Btt70s Card Teaser #2

[Jablowmi]

The walks are scary, but isn't Soto a better comparison than Hoyt? Although JR walked more than Soto, he doesn't have the BP HR problem that Soto has. Re: DPs, of course you'd rather have a DP than a K, but the K takes a lot of stuff out of the equation (e.g., advancing runners, errors). As for the BBs, a walk is a lot less painful than a hit b/c the runners only advance 1.

I think he's Soto+/Hershiser -, hence, my $8.2M estimate.

[Hakmusic]

I think with low # of hits of any type, and virtually no ball park effects, he has to be highly priced. 4 very good cards makes his worth more than Guidry or Gooden. Mybe not $8 million good, but in the $7 range at least.

Also, absolute $$ is dependent on other pitchers. If there are a lot of great starters, none of them are worth as much. I expect the prices of usable RP's are going to be higher, supply and demand.

[Paul5757]

I was probably letting the bad '75 card cloud my judgment too much.

On the other hand, I don't think he's going to be the elite pitcher in BTT70s. '75 is a unusable, '76 is average, '77 and '78 are solid, and '79 is his stud year.

His +1 hold rating is also important. You have to have the right catcher with him. Walks + stolen bases = doubles.

I still think a lot of players are going to drop him quick. He'll have a couple of walk-infested poor outings based on some unlucky rolls and rolls off the batter's card. Players will incorrectly assume they have his '75 card based on the number of walks, which will put him on the waiver wire fast.

The x-chances point was a good point. His value might be driven up by the lack of quality fielders in the middle. I don't think there are a lot of 1's in the middle, and only a few 2's. That'll be interesting...how many 1's and 2's are in the middle. If Morgan isn't the highest-salaried player by far, then the salary structure is screwed up.

I'll have to look at the cards on the CD. I have 75 and 78 at home, may some other years. My recollection is that # aren't as much of a factor for pitchers in the older sets.


Still don't think he's upper-tier, though, just based on the number of SPs that should be available.

[childsmwc]

Interesting discussing on prices. Jablowmi, you estimated Jackson around $6.7 million (I assume based purely on '80's comparables), but looking at that period of time (remeber a 30 hr season meant something in the 70's) don't you think that Jackson will be one of the top 5 offensive players from the 70's? Given that shouldn't his salary be atleast $7.5 to $8.0 comparatively to the top 5 80's players.

But that raises an intersting offshoot for discussion, are you happy with the pricing in the 80's game for hitters. In the seasons I have played the player pool is small and basically if you have a bad auto draft there aren't many options offensively to choose from. This to me implies the pricing in the 80's game is flawed to some degree and that the top offensive players are undervalued, which is why they all go drafted every season.

In every other TSN game the top hitters are all in the $10+ million range. It seems to me that the economics of spending $80 million works the same regardless of the game platform being played and therefore an overhaul of the pricing will be done when the '70's rolls out. So if Reggie is a top 5 hitter why shouldn't he be priced at $10 million.

Please discuss,

Bbrool

[Jablowmi]

Bbrool, I think it's apples and oranges. The other games only have a single card, while the 70s/80s games have 5. The price for the latter is more/less an average of the 5, so the "bell curve" is smaller. For JR, his salary will be brought down by the bad 75 card. I love cards that have 4 very good/great seasons and one terrible one b/c the terrible one knocks the salary down (which, I think, is why a guy like Stieb is such a bargain in the 80s).

[YountFan]

He'll is more like Sutcliffe. His having grace is a total lack of slg and BP #

Consider the OB chances
Year OBL OBR
1975 42.2 29.6
1976 34.1 24.2
1977 27.2 21.7
1978 23.6 22.6
1979 20.2 12.2

Here are Soto's
OBL OBR
21.7 18.2
21.7 12.3
13.8 18.0
18.0 16.8
23.5 19.3

Sutcliffe
OBL OBR
28.3 25.2
27.6 23.8
12.4 21.1
26.5 34.2
28.2 29.7

[childsmwc]

Jablowmi,

The issue is one of economics (ie. supply and demand). Regardless of the game being played a total of $960 million is available to purchase players in a standard league. If the offensive players produces less in the btt80's game because of the five year averaging, that doesn't change the amount of cash available by the league to spend on the top offensive players in that set. It only implies that you should pay more in btt80's for the same level of expected offensive production than in other games.

The 1969 Season is a perfect expample of this dynamic. If they had used at 200X pricing structure on the offensive production of 1969, the prices per hitter would have been so low, not every owner would be able to spend their $80 million. Basically it is inflation, the excess cash in the system drives up the price of the few players that are in the set. I beta tested the 1969 product and this dynamic was a problem until salaries accross the board were raised significantly.

This dynamic is actually in play when you compare the 200X seasons against each other. In the 2005 game you are paying more for an equal level of offense than compared to the 2004 game, because offense was down in 2005. The TSN pricing models have improved over time to take these dynamics into effect, and price each season in isolation. Based on the pricing overhaul ATGIII received as well as the example of the changes year to year in the 200X game, I would expect a fundamental shift upwards in prices for the btt70's game. In fact using the Btt80's game as a guide, there are fewer player cards in that set, compared to the 2006 game, yet prices are lower per player (this does not fundamentally make sense, when the same amount of cash is available to spend). I think this is a flaw in the Btt80's pricing that will be corrected when Btt70's is released.

As I think about it the 1969 pricing structure probably fits perfectly with expected "average" values for 1970 stars (once you factor in one bad season), so that would be my expectation.

Bbrool

[Hakmusic]

I disagree Yountfan because I think you need to take total bases as equal value to OBP, and his total bases is lower than any of them. The lack of BPHR's is critical too because a great pitcher can be undone simply because of BPHR's.

I agree that a lot of managers may wrongly drop him early, but that's fine, knowing when to hold on and be patient and when to cut and run is a big part of managing.

I think to an extent, you leave the "bad" year out of the equation unless there is no bad year, because whether the bad year is a 4.15 or 5.75, at that price, he is going to be dropped. I generally judge pitchers based on the quality of their good cards and the number of bad cards, not so much how bad the bad cards are, since if you drop, you drop. Thus, in the 80's game, there are a lot of valuable guys that are valuable because they have one really bad year rather than two so-so years. I think a guy with 4 really good years and one awful year should cost more than a guy with three really good years and two not so good years.

[YountFan]

He TB is very low vs RHH, but and low vs LHP. This R tilt hits him. His a 6 million dollar man, maybe low 7's, but the OBA can kill you (ask Mark Langston owners)

TBLH TBRH
20.7 8.0
19.3 11.1
23.5 10.7
13.6 6.1
18.9 4.7

[quote:b7f432b65b]I think a guy with 4 really good years and one awful year should cost more than a guy with three really good years and two not so good years.[/quote:b7f432b65b]In the 80's that is the diff between 5 and 3 m $ pitchers for the most part

[YountFan]

he might be more Ryan like