 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Baseball Beta Testing » Beta News » Major League position changes and ICs
CaseyStengel
If the penalty is implemented then I suggest that minor league players are drafted with multiple skill levels... infielders may have a primary position (100%), but also will have varying degrees at the other positions. In this way, owners don't have to start at zero if they need someone at a different position.
Same with outfielders... a left fielder is not a complete clutz at right or center field.
In addition... minor league players should have realistic fielding skills... for example a 3B with good range, but no arm should move to 1st base. Likewise a 1st baseman with a D- range and an A+ arm is unrealistic... what is he going to do.. throw the runner out at 3rd?
Age may be a factor in position changes... the outfielder, now 37 years old may be a better candidate at first than hobbeling around in the outfield.
Lastly... different question... has minor league training changed? Can a minor league player change positions while developing skills? I have ignored minor league position changes because of the length of time to change and the loss in skill development... have I missed something.
Well back to the conf. I'll check in again on Monday.
September 29, 2007 at 08:52PM View BBCode
I am out of town and have stumbled on this issue only because I got bored at the conference and ran to the business center... so this will be short.If the penalty is implemented then I suggest that minor league players are drafted with multiple skill levels... infielders may have a primary position (100%), but also will have varying degrees at the other positions. In this way, owners don't have to start at zero if they need someone at a different position.
Same with outfielders... a left fielder is not a complete clutz at right or center field.
In addition... minor league players should have realistic fielding skills... for example a 3B with good range, but no arm should move to 1st base. Likewise a 1st baseman with a D- range and an A+ arm is unrealistic... what is he going to do.. throw the runner out at 3rd?
Age may be a factor in position changes... the outfielder, now 37 years old may be a better candidate at first than hobbeling around in the outfield.
Lastly... different question... has minor league training changed? Can a minor league player change positions while developing skills? I have ignored minor league position changes because of the length of time to change and the loss in skill development... have I missed something.
Well back to the conf. I'll check in again on Monday.
tworoosters
Currently a player learns a new position at a static rate, regardless of how well he knows the position or if he played the position before.
In the Don Newcombe League I've been experimenting by flip-flopping catchers.
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?player=nobody&mode=stats&id=3663400]Jimmy McGinty[/url] was drafted as a catcher, and has played there sporadically during his major league career, but simply isn't as good as my regular catcher so I converted him to 1B.
McGinty is young, has decent defensive ratings, was originally a catcher and has played roughly 40% of his games at the position yet he "converts" back to the position at a rate of 0.3%.
It would seem logical to me that at a certain level (say 60%) the switch turns on and a player begins to convert faster rather than simply always converting at the same rate.
September 30, 2007 at 03:54PM View BBCode
Another thing to be considered, if we are going to punish positional changes at the major league level, is the % improvement as a player learns the position.Currently a player learns a new position at a static rate, regardless of how well he knows the position or if he played the position before.
In the Don Newcombe League I've been experimenting by flip-flopping catchers.
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?player=nobody&mode=stats&id=3663400]Jimmy McGinty[/url] was drafted as a catcher, and has played there sporadically during his major league career, but simply isn't as good as my regular catcher so I converted him to 1B.
McGinty is young, has decent defensive ratings, was originally a catcher and has played roughly 40% of his games at the position yet he "converts" back to the position at a rate of 0.3%.
It would seem logical to me that at a certain level (say 60%) the switch turns on and a player begins to convert faster rather than simply always converting at the same rate.
lvnwrth
How many times do catchers convert to a different position and then convert BACK to catcher? Gary Carter and Barry Foote took turns playing the OF with Montreal in the Seventies, while the Expos tried to figure out which one was their catcher of the future. But I'm guessing neither ever dropped below 90% (using SD terms) as a catcher.
Charlie Moore converted to RF when the Brewers acquired Ted Simmons in the early 1980's and he played there A LOT and caught very little. Then, when Simmons became DH material, Moore moved back behind the plate.
There may be others, but those are the only examples I can think off without searching baseball-reference.com, or some other similar site.
September 30, 2007 at 04:29PM View BBCode
On the one hand, your position makes sense. But, on the other hand, how realistic is it, at least for catchers - which is the example you use?How many times do catchers convert to a different position and then convert BACK to catcher? Gary Carter and Barry Foote took turns playing the OF with Montreal in the Seventies, while the Expos tried to figure out which one was their catcher of the future. But I'm guessing neither ever dropped below 90% (using SD terms) as a catcher.
Charlie Moore converted to RF when the Brewers acquired Ted Simmons in the early 1980's and he played there A LOT and caught very little. Then, when Simmons became DH material, Moore moved back behind the plate.
There may be others, but those are the only examples I can think off without searching baseball-reference.com, or some other similar site.
tworoosters
Using MLB as an example is simply not valid, for example BJ Surhoff converted to 3B from catcher at age 28 in less than 100 games - impossible in SIM.
Surhoff then played catcher, 3B, and converted to 1B and OF successfully after the age of 29 - again all virtually impossible in SIM. He also played until he was 41 years old, despite an "OS37" season that saw him garner only 75 at bats due to injury. I'm pretty sure ABE would have written him off then, and he made his first All Star appearance at 34 all things which wouldn't happen in SIM either but did occur in MLB.
Let's just stay with the understanding that all learning is static and occurs at the same rate, regardless of how much we have already learned about the subject.
Sorry for the tone but I get tired of people who focus on one small aspect without viewing the larger context.
I chose McGinty because he was a young player, therefore someone who would suffer from loss of improves, yet still experienced at 2 positions and had reasonable defensive skills just to see if ABE would recognize this and adjust the improvement rate. The fact that he was a C/1B was moot to the larger context of age and positional familiarity in development.
September 30, 2007 at 06:56PM View BBCode
Yes, lets focus on the one example rather than the overall issue.Using MLB as an example is simply not valid, for example BJ Surhoff converted to 3B from catcher at age 28 in less than 100 games - impossible in SIM.
Surhoff then played catcher, 3B, and converted to 1B and OF successfully after the age of 29 - again all virtually impossible in SIM. He also played until he was 41 years old, despite an "OS37" season that saw him garner only 75 at bats due to injury. I'm pretty sure ABE would have written him off then, and he made his first All Star appearance at 34 all things which wouldn't happen in SIM either but did occur in MLB.
Let's just stay with the understanding that all learning is static and occurs at the same rate, regardless of how much we have already learned about the subject.
Sorry for the tone but I get tired of people who focus on one small aspect without viewing the larger context.
I chose McGinty because he was a young player, therefore someone who would suffer from loss of improves, yet still experienced at 2 positions and had reasonable defensive skills just to see if ABE would recognize this and adjust the improvement rate. The fact that he was a C/1B was moot to the larger context of age and positional familiarity in development.
Admin
There are 1000 changes I'd like to make to the game, but rather than wait until all 1000 are complete I tend to work on a few, move them in, see how people like them, then work on a few more. We'll get all 1000 done eventually, but you have to start somewhere. And there can probably be an argument to hold change A back, until change B is complete. Someone can probably draw a chain all the way from change 1 to 1000 using that logic.
By that, I mean that I do have plans to make it easier for guys to re-learn a position. I have plans to totally revamp how position changes work, so that a guy can't do something unrealisitc like start as a 1B and end up as a SS. And I kind of like the idea of draftees being able to play multiple positions. Some of these ideas you are going to like, some of them you are going to hate. Some of them will come faster than you expected, some slower. Some may be made obsolete by other changes or shifts in the game.
Hopefully I make enough changes that you like to keep your interest, but invariably there will be changes you don't like. We can't please everybody. My approach is to continue to make changes to the game, rather than just leave it alone. Some may disagree with that approach.
Tyson
October 08, 2007 at 08:20PM View BBCode
Casey - see the thread about minor league position changes. That should qwell any concerns there. That is a much larger change than anything else we have taken on.There are 1000 changes I'd like to make to the game, but rather than wait until all 1000 are complete I tend to work on a few, move them in, see how people like them, then work on a few more. We'll get all 1000 done eventually, but you have to start somewhere. And there can probably be an argument to hold change A back, until change B is complete. Someone can probably draw a chain all the way from change 1 to 1000 using that logic.
By that, I mean that I do have plans to make it easier for guys to re-learn a position. I have plans to totally revamp how position changes work, so that a guy can't do something unrealisitc like start as a 1B and end up as a SS. And I kind of like the idea of draftees being able to play multiple positions. Some of these ideas you are going to like, some of them you are going to hate. Some of them will come faster than you expected, some slower. Some may be made obsolete by other changes or shifts in the game.
Hopefully I make enough changes that you like to keep your interest, but invariably there will be changes you don't like. We can't please everybody. My approach is to continue to make changes to the game, rather than just leave it alone. Some may disagree with that approach.
Tyson
barterer2002
October 08, 2007 at 08:42PM View BBCode
Not me, I like things to change to prevent it from being staticPages: 1 2