Hack Wilson in LF?

[BDWard]

Fine work, Dukie. I had done similar research before I started this thread, but haven't had time to put it in a post.

Maybe Cubs' brass felt that Hack was a fine defensive player. He can play LF for me anytime! :wink:

Of course, there was no Strat-o-matic back in 1930, and records were not kept on such obscure things as how many times per game a player picks his nose or scratches his balls in the dugout like they are today. So it has to be extremely difficult to rate players defensively based upon incomplete and poorly kept records, newspaper accounts, legend and the opinions of those who long ago met their maker. This is particularly true of the Negro League players.

Moreover, there is sometimes a dichotomy between a player's true defensive ability and his Strat-o-matic defensive rating. It seems that Strat-o-matic, a company that for years has made claims about statistical accuracy, was sometimes more interested in reproducing actual won-loss records at the expense of actual defensive ability. One such example is Graig Nettles, generally considered as a fine fielder for most of his early career. Beginning in 1971 and continuing for consecutive years, Nettles' defensive ratings were 1, 2, 3, 4, 3, 2, 1. Even when one considers that players get old and lose some defense ability and/or have "down" years defensively, it is interesting to note that Nettles defensive rating roller coaster seems to correlate with the W-L records of his teams, the Indians and the Yankees.

The point is that Strato defensive ratings sometimes have to be taken with a grain of salt. Regardless, it is among the best, if not the best, baseball simulations around and the company is constantly striving for improvement. I can't think of any baseball simulation game that I'd rather play. - Bernie W

[216 Stitches]

You know, philosophically I am probably with alvarndc
on the intent. But if we step back a bit, 5 positives on Petro:

(1) We all benefit from 1 set of rules, having 2 sets of rules
is awful. And when we make enough stink, TSN (Bernie) steps
in and clarifies this. Petro (and Nev and everyone else) steps
in line and accepts it. This happened with the ownership of the
multiple cards debate -- different initial opinion, but when it was
clear what rules everyone had to follow -- debate over.

(2) He is not trying to stretch the rules to his advantage. While
I wonder if it matters much whether or not Hack Wilson plays LF (actually
I am pretty sure I don't care), its not lost on me that we can't just
pick rules because the PC can't handle it.

(3) I need to get over myself. Does Petro need to get over himself?
Let me look in the mirror a bit first... and if you have a mirror, wouldn't
hurt. Not saying he shouldn't, but not exactly an exclusive deal.

(4) Petro does encourage managers and fair play. There may be
a disagreement on what fair play is, but give it a chance. He has
said if everyone is allowed to use Hack in LF, then thats okay by him.

(5) Now I want a legal Hack Wilson card (either 1929 or 1930) that
is LF and RF eligible and costs more. Same card, just more expensive, more defensive options, and I can still set my own lineup (i.e., batting
Hack 9th is not an option for me). No biggie if it can't be done, but
logically speaking, why not a 1930 Hack Wilson standard contract (the
current card) and a 1930 Hack Wilson out-of-position bonus contract
card (with LF and RF eligibility)?

[alvarndc]

[quote:bd327ce6ae="Petrosian"] I guess my posts have acquired a sort of psychometric or projective value, for some people. Sort of like a Strat-forum version of the Rorschach.[/quote:bd327ce6ae]

As I said, delusions of grandeur. Thanks for proving my point.

Memo to Petrosian: it's a game.

[gkhd11a]

[quote:e255a414c5="Petrosian"]Having reviewed all the posts and read the relevant rules at TSN and Strat itself it seems abundantly clear that the [b:e255a414c5]intent [/b:e255a414c5]of the rules is not to allow this particular maneuver at ATG / TSN. However, it can be accomplished if the manager initially drafts an eligible left-fielder and then fills out the lineup and later drops all eligible lf'ers or if the manager leaves the lineup blank and lets Hal create the lineup. [/quote:e255a414c5]

There is no requirement or control requiring any position be drafted other than 2 catchers.

[The Last Druid]

Memo to alvarndc: Maybe you should refrain from making psychiatric diagnoses, and leave that to those of us who are professionally trained to do so, and just stick to the subluxations you actually are trained to diagnose.

I make a pointed joke about my posts eliciting projections of enmity in some people (i.e. you and Ward) and you think that is a sign of delusion? Just stating the obvious, although I guess that just went over your head as well.

[alvarndc]

So let me see if I understand this -- Petrosian is "professionally trained" to make psychiatric diagnoses based merely on the written responses put forth on a nerd forum regarding the appropriateness of playing a player out of position in a simulated computerized baseball game.

But no one else is.

Must have been one great school.

Probably the same school that granted him the "certification" to rule on interpretations of the INTENT of the rules when applied to arcane and esoteric situations.

You know, I am fairly certain that when BDWard posted the bit reproduced below, that he was pretty much being clever and snarky and tongue in cheek:

[quote:4cc5a156b5="BDWard"]Petrosian, I'm concerned about you. The heavy handed, hostile, confrontational, taunting (i.e. "[b:4cc5a156b5]Enjoy this contribution then...[/b:4cc5a156b5]") and generally bullying tone of your response to a mere game strategy question suggests the existence of deep rooted underlying psychological problems, including paranoia and anger management issues. [/quote:4cc5a156b5]

Actually now I am starting to wonder. He seems to have really struck a nerve.

As I said, it's a game.

And to the question at hand, are we all really so concrete that we will quibble about whether someone capable of playing centerfield in the major leagues could not in fact play left or right? It really seems so ridiculous considering that we are playing a game in which we routinely see things like Christy Mathewson pitching to Derek Jeter, and Mickey Mantle playing alongside Turkey Stearnes.

Seems to me that one of the beauties of Strat is the ability to "see" these incredible situations played out with some sense of validity.

But the creative suggestion of imagining playing Hack in left is met with a visceral rejection -- by some. That's odd.

[The Last Druid]

Of all people [b:b39f1176f3]you[/b:b39f1176f3] want to question academic pedigrees?? LMAO. Let's see, you are in the only "doctoral" level "profession" that doesn't even require a bachelors degree and all you need to get into chiropractic school is a 2.5 G.P.A. as a non-baccalaureate undergraduate. Now that's funny. :lol: :lol: :lol: :roll:

Now my doctoral program, back in the mid-90's, accepted less than 3% of the applicants. And without at least a 3.7 G.P.A., GRE"s of around 1400, and some solid undergraduate research, you didn't stand a prayer of admission.

Frankly, you don't even argue well enough to bother with. End of "dialogue."

[alvarndc]

[quote:adadc3f845="Petrosian"]Of all people [b:adadc3f845]you[/b:adadc3f845] want to question academic pedigrees?? LMAO. Let's see, you are in the only "doctoral" level "profession" that doesn't even require a bachelors degree and all you need to get into chiropractic school is a 2.5 G.P.A. as a non-baccalaureate undergraduate. Now that's funny. :lol: :lol: :lol: :roll:

Now my doctoral program, back in the mid-90's, accepted less than 3% of the applicants. And without at least a 3.7 G.P.A and GRE"s of around 1400, and some solid undergraduate research, you didn't stand a prayer of admission.

Frankly, you don't even argue well enough to bother with. End of "dialogue."[/quote:adadc3f845]

To paraphrase the immortal Inigo Montoya:

I do not think alvarndc is who you think he is

I am not a chiropractor - not that there is anything wrong with that. Although you seem to think so. (Now I understand that crack about subluxations -- I was like "wtf is he talking about?")

I assure you I have reasonable academic bona fides. Although I do not see the need to post an academic CV in order to give a response to this question on this board. Apparently you do.

What is troubling is that apparently you honestly feel that your supposed "superior" academic achievement confers authority to you on determining the correct answer to the question that has plagued generations of serious critical thinkers -- can Hack Wilson play left field?

Frankly, I think you are making an *** out of yourself. But you are free to keep on "talking".

[djmacb]

I am really enjoying this witty repartee

Petrosian's post reminds me of a scene from my favorite show, Big Bang Theory: "Dr. Cooper, Dr. Hofstadter, Dr. Koothrappali, and (voice dripping with scorn) MISTER Wolowitz"

To the matter at hand, I have a question. Let's say I draft myself an outfield of Mays, Wilson, and Aaron and stick them in Hilltop. What's to stop HAL from moving Mays into left and using Wilson in center?

[andycummings65]

Boys, boys, boys..............this feels like the old "Bullpen", where by the second page of a thread, you had no idea what the thread was even about :D

Those of you who want to try Hack in LF or SS, or whatever, do it.

Those who want to report them, do it.

There, I feel better already :wink: