Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365

I am coming to the conclusion that ballparks aren't as important as everyone is saying in many of the posts around this forum. Let me explain what I mean so there is no confusion.

Lets say you picked Forbes field as your home ball park...

and you have the first pick, you can choose anyone you want, do you forego choosing Ruth or Bonds to get Hugh Duffy or Tris Speaker?

or lets say you choose a first baseman, do you forgo picking say Jimmie Foxx to get George Sisler?


Maybe its mixing apples with oranges, and if you were in that position you wouldn't do it since the Ruths, Bonds, and Foxxes are higher salaried than the Duffys Sislers and Speakers.

But some would.

I bet there are many people if you and me had Forbes field as a home ball park, and I offered up say Mickey Mantle for Ty Cobb, you might just refuse.

I'm kinda getting the feeling that HRs beat batting avg. and speed everytime, even in the parks like Forbes field. At least when it comes to drafting in the ATG VII. But maybe I am stating something obvious, that I, being new to Online Strat, am just learning.

That if you have a choice between say a guy who hit .370 with 20 triples and 50 stolen bases, and a guy who hit .290 with 40 HRs, the guy with the HRs is the guy to choose, even if your home park is Forbes field.

Am I stating and Obvious thing? Do you disagree?

Scott.

One player does not make a team and, no matter how many high OBA or base-stealing players you stock yourself with in Forbes, you need someone to drive them in. Even big-bopper teams playing in BP/HR-happy parks don't win automatically. That's why we have so many choices of salary caps. The game plays differently at $60 or $80 mil than it does at $200 or $999 mil caps.

Disagree completley. Park effects are out of control and grossly distort player stats in ATG.

The lower the cap the more powerful the park impact. If price is no object, Ruth or Gibson are appropriate first picks if your park was Forbes - not Bonds because he loses all the ballpark singles.

But at 100M or less I would take a Cobb, Lajoie, or Duffy type players in Forbes everytime. I used to play for free here with that strategy.

Short answer--Yes.

Player salaries are based on a composite--a neutral park. As GM's our job is to find value. If we pick a neutral park, there is no value to be found--the pricing algorithm Strat uses is very good. It prices players accurately for a neutral park. Ruth is great anywhere, but he's overpriced in Petco. Cobb is great anywhere, but he's overpriced in Polo '41. Our job, tree hugger, is to find value and win games. That means find a non-neutral park and accumulate value by picking players who do better there than in a neutral park. The game is all about distorting neutral park player stats in one's favor.

I will see if you guys are right as I have Pujols in Forbes. I will compare him to Sisler who is on another team but is also in Forbes.

so far after 6 games:

Sisler 6 25 10 12 0 1 1 3 1 2 2 0 .480 .519 .680 1.199
Pujols 6 24 3 9 0 0 3 6 2 4 0 0 .375 .423 .750 1.173

So far pretty even on what I thought would happen, Pujols will get less hits but more homeruns and rbi's and Sisler will get more hits and runs.

I think getting a power hitter is always better, or at least I think it is better, especially in the ATG where pitching isn't scarce but guys with both HRs and a high batting avg is.

HUGE difference in player performance at a $200 cap as opposed to a $80 cap league

At $200+ it's a completely different game. It's not about value for $, since money is unlimited. It's about drafting--where you draft in the order and who you pick. Then you're smart to pick Ruth or Bonds in Petco, or Cobb in the Polo Grounds. You're not trying to build the best team for the $; you're George Steinbrenner, trying to buy the best player. $60-$80M think Billy Beane/Money Ball; more than $100M think George S.

Parks are still important, but not as critical to overall team performance for that reason--it makes sense to draft Ruth in Petco @$200M 'cuz he's better than anybody else there. His lesser value there doesn't cost you another good player--only somebody else drafting that player prevent you from getting him because you're so stinking rich.

I'll take the all around player in Forbes over a slow, poor fielding home run hitter every time. It is just my style, you don't need to hit home runs to win. At least not in normal 80 million dollar leagues. And yes, ballparks DO matter!

My first draft, I picked forbes and loaded up on pitching and guys that played defence and stole bases, and im 60-66 so far.

I had, or have,

Gwynn in right subbed by Sosa when on the road in a HR park for righties
Cobb in centre
Raines in left with E davis for some lefthanders on the road in a HR park for righties.
Chance at first, but replaced by Brouthers when chance sucked out
Robinson at 2nd until he sucked out then began using Evers and Scales
Larkin at short
Wright at 3B until he started sucking out so I used Brosius against lefties
Breshnahan at c
and my DH is McGraw.

I dropped Mize and Howard as they only got used in one park (all the road parks were centered on Right Handed power hitters except one)

My starters are

Tiant, Brown, Mathewson and W. Johnson,

Babe Adams for middle relief and Gossage, Charlton and Wagner for relief late.

What I failed to realize is the difficulty to drive in runs from my players. High batting avg/ONb% with steals doesn't cut the mustard for driving in runs its seems, and over estimating getting the best pitching staff in the league, thinking it would reduce the league from crushing me very often, was a mistake. I win games when I score 4 or 5 runs and lose more buy scoring the same amount. In other words I consistently score 4 or 5 runs, with an occasional 10 run game, and lose whenever I let more than 5 runs in, which is more often than not.

Scottbdoug wrote:High batting avg/ONb% with steals doesn't cut the mustard for driving in runs its seems, and over estimating getting the best pitching staff in the league, thinking it would reduce the league from crushing me very often, was a mistake.

Pitching is solid here but the offense is way below average for 200m...Cobb is the only real starter you have in 200m with Larkin and Bresnahan being okay.