Willie Keeler's strikeouts in 1897 ...

He had 5 strikeouts that year in 599 at bats, 618 total plate appearances when HBP and sacrifices are added in. Yet his SOM card has a 3.7% of strikeouts. Seems way off in the SOM card. Not sure if they truly counted strikeouts in 1897, so aware of that.

And why aren't HBP and sacrifices added in to total plate appearances for reasons of injury rolls? Keeler has 599 at bats and walks, but i think the HBPs and sacrifices should count. They are plate appearances. Just saying...

Hack Wilson
And why aren't HBP and sacrifices added in to total plate appearances for reasons of injury rolls? Keeler has 599 at bats and walks, but i think the HBPs and sacrifices should count. They are plate appearances. Just saying...

I have been saying this exact thing for years. How difficult is it to add to the code for total plate appearances?

I mean if the code is AB's + BB's = PA's. Does this seem HARD for SOM to do? AB's + BB's + HBP's + SF's = PA's. Looks TOO simply to me.

Better yet all SOM has to do is check baseball reference and add a PA's number code and forget the code formula they use. Here are some examples of players that can go down for 15 because of SOM coding and if changed to PA's would not.

2009 Mauer 606 PA's
2004 Edmonds 614 PA's
1930 Simmons 611 PA's
1935 Vaughan 610 PA's
1961 Gentile 601 PA's

the injury system is a total joke anyway all it does is unfairly screw managers out of wins.... for the 10000 time when a guy with 200 PA has the same chance of getting injured as a guy with 599 PA thats BS ....using PA from guys who played 154 game seasons and guys who played 162 game seasons and using them equally is BS

the injury system is a total joke anyway all it does is unfairly screw managers out of wins.... for the 10000 time when a guy with 200 PA has the same chance of getting injured as a guy with 599 PA thats BS ....using PA from guys who played 154 game seasons and guys who played 162 game seasons and using them equally is BS

The same system applies to everyone so no one is being "screwed" relative to anyone else. And the injuries are priced into the cards. Re-doing the injuries would just mean re-pricing the cards. Literally who cares. The game is all about getting value for the price, who cares if someone has slightly more or less injury risk than he "should," the only relevant question is if the price is higher or lower than it should be, given the risk. By far the most unrealistic aspect of injuries is going a whole season using only 4 starting pitchers who never get injured, and yet strangely I never hear anyone clamoring for more pitcher injuries.

The same system applies to everyone so no one is being "screwed" relative to anyone else. And the injuries are priced into the cards. Re-doing the injuries would just mean re-pricing the cards. Literally who cares. The game is all about getting value for the price, who cares if someone has slightly more or less injury risk than he "should," the only relevant question is if the price is higher or lower than it should be, given the risk. By far the most unrealistic aspect of injuries is going a whole season using only 4 starting pitchers who never get injured, and yet strangely I never hear anyone clamoring for more pitcher injuries.[/quote

injuries apply to everyone but if your Willie Mays is injured for say 9 games in a season and your Cal Ripken [you know the one I mean] is only injured for say 3 can be the difference between playoffs or not....explain how injuries are priced into pricing because I dont see it quite frankly I dont see how pricing is figured in at all on anything when a LARGE number of players over 6 Millon are NEVER used in 80 mil leagues ....sounds like the majority over 6 mil must be overvalued to make it worth picking up guys who are cheaper with the same injury risk because they hit lefties or righties better or their cards arent much worse than the over 6 mil guys and as far as injuries to pitchers go ive repeatedly said thats a even bigger joke...many people on here use their arguments to compare this to real life when most of the leagues have absolutely nothing to do with real life

the injury system is a total joke anyway all it does is unfairly screw managers out of wins.... for the 10000 time when a guy with 200 PA has the same chance of getting injured as a guy with 599 PA thats BS ....using PA from guys who played 154 game seasons and guys who played 162 game seasons and using them equally is BS

The same system applies to everyone so no one is being "screwed" relative to anyone else. And the injuries are priced into the cards. Re-doing the injuries would just mean re-pricing the cards. Literally who cares. The game is all about getting value for the price, who cares if someone has slightly more or less injury risk than he "should," the only relevant question is if the price is higher or lower than it should be, given the risk. By far the most unrealistic aspect of injuries is going a whole season using only 4 starting pitchers who never get injured, and yet strangely I never hear anyone clamoring for more pitcher injuries.

Just because a player only had 200 PA doesn't mean he was any more injury prone than a player with 500 PA. He may have been a bench guy who was available for all 154, or 162 games.

And as Max said, the same system applies to all of us, so how is anyone getting screwed? The injuries are certainly priced into the cards. There is a premium to be paid for the bulletproof and in-game injury only cards, as well as the 3-game only injury and a discount to be had on cards with a higher risk of injury.

I'd like to see some variation on S* pitcher injuries, based on the number of starts, perhaps. The possibility of a 4, or 5 game injury would at least force the use of a 5th starter on occasion.

Also, it would be nice if the PA numbers used for injuries included all PAs, not just ABs and BBs.

I get that 80m leagues are the most common but are those leagues the best to judge usage on an expensive card? And if you can’t see how injuries are factored into pricing then you’re just looking hard enough. Look at Tatis Jr and the short stop right above him and right below him. All priced within .02 of each other, tatis is a 3 injury and the other two are no injury and in game only , all with similar defense. Tatis Jr card is much better than the other two

By far the most unrealistic aspect of injuries is going a whole season using only 4 starting pitchers who never get injured, and yet strangely I never hear anyone clamoring for more pitcher injuries.

in 1876, Jim Devlin had a record of 30-35 for Louisville. The team finished the season with a 30-36 record.
Devlin followed up in 1877 going 35-25 and pitched every inning for Louisville that season.

Any pitcher who threw more than 500 innings should be bulletproof, need no bullpen and be able to start every game. I'd pay $20 mil for that!

Sandy Koufax S9*
Jim Devlin S15****

The same system applies to everyone so no one is being "screwed" relative to anyone else. And the injuries are priced into the cards. Re-doing the injuries would just mean re-pricing the cards. Literally who cares. The game is all about getting value for the price, who cares if someone has slightly more or less injury risk than he "should," the only relevant question is if the price is higher or lower than it should be, given the risk. By far the most unrealistic aspect of injuries is going a whole season using only 4 starting pitchers who never get injured, and yet strangely I never hear anyone clamoring for more pitcher injuries.

Love the lively conversation! I do absolutely agree that pitchers -- some of the most fragile creatures on planet Earth –- should be injured more often, that would really spice things up and make that 5th starter place more valuable instead of a waste. Also agree that no one exclusively is being screwed, it's egalitarian due to the same price for the player for everyone. However, I'd just like an accurate representation of plate appearances in this game, rather than simplistically basing it on only ABs and walks. That's not the way it works in reality. Sac hits/flies and HBPs should count, and it's fine to reprice cards based on this, won't affect a ton of cards anyways. Remember, the 600 plate appearances formula that SOM came up with for the 3 game injury rule is an arbitrary figure -- one has to decide on thresholds in any game format, that's what they chose. Upon review, it can be better. The game is better off if it's a bit more tethered to reality on simple things like plate appearances, that's all we're asking (not seeking perfection, because it is a simulation game and not reality, there are tradeoffs/issues, of course, on a host of issues).

SOM is bizarrely allergic to plate appearances. They don't even track the stat anywhere. Same with the Windows game. In fact the one place in the Windows game I can think of that's labeled "PA" is actually the made-up stat of "AB+BB," not the exists-in-reality stat of plate appearances. SOM is just so opposed to tracking PA that even when they label something PA they are lying and actually tracking something else and calling it PA. Highly odd behavior. It's literally the most basic fundamental stat that exists, every other good stat is based off it, but SOM is just gonna ride or die with at bats.