Grade my 70's team...

Veteran managers,
I am new to strat on-line. One season almost complete and it was not very successful. New season coming up.
Give me a grade on this draft...what might be some weaknesses and opportunities? Much appreciated.
C-Gary Carter
1B-Mike Hargrove
2nd-Julio Cruz
3rd-Larry Parrish
ss-Rick Burleson
LF-Jose Cruz
RF-Ellis Valentine
CF-Cesar Cedeno
DH-Willie McCovey
SP-Catfish Hunter, Mike Cuellar, Juan Marichal, Dennis Leonard
RP-Rollie Fingers, Joe Hoerner, Paul Lindblad, Ron Schueler, Doug Bird

C-Gary Carter D - THERE ARE PROBABLY ABOUT 10 BETTER CATCHERS FOR THE MONEY.
1B-Mike Hargrove -- F, NOT ONE OF THE 12 BEST 1B IN THE SET.
2nd-Julio Cruz C, DECENT BACKUP OR MAYBE PLATOON. NO POWER.
3rd-Larry Parrish C, 2 YEARS ARE CUT, 2 YEARS ARE PLATOON VS. L (WITH SOMEONE LIKE HEBNER), 1 GOOD YEAR.
ss-Rick Burleson C, OK DEFENSE, BUT DOESN'T HIT.
LF-Jose Cruz C, DECENT BUT THERE ARE MUCH BETTER VALUES.
RF-Ellis Valentine F, HE IS ALWAY IN THE FREE AGENT POOL. ONE OF THE MOST OVERPRICED CARDS IN THE SET.
CF-Cesar Cedeno A-, EXCELLENT CF, 2 GREAT YEARS, 2 GOOD YEARS. SPEED, DEFENSE, MAYBE A LITTLE EXPENSIVE
DH-Willie McCovey A-, 1 GREAT YEAR, 2 SOLID YEARS, BUT VERY INJURY PRONE, YOU NEED TO HAVE A SOLID BACK UP READY TO GO.
SP-Catfish Hunter B, GOOD PITCHER, BUT MAYBE OVERPRICED,
Mike Cuellar, D, MAYBE THE MOST DECEPTIIVE CARD IN THE SET, HE BENEFITED FROM GREAT BALTIMORE DEFENSE, TEAM AND BALLPARK, AND THE CARD DOESN'T PLAY WELL.
Juan Marichal, B, DECENT VALUE, BUT SOME OF HIS YEARS DON'T PLAY WELL
Dennis Leonard C, USUALLY DOESN'T PERFORM UP TO HIS CARD.
RP-Rollie Fingers, Joe Hoerner, Paul Lindblad, Ron Schueler, Doug Bird WAY TOO MUCH SPEND ON BULLPEN (AND PITCHING). 50% ROLLS OFF HITTERS CARDS, 35% OFF PITCHERS, 15% OF DEFENSIVE. SPEND ACCORDINGLY.
I'D SPEND SOME OF YOUR PITCHING MONEY, PLUS VALENTINE, CRUZ ON BETTER HITTING. ALSO LOOK AT A PLATOON OR TWO (E.G., PARRISH). THIS TEAM WILL PROBABLY HAVE A LOSING RECORDS 80% OF THE TIME, UNLESS YOU HIT A LOT OF REALLY GOOD CARDS.

Great feedback.
Seems like the first season I went after high OPS guys with no consideration for defensive range. I converted only 62% of X rolls to outs. So I drafted for #1 and #2 defensive range. This seems to be one of the things that killed me. I get the Valentine/Cruz values. I will see what is left in the free agent pool. I thought I decreased my spending on pitching significantly from my last draft but there still is room for cuts there. At what point do I need to consider platoon...3R/3L or higher?
I wish my boss gave me specific feedback like this...

Your 5 backup hitters are largely wasted $$. I'd spend a little more for the Righty half of the platoon (look at Parrish, Vail, Kusick, Wockenfuss, Clines all in the $1.x), and then the lefties half can be guys like Carbo, Blomberg, May, Hebner, Crawford, etc. Anything much over 3L or 3R can easily be platooned. I normally try to spend about $6-$9M on my bullpen -- in the 70s games they may pitch 30% of your innings. 70% of innings on starters, so maybe at most $20M. You also need to try to fit your team in your home ballpark and your league -- a lot of your pitchers have a lot of ballpark homeruns and would get bombed in Fultons/Fenways.

I think the grading is overly tough. Burleson and Cruz are excellent value players if you hit their good years. It is true, Ellis Valentine is almost never on anyone's roster because it is one of the most overpriced cards in the set. I also agree with the grading for McCovey and Cedeno. One area I really disagree is Gary Carter, if you are in a home run park, Carter is my 2nd favorite catcher (as I recall, the Reds had an even better one). But, as always, you have to look for years, Carter has one clearly cut year, and one year where he obliterates lefty pitching. The outfielder Jose Cruz can be a good value in RF, depending on his year and the ballpark. Hargrove, the human rain delay, can be a pretty good play at the 2nd or 3rd position in the lineup due to his OBP.

If you are new to the mystery card format, it is critical to understand that for each season, each player has only one season. So, if an injury shows that Gary Carter is 1978; he is 1978 all season long. I only mention this because it is impossible to grade your team without knowing the season for each player. Some new players think that a player can change years during the season; this is not true; each player is randomly assigned one year and that is their card for the entire season. You probably already knew this, but I add it just in case you didn't.

...50% ROLLS OFF HITTERS CARDS, 35% OFF PITCHERS, 15% OF DEFENSIVE...

While I might quibble with some of the other feedback (e.g., I think Catfish is a good value), I cannot agree with this 50/35/15 assertion somehow makes pitching less valuable. You could argue that at least 15 percent of a hitter's card is always an out, therefore his card only matters 35% of the time. Pitching is important in SOM just as in real life. There is enough variation in the "35%" that a pitcher's card has to make a SOM pitcher's card as effective (or ineffective) as his real-life counterpart.

Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:24 pm
Re: Grade my 70's team...Report this postReply with quoteFri Oct 19, 2012 1:39 pm

Perhaps not as harsh as Hallerose

C-Gary Carter C but THERE ARE PROBABLY BETTER CATCHERS FOR THE MONEY.
1B-Mike Hargrove -- B+, One of best Leadoff hitters in 70s and would work as DH.
2nd-Julio Cruz B, I love D and speed, especially if you are spending Offensive $ elsewhere.
3rd-Larry Parrish D, Not a fan, not top 12 @ 3b
ss-Rick Burleson C, OK DEFENSE, BUT DOESN'T HIT. agreed
LF-Jose Cruz C, DECENT BUT THERE ARE MUCH BETTER VALUES. agreed
RF-Ellis Valentine F,The most overpriced hitter in Strat (briggs is close 2nd)
CF-Cesar Cedeno A-, EXCELLENT CF, 2 GREAT YEARS, 2 GOOD YEARS. SPEED, DEFENSE, but EXPENSIVE, I never take.
DH-Willie McCovey A+, 1 Tremendous value BUT VERY INJURY PRONE, YOU NEED TO HAVE A SOLID BACK UP READY TO GO.
SP-Catfish Hunter B, GOOD PITCHER, BUT MAYBE OVERPRICED, 4R is a concern
Mike Cuellar, D, MAYBE THE MOST DECEPTIIVE CARD IN THE SET, HE BENEFITED FROM GREAT BALTIMORE DEFENSE, TEAM AND BALLPARK, AND THE CARD DOESN'T PLAY WELL. agree
Juan Marichal, C, DECENT VALUE, BUT SOME OF HIS YEARS DON'T PLAY WELL. Never got his good 2 years
Dennis Leonard B, One of my favorites except in HR park. Pitched my on no-no
RP-Rollie Fingers, Joe Hoerner, Paul Lindblad, Ron Schueler, Doug Bird Love Fingers, Bird is best $0.75 releiver, Hoerner is too schizophrentic, Lindblad OK but better options. Schueler cheap mopup 5th starter

I would upgrade LF, RF and perhaps CF depending on whats out there (if you need $ elsewhere). Parrish must go.

...50% ROLLS OFF HITTERS CARDS, 35% OFF PITCHERS, 15% OF DEFENSIVE...

While I might quibble with some of the other feedback (e.g., I think Catfish is a good value), I cannot agree with this 50/35/15 assertion somehow makes pitching less valuable. You could argue that at least 15 percent of a hitter's card is always an out, therefore his card only matters 35% of the time. Pitching is important in SOM just as in real life. There is enough variation in the "35%" that a pitcher's card has to make a SOM pitcher's card as effective (or ineffective) as his real-life counterpart.

I assume you understand that all the "x" (defensive) rolls are all on the pitchers cards. Half the rolls come on the hitters card, and half on the pitchers card. It just that between 1/4 and 1/3 of the rolls on the pitchers cards are really x rolls that go to the defense. If you want to spend 1/2 your $$ on pitching, please come and play in my division.

WOW, it got a little heated.

...50% ROLLS OFF HITTERS CARDS, 35% OFF PITCHERS, 15% OF DEFENSIVE...

While I might quibble with some of the other feedback (e.g., I think Catfish is a good value), I cannot agree with this 50/35/15 assertion somehow makes pitching less valuable. You could argue that at least 15 percent of a hitter's card is always an out, therefore his card only matters 35% of the time. Pitching is important in SOM just as in real life. There is enough variation in the "35%" that a pitcher's card has to make a SOM pitcher's card as effective (or ineffective) as his real-life counterpart.

I assume you understand that all the "x" (defensive) rolls are all on the pitchers cards. Half the rolls come on the hitters card, and half on the pitchers card. It just that between 1/4 and 1/3 of the rolls on the pitchers cards are really x rolls that go to the defense. If you want to spend 1/2 your $$ on pitching, please come and play in my division.

Yes, I understand the bit about X defensive rolls being on pitcher's cards, but it's irrelevant. You don't need three columns to differentiate how effective a pitcher is. You can give a pitcher 0 hit/walk chances all the way up to 72 hit/walk chances (out of 216 chances on both cards) with just two columns to work with.

In fact, if SOM for some reason decided to move all the X chances to the hitters cards, it wouldn't change how effective (or ineffective) pitchers are in general in this game. Now I suspect you won't believe that, but it's simple math. It's easy enough to figure out what any given hitter's expected batting average is against any given pitcher. Now swap a column worth of outs from the hitter's card with a column full of X chances on the pitcher's card and nothing changes. The pitcher, now affecting "50%" (instead of "33%") of the rolls is no more or less effective than he was before.

Furthermore, I'm not suggesting that anyone spend half of their payroll on pitching; that would be excessive. However, good pitching teams can win in this game just as good hitting teams can.