Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365

This has probably been discussed before but I have not seen it. Why does SOM change the ballpark ratings so significantly every season? Unless a park was remodeled or the weather patterns changed a great deal a ballpark will not play much differently from year to year.

For example, SOM had Miller Park tilted in favor of lefthanded hitters for a few years, now it's neutral. Wonder why... oh, yeah, Prince Fielder is not there anymore, so not as many lefthanded HR's. Did the ballpark change when Prince left? No, there were just not as many HR's by lefthanded hitters because Prince left and the Brewers did not replace him with a similar lefthanded hitter.

I know SOM's primary goal is to simulate a season as closely as possible so that if the season is replayed "as is" the results will be close to real life, but I don't see how changing the ballpark ratings based on who played more games at a given park that particular season helps the realism. How about basing the ratings on several season's results rather than just the past season, then the ratings won't vary so widely from year to year.

travelingjack wrote:This has probably been discussed before but I have not seen it. Why does SOM change the ballpark ratings so significantly every season? Unless a park was remodeled or the weather patterns changed a great deal a ballpark will not play much differently from year to year.

For example, SOM had Miller Park tilted in favor of lefthanded hitters for a few years, now it's neutral. Wonder why... oh, yeah, Prince Fielder is not there anymore, so not as many lefthanded HR's. Did the ballpark change when Prince left? No, there were just not as many HR's by lefthanded hitters because Prince left and the Brewers did not replace him with a similar lefthanded hitter.

I know SOM's primary goal is to simulate a season as closely as possible so that if the season is replayed "as is" the results will be close to real life, but I don't see how changing the ballpark ratings based on who played more games at a given park that particular season helps the realism. How about basing the ratings on several season's results rather than just the past season, then the ratings won't vary so widely from year to year.

Jack they use a 3 year average to figure Ball parks ratings. I read this in an old issue of Start Fan magazine, so even though there are changes from year to year, it's not specifically because of a change in the past year, becuase it's averaged against the past 3.

I know there is a 3 year average, but WHY??? A better average would be all the years the park kept the current configuration--in the case of Wrigley maybe all of them since the dead ball era ended.

Unless the fences are moved, or it is a new park less than 3 years old I see no reason for this rolling average.

Fenway has the wall--Yankee stadium has the short LF fences---mostly the only thing that changes are the players--and the players are driving the changes in ratings--I don't think they should--put a hard left or right handed pull hitter that hits HRs in any park and he will change the parks ratings--it makes no sense to me in an established park that we know the tendencies.

My biggest pet peave this 2012 year was Progressive park--you almost couldn't get in a league that didn't have 3 or 4 teams in that park, and 3 or 4 more Coors teams, especially early in the SoM season--at least the ratings for Coors are logical.

On a related topic I think the parks should be drafted also with no duplicates in a given league--I think it would be a bit more difficult than it seems for SoM to accomplish though.

miller.randall@att.net wrote:I know there is a 3 year average, but WHY??? A better average would be all the years the park kept the current configuration--in the case of Wrigley maybe all of them since the dead ball era ended.

Unless the fences are moved, or it is a new park less than 3 years old I see no reason for this rolling average.

Fenway has the wall--Yankee stadium has the short LF fences---mostly the only thing that changes are the players--and the players are driving the changes in ratings--I don't think they should--put a hard left or right handed pull hitter that hits HRs in any park and he will change the parks ratings--it makes no sense to me in an established park that we know the tendencies.

My biggest pet peave this 2012 year was Progressive park--you almost couldn't get in a league that didn't have 3 or 4 teams in that park, and 3 or 4 more Coors teams, especially early in the SoM season--at least the ratings for Coors are logical.

On a related topic I think the parks should be drafted also with no duplicates in a given league--I think it would be a bit more difficult than it seems for SoM to accomplish though.

They why is stated above, because above all things, the game is made to simulate the stats of the previous season, and using the ball park effects set up with the ball park numbers helps them acheive this goal.

I don't get the logic---

Showing my age here, but I remember things from 40 years ago better than yesterday.

The Atlanta Braves hit 206 HRs in 1973 (and had a horrible team ERA).
They hit 120 HR's in 1974 (and had a near 3.00 team ERA--only the Dodgers were better that year).

assume those two back to back years are the last two years and SoM is just now figuring odds----how do you average the two years (add 1972 for 3 years if you must) for BP HRs and be accurate for a single season replay???

I think that was the year the ball changed from Horsehide to Cowhide and HRs were down in most everywhere 74

it would be more accurate to just figure the BP HRs every single year for accurate replay of that season---or leave the park BP HRs alone and just print the cards accordingly--by averaging 3 years I think it is worse than either.

Still a great game though---but I think BP HR's are overdone by SoM.

It's not just the home team HR numbers, it's the visitors as well. Each year the players who play in a specific park will hit X # of HRs (or not) in that park, and if SOM ignores that data and does not factor it in somehow, the player cards will not be accurate. SOM essentially reverse-engineered the HR stats, found strong ties to ballpark effects, and came to the conclusion that they HAD to put in BP HRs.

Actually, I think just the opposite of the way you do. Until recently, when this data has been looked at more by ML clubs, GMs and managers were mostly in the dark about park-specific strategies. Some things were obvious, like the short RF porch in Yankee Stadium making it a better HR park for LHs, but often wind & weather conditions were poorly understood. I think SOM's BP HR analysis has really been ahead of the game since its inception. Now we see teams taking very park-specific approaches, with the fly-ball pitchers being developed in San Diego as the easiest example - they target undervalued flyball guys who might not fare as well in other parks and make useful, cheap SPs of them.