Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365

Is there any logic when they make the cards?
Walter Johnson walked 38 batters in 346 innings and as a reflection of that, he has no walks on his card.
George Bradley walked 38 batters in 573 innings and he has 1 walk vs. both sides of his card.
That's 1 walk every 57 batters. The only way it is feasible to put a walk on Bradley's card, is if there are no walks on any hitters cards from 1876 (if they even exist). Otherwise, strat is just randomly making cards.

All I know is that the cards are meant to replicate what the player would do facing the hitters in the parks from that season

So, it purports to be a symbiotic relationship between all the cards and parks from the particular season in question......

Also, in 1876, it took nine balls for a walk. Presumably, Bradley would have walked substantially more hitters if the four-ball rule was in effect.

Relative to the context of his league, Bradley's walk ratio is solid but unremarkable- he was 9th in the NL in walks per 9 innings. http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/NL/1876-pitching-leaders.shtml . A modern pitcher who was ninth in the league in BB/9 would probably have at least a couple of walks on his card.

Daniel, from what I understand, the cards are based on comparison to league stats for the individual season.

In 1913 there were 3737 BBs in the AL in 45335 PA's (1 BB in every 12.13 PA). Walter Johnson had 38 BBs in 1271 Batters Faced (1 BB in every 33.44 Batters Faced) MUCH LOWER rate than the league average.

In 1876 there were 336 BBs in the NLin 20457 PA's (1 BB in every 60.88 PA). George Bradley had 38 BBs in 2269 Batters Faced (1 BB in every 59.71 Batters Faced) EQUAL to the league average.

Basing it on the individual to league ratios, Johnson should have less walks on his card than Bradley.

If we look at Bob Groom from 1913, he had 81 BBs in 1075 Batters Faced (1 BB in every 13.27 Batters Faced), much closer to the league average, his card has 1 walk on each side (as does Bradley). Bradley's BB is on a 2, Grooms is on a 6/8, which I expect is from the overall difference in BB/PA difference from 1876 to 1913.

Keep in mind that the ATG set is NOT normalized across seasons, so the 1876 BB/PA ratio isn't compared to the 1913 BB/PA ratio.

This just made my head hurt....LOL

Also keep in mind that 1876 is probably a computer generated season which means it may not be as accurate a card as one based on research, etc as the so called cadillac seasons are.

The rules of 9 balls to get a walk and other similar factors is one reason they usually separate this era from the rest of MLB history when discussing records. It is also one reason I do not care for these cards being in the set.