by Ninersphan » Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:15 pm
[quote:88bdcb91f8="DeanTSC"] [b:88bdcb91f8]The difference is that, in terms of their actual ability as baseball players, Furcal is a star and Santiago is a utility infielder. That's the difference.[/b:88bdcb91f8]
And I really think it is best stated just like that... which is subjective rather than objective... but trying to come up with objective standards would likely confuse rather than clarify that very simple point.[/quote:88bdcb91f8]
And I say SO WHAT? Santiago had a great year last year, and now, because of an arbitrary cut off, a fan of that team now can't use this player. Guys have great years and spikes all the time and never do it again ( Brady Anderson OF BAL, Rick Wilson C CUBS etc.)
[quote:88bdcb91f8="DeanTSC"]
If the card you're alluding to that was excluded earlier was '04 Carlos Baerga, same thing. He was an over-the-hill fatty whose career, as it turned out, would be over two years later after putting up OPSes of 638 and 653. If he had played a full season in '04, there is no way in hell he would have hit anything like .343. [/quote:88bdcb91f8]
Kudos to you for rembering who it was, but this proves my point about it being arbitrary, so If he got 50 more pa's would he be allowed then? At what point do they just say , "okay I guees he had a great year" and give him a card? Who cares if he was "an over the hill fatty", he wasn't injured that year and hit the crap out of the ball. He was also a former 2 time Al-Star. Maybe Arizona should have played him a little more, isn't that kind of the point to this whole game in the first place? to see how we'd do given the players to manage? By excluding players options are being taken away, and I hate losing options.
[quote:88bdcb91f8="DeanTSC"]
Obviously there's a line-drawing issue here -- Ryan Ludwick might not repeat what he did in '08 either -- but the line is drawn based on playing time accumulated (more playing time means a better sample size to determine what this player's level of ability in the given season truly was), and on established quality of play. Again, I think it makes more sense to do that subjectively rather than objectively. [/quote:88bdcb91f8]
This will be my last post, I've enjoyed the debate, but it's clear I'm in the minority and that I can't convince any of you on the other side any more than any of you can convince me.
I'll will take one more stab at it though. :wink:
Most of the disagreements all stems from some sort of realism argument, that "so and so wouldn't get those kind of stats if he played in real life over a whole year". My whole argument against that is simply this, TSN Strat isn't a realistic game, you want that kind of realism get the CD ROM and replay the season. So long as the format remains 12 teams of essentially mostly All-Star players, playing in circumstances that would allow 12 Coors fields so we can find out which team will get to 250 HR's first, what difference does it make how good someone card is vis-a-vis a player's number of plate appearences and/or what they've done in the past? I'm sorry but the realism argument with the parameters we play under just doesn't hold up.
And you watch, 8-10 weeks from now, someone [b:88bdcb91f8]will[/b:88bdcb91f8] post on the board how "unrealistic" it was that a manager got M Rivera to pitch over 150 innings, and everyone will say, "that's just the game", "it's not real". Allowing Cruz, Santiago and all the rest a card is the same thing in my eyes. But as I said I'm apparently in the minority, so I'll go quietly now.
Again thanks for the spirited debate.