I believe fielding ratings have way too much effect in games

[willmurr24]

My experiences as a one year or so online stratomatic player is that the teams fielding may even be more important than it's pitching,which would be nuts.Please explain why I am wrong.

With 30 or so X rolls on the average pitchers card out of 108 chances and none on the hitters card ,we are left with 30/216 chance of the fielder coming into play,or a little under one of seven AB's.Translated to a real game this would mean about 12 times a game that balls are hit that one major league player would make a play on and another MAJOR LEAGUE PLAYER would not,This I believe is absurd. My feel/guess after watching ball for fifty years and playing for about 15 is maybe 5-7 times a game, maybe if that.

Overpowering big K pitchers in strat also average about thirty X rolls per card ,when in real life the reason they are so dominant is fewer balls in play( K's ) and more easy outs popups etc.,so how could there possibly be as many" tough" fielding plays as with a Ted Lilly let them hit it to my fielders approach. :?:

[LMBombers]

If you think fielder's X rolls come up too much then try a team of all 1's to take advantage of your theory. It won't win. You need much more than superb fielding to win.

To me there is huge difference between Carlos Lee in LF vs Sam Fuld for instance and this needs to be reflected in the game just like it is. Any hitter (good or bad) could hit a ball towards LF that Lee can't get to that Fuld swoops in and catches. There is no guarantee that you will even get that LF X chance in any given game. Its in the roll of the dice. The same is true of real baseball. All the balls hit to LF in any given game might be right at the LF or in a spot that no LF could catch it. Then again there might be one that a good fielder will catch but Carlos Lee has no chance to get to.

[the splinter]

[quote:fd77de067d]Translated to a real game this would mean about 12 times a game that balls are hit that one major league player would make a play on and another MAJOR LEAGUE PLAYER would not,[/quote:fd77de067d]

really thats 12 times a game a ball is hit that fielding comes into question....the 4 rated LF could still make the play...but the 1 will make it more often

in short a X roll is not an automatic E or hit yielded

[MtheB]

it is easier to put put together a winning team of bad fielding great hitters, than a great fielding winning team not great hitters.
i don't think anything needs to be adjusted.

[elpasopesos]

Just rememebr in isnt Carlos Lee that will killl you it is Ricky Weeks at second.

[chasenally]

[quote:3f0f8501a8="elpasopesos"]Just rememebr in isnt Carlos Lee that will killl you it is Ricky Weeks at second.[/quote:3f0f8501a8]

I agree with that. I have Osvaldo Martinez playing SS in a theme league. Only 2MIL or less pitchers so there are more chances and he has 8 errors in 18 games. Infielders with a bad rating are where you get burned.

[pkwmati]

Here is a thread you may have missed where I put together a team of all 1s. Oddly, the team pitching was not improved as much as I hoped but my offensive was better than expected.

[url]http://forums.sportingnews.com/viewtopic.php?t=623586&start=25[/url]

As an Indians fan who went from one extreme (Omar Vizquel) to the other (Jhonny Peralta), I'm not sure the X-rolls on the pitcher card and the X-Charts capture the difference between a great fielder and poor one enough. I don't have numbers to back this up - just the eyeball test.

I've been playing a lot of cards & dice lately with the 1988 set and the teams with poor middle infielders don't seem to pay enough.