tworoosters
A guy like [url=http://beta.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?mode=player&playername=nobody&id=9810254]Dillon[/url] should be a successful hitter IMO, yet his career slugging % is .402 and he's never hit more than 20 homers or had an OPS above .780. To put that in perspective 70 hitters in MLB had an OPS of .780 or higher in 2012.
On the other hand 10 teams in Beta currently have team ERAs below 3.00, the last time any team in MLB had an ERA below 3.00 was 1989. Whatever is being tested isn't producing any results that relate to MLB, that's for sure.
July 28, 2013 at 04:10PM View BBCode
I must admit I have no idea what is being tested in Beta or the ASL, in Beta I've pretty much stopped doing anything with my team other than try and keep the roster relatively intact. I have zero idea what the schedule is, I went away for 10 days and missed two amateur drafts, and I have no clue as to why some hitters are relatively successful or even what success should be.A guy like [url=http://beta.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?mode=player&playername=nobody&id=9810254]Dillon[/url] should be a successful hitter IMO, yet his career slugging % is .402 and he's never hit more than 20 homers or had an OPS above .780. To put that in perspective 70 hitters in MLB had an OPS of .780 or higher in 2012.
On the other hand 10 teams in Beta currently have team ERAs below 3.00, the last time any team in MLB had an ERA below 3.00 was 1989. Whatever is being tested isn't producing any results that relate to MLB, that's for sure.
lvnwrth
July 29, 2013 at 07:53AM View BBCode
I'm surprised at the discussion here. I thought Casey Stengel's original question was merely rhetorical.
ballplayer3
August 02, 2013 at 04:10AM View BBCode
It seems like there was an attempt to test the dead-ball era, but it went beyond dead. It's more like the decomposed deadball era.Pages: 1