|
|
Post by Sha-Le Unique on Apr 28, 2015 15:08:38 GMT -5
I think some people in the league would prefer all players have good brilliant and maybe one average rating..... sim in a make believe world where the whole league is on steroids lol lol that's a complete exaggeration. Again, if certain players were the very best in their respective eras, they should look the part in OOTP as well, within reason. Not saying any of them deserving all brilliants by default...just in certain categories. |
|
|
|
Post by Sha-Le Unique on Apr 28, 2015 15:12:21 GMT -5
I didn't make Seaver all brilliant in LBB even though I would've loved to see it because he didn't deserve them in every category. He got 4 brilliants and good in walks because that's what he deserved.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sha-Le Unique on Apr 28, 2015 15:18:20 GMT -5
Agreed with darryl....some guys are great and get into the hall but they are not complete studs. Can't just look at a name and be like "oh man that guy...brilliants across the board cause I'm excited and everyone should be brillaint brillaint brilliant and oh brilliant" lol I already thoroughly looked through baseballreference.com for all 5 of those pitchers that I strongly feel need to be upgraded. OOTP 5 is already flawed as is, so if players deserve the benefit of the doubt, there's no reason why they shouldn't get it. |
|
|
|
Post by soonerfantu on Apr 28, 2015 15:56:57 GMT -5
For the record, I'm against anything approaching all Brilliant's, or even all but one Brilliant's.
Most of these guys are Good across the board, or something close. I'd probably add one Brilliant rating. And maybe bump Carlton's BB talent to Good. Something like that. I'm basically saying take where they should be rated, and change one, MAYBE two talents up one. But really just one talent is probably enough in most cases.
|
|
Darryl
New Member
California Angels
Posts: 2,412
|
Post by Darryl on Apr 28, 2015 17:53:10 GMT -5
Agreed with darryl....some guys are great and get into the hall but they are not complete studs. Can't just look at a name and be like "oh man that guy...brilliants across the board cause I'm excited and everyone should be brillaint brillaint brilliant and oh brilliant" lol I already thoroughly looked through baseballreference.com for all 5 of those pitchers that I strongly feel need to be upgraded. OOTP 5 is already flawed as is, so if players deserve the benefit of the doubt, there's no reason why they shouldn't get it. Upping guys in talents they shouldn't be upped in isn't the benefit of the doubt. It's talent stacking. Carlton is not even in the top 500 for BB/9 and is second all time in walks. Koosman sneaks in at 498 in the BB/9 rankings. McGraw you are Met fan dreaming. He was good not great. Heck if anything after viewing them all again against the rating chart Palmer should actually be avg in walks. Sutton is right on the money. Here is what I would change. Take away the very inconsistent ratings from Carew,McGraw and Sutton. Beyond that unless Chris wants to slant the stats or Matt who has been the draft guy before me tells us that he has used an adjusted format all the time, it should stay as is. If the case is we do slant stats we based on their decision then a new chart should be put together strictly for this league. |
|
|
|
Post by CSCommish on Apr 28, 2015 18:06:29 GMT -5
I already thoroughly looked through baseballreference.com for all 5 of those pitchers that I strongly feel need to be upgraded. OOTP 5 is already flawed as is, so if players deserve the benefit of the doubt, there's no reason why they shouldn't get it. Upping guys in talents they shouldn't be upped in isn't the benefit of the doubt. It's talent stacking. Carlton is not even in the top 500 for BB/9 and is second all time in walks. Koosman sneaks in at 498 in the BB/9 rankings. McGraw you are Met fan dreaming. He was good not great. Heck if anything after viewing them all again against the rating chart Palmer should actually be avg in walks. Sutton is right on the money. Here is what I would change. Take away the very inconsistent ratings from Carew,McGraw and Sutton. Beyond that unless Chris wants to slant the stats or Matt who has been the draft guy before me tells us that he has used an adjusted format all the time, it should stay as is. If the case is we do slant stats we based on their decision then a new chart should be put together strictly for this league. I think the only thing I may consider is bumping Palmer and Carlton's ratings to Brilliant in Homers ONLY. Maybe make Palmer AVG in Walks. We have a system in place that can artificially raise ratings from Average to Good anyway. Also, make sure the top 5 (including Carew) are Durable and NOT inconsistent. Koosman and McGraw seem OK as is. And I have not read everyone's comments or even really looked into Darryl's work. Otherwise seems spot on once I randomly give 1 AVG and 3 Fair ratings to about 75% of the 1-star scrubs. And is Break going to input the work in? I have NO TIME at all this week. |
|
|
|
Post by CSCommish on Apr 28, 2015 18:08:41 GMT -5
I'm really opposed to Brilliant in Hits Against unless you are: Nolan Ryan, Tom Seaver, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, Kerry Wood, Clayton Kershaw and similar. Oh, and Mariano Rivera, Bruce Sutter, Rich Gossage and Trevor Hoffman too.
|
|
Matt
Other 
Posts: 5,757
|
Post by Matt on Apr 28, 2015 18:47:20 GMT -5
I'm really opposed to Brilliant in Hits Against unless you are: Nolan Ryan, Tom Seaver, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, Kerry Wood, Clayton Kershaw and similar. Oh, and Mariano Rivera, Bruce Sutter, Rich Gossage and Trevor Hoffman too. Gibson only got where he was with help of PD and a Christmas gift. I think he was all goods except for K |
|
|
|
Post by Danny Glover on Apr 28, 2015 20:23:15 GMT -5
I'm really opposed to Brilliant in Hits Against unless you are: Nolan Ryan, Tom Seaver, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, Kerry Wood, Clayton Kershaw and similar. Oh, and Mariano Rivera, Bruce Sutter, Rich Gossage and Trevor Hoffman too. I can't wait to have Nolan Ryan |
|
bigmark
General Manager 
Chicago White Sox
Posts: 6,175
|
Post by bigmark on Apr 28, 2015 21:16:28 GMT -5
I'm really opposed to Brilliant in Hits Against unless you are: Nolan Ryan, Tom Seaver, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, Kerry Wood, Clayton Kershaw and similar. Oh, and Mariano Rivera, Bruce Sutter, Rich Gossage and Trevor Hoffman too. Roy Halladay  |
|
Darryl
New Member
California Angels
Posts: 2,412
|
Post by Darryl on Apr 28, 2015 21:30:38 GMT -5
I'm really opposed to Brilliant in Hits Against unless you are: Nolan Ryan, Tom Seaver, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, Kerry Wood, Clayton Kershaw and similar. Oh, and Mariano Rivera, Bruce Sutter, Rich Gossage and Trevor Hoffman too. Roy Halladay Greg Maddox |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2015 22:03:59 GMT -5
The Pete Rose thing was kind of an exception for me. In the real ratings world, I think only Tony Gwynn would get a BR based on ratings, I just had a hard time saying the all time hit leader wouldn't be BR. If there was a player that I thought maybe was getting the shaft, a lot of times I would look at things on a year by year basis. For instance, if a player had a 15 year career, and his career totals said he was only G in HR's, but maybe 7 or 8 of his overall seasons rated as BR, I'd make exceptions there, or, if it was REALLY close to being BR, or the next level up, I may make an exception. Like, within a HR or 2, or 3 or 4 K's, something like that. I think technically Fergie was G in BB's and BR in K's, but REALLY close to BR in BB's and I made him BR/BR. Or maybe it was the other way around. That was how I looked at things. I also made sure to make sure the VEL was in line with the K ratings, and tried to put the GB% in line with the HR talent ratings. Also, making sure all of the guys that were starters the majority of their career had at LEAST 3 pitches.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sha-Le Unique on Apr 28, 2015 22:43:27 GMT -5
I'm really opposed to Brilliant in Hits Against unless you are: Nolan Ryan, Tom Seaver, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, Kerry Wood, Clayton Kershaw and similar. Oh, and Mariano Rivera, Bruce Sutter, Rich Gossage and Trevor Hoffman too. Now this is good to know |
|
|
|
Post by Sha-Le Unique on Apr 28, 2015 22:44:32 GMT -5
Upping guys in talents they shouldn't be upped in isn't the benefit of the doubt. It's talent stacking. Carlton is not even in the top 500 for BB/9 and is second all time in walks. Koosman sneaks in at 498 in the BB/9 rankings. McGraw you are Met fan dreaming. He was good not great. Heck if anything after viewing them all again against the rating chart Palmer should actually be avg in walks. Sutton is right on the money. Here is what I would change. Take away the very inconsistent ratings from Carew,McGraw and Sutton. Beyond that unless Chris wants to slant the stats or Matt who has been the draft guy before me tells us that he has used an adjusted format all the time, it should stay as is. If the case is we do slant stats we based on their decision then a new chart should be put together strictly for this league. I think the only thing I may consider is bumping Palmer and Carlton's ratings to Brilliant in Homers ONLY. Maybe make Palmer AVG in Walks. We have a system in place that can artificially raise ratings from Average to Good anyway. Also, make sure the top 5 (including Carew) are Durable and NOT inconsistent. Koosman and McGraw seem OK as is. And I have not read everyone's comments or even really looked into Darryl's work. Otherwise seems spot on once I randomly give 1 AVG and 3 Fair ratings to about 75% of the 1-star scrubs. And is Break going to input the work in? I have NO TIME at all this week. Break said hopefully he can start tomorrow but he didn't have time today. |
|
Matt
Other
Posts: 5,757
|
Post by Matt on Apr 29, 2015 9:39:26 GMT -5
I'm really opposed to Brilliant in Hits Against unless you are: Nolan Ryan, Tom Seaver, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, Kerry Wood, Clayton Kershaw and similar. Oh, and Mariano Rivera, Bruce Sutter, Rich Gossage and Trevor Hoffman too. Now this is good to know Now you know which years to "shale" to get the top picks! |
|
|
|
Post by Sha-Le Unique on Apr 29, 2015 13:13:22 GMT -5
Now you know which years to "shale" to get the top picks! Didn't say it for that particular reason... |
|
|
|
Post by Sha-Le Unique on Apr 29, 2015 13:13:40 GMT -5
Only to avoid potential arguments in the future
|
|
|
|
Post by Sha-Le Unique on Apr 29, 2015 13:14:54 GMT -5
It will definitely be interesting to see if Palmer still gets FPR'd even without brilliant hits
|
|
|
|
Post by Sha-Le Unique on Apr 29, 2015 13:15:29 GMT -5
Plus, does Adam bite the bullet with Carew? Or does he wait a few decades for Mauer or Johan?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2015 13:37:16 GMT -5
Melton is listed as a CF although he doesn't play there. He SHOULD have defensive ratings at 1B and RF.
Murcer should have defensive ratings at all 3 OF positions and SS/3B believe it or not.
Was suprised Joe Rudi was only AVG in HR's. I looked, and that's probably right, but I sure remember him as being more of a GOOD HR type of guy.
I would guess Don Sutton's VEL should be a little higher, and I'd like to see Palmer with 4 pitches at least, I think that may give him a better chance of living up to ratings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Apr 29, 2015 14:00:05 GMT -5
Lol at using all time bb/9 as a reference point. If a guy is borderline he should get it. Chances are he's not going to maximize anyways.
|
|
Darryl
New Member
California Angels
Posts: 2,412
|
Post by Darryl on Apr 29, 2015 16:47:42 GMT -5
Lol at using all time bb/9 as a reference point. If a guy is borderline he should get it. Chances are he's not going to maximize anyways. Actually is actually great to use because it is one of the few walk related stats readily available for pitchers from all eras and it carries over eras much better then the other available stat which is BBs. Thanks though lol. Problem is here certain parties don't understand the meaning of the word borderline. Im waiting for said people to argue Wade Boggs should be rated good in homers because of his 24 in 1987 and Brady Anderson should be brilliant because of his 50 in 96. |
|
Darryl
New Member
California Angels
Posts: 2,412
|
Post by Darryl on Apr 29, 2015 16:53:02 GMT -5
Melton is listed as a CF although he doesn't play there. He SHOULD have defensive ratings at 1B and RF. Murcer should have defensive ratings at all 3 OF positions and SS/3B believe it or not. Was suprised Joe Rudi was only AVG in HR's. I looked, and that's probably right, but I sure remember him as being more of a GOOD HR type of guy. I would guess Don Sutton's VEL should be a little higher, and I'd like to see Palmer with 4 pitches at least, I think that may give him a better chance of living up to ratings. What did you use as a cut off for positions? I left Murcer with RF,CF cause he played 844 games in RF, 790 in CF vs 57 in LF, 31 at 3rd and 30 at SS. You're right on the Melton thing I took away his CF but forgot to shift him to his new positon. |
|
bigmark
General Manager
Chicago White Sox
Posts: 6,175
|
Post by bigmark on Apr 29, 2015 17:20:22 GMT -5
Plus, does Adam bite the bullet with Carew? Or does he wait a few decades for Mauer or Johan? If he does itll be his 2nd fpr with killebrew....first team to do 2....how many points would he have left and wasnt the limit 2 per team? |
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Apr 29, 2015 17:33:03 GMT -5
Lol at using all time bb/9 as a reference point. If a guy is borderline he should get it. Chances are he's not going to maximize anyways. Actually is actually great to use because it is one of the few walk related stats readily available for pitchers from all eras and it carries over eras much better then the other available stat which is BBs. Thanks though lol. Problem is here certain parties don't understand the meaning of the word borderline. Im waiting for said people to argue Wade Boggs should be rated good in homers because of his 24 in 1987 and Brady Anderson should be brilliant because of his 50 in 96. OOTP values walks higher than real life does. Guys who are borderline in walks should DEFINITELY get the bump at all times. Otherwise we're going to have a league full of Good walks hitters walking 90+ times. |
|
