Re-pricng of players

Durgleberry,

You're going to have to put that mess into paragraphs if you want me to read it. I'm not wading through it as is.

durantjerry makes a couple points I want to comment on.

Orlando Cepeda cost around $4.50 in ATG I and was acknowledged as the supreme bargain. Now he costs over $6.50 in ATG 8. Why, because he was incorrectly priced in the first attempt at pricing SOMO ATG, which is understandable. The pricing error was corrected in future versions of the game as SOMO became more experienced at pricing the card sets. .... Don Buford in the 70's game should cost closer to $7.00 than $5.00.

The first point I agree with. The older sets, especially, are not priced correctly. The second point I disagree with because I never draft Buford and I see him as a free agent in a number of leagues. To me, the best way to know whether he is underpriced is to measure how often he is used or not used.

My proposal for correcting pricing is to use the wisdom of the market. SOM would collect data on the percentage of time each player is on a roster at the start of each season. Then, every six months, players above a certain threshold (let's say 90% of seasons on a starting roster) would have their price increased 10%, and players below a certain threshold (let's say 10% of seasons on a starting roster) would have their prices decreased 10% with a floor of 0.75. In a few years, the prices will be much more balanced according to the preferences of the SOM managers that play the game.

First, I think Stretcher is right that any extravagant re-pricing plan is a pipedream. By extravagant, I mean expecting them to look at it more than once. They haven't ever re-priced over about a ten year period so thinking they are going to periodically revisit the pricing is unrealistic based on past experience. We could argue the merits of Buford, but I think you get the point. The 70's & 80's basically = ATG I & 2001 when it comes to accurately assigning value to the cards and those early years weren't priced so good.

My plan only requires SOM to fix it once. The game runs very well, so there must be someone that writes good code. That person could implement a sub-program that collects data and the computer automatically reprices every 6 months according to the collected data - no further human intervention is required. So, this program would quietly run in the background and over the years pricing would get closer and closer to absolute pricing perfection; thus, over an infinite amount of time, achieving SOM-player-pricing-nirvana with only one human intervention until the end of the universe. Buh-hah-hah-hah

Look again at my proposal, how hard would it be to program in?

My proposal for correcting pricing is to use the wisdom of the market. SOM would collect data on the percentage of time each player is on a roster at the start of each season. Then, every six months, players above a certain threshold (let's say 90% of seasons on a starting roster) would have their price increased 10%, and players below a certain threshold (let's say 10% of seasons on a starting roster) would have their prices decreased 10% with a floor of 0.75. In a few years, the prices will be much more balanced according to the preferences of the SOM managers that play the game.

Hmmm. Don Buford you say... Please do give more examples!

I put a lot of work into researching these players because I love the mystery card games (all four decades) and want them all to be as much fun as possible and because I enjoyed doing it.

It shouldn't be too hard (for IT guys) to calculate use and reprice players based on usage.

I have no problem with adding new players to the set; it would increase the combinations of rosters I and other players could construct. However, it would add new players to the "unused players" pool and would cause more original players to go unused, a problem a previous poster bemoaned. So, solving one "problem" would just enhance another one. If everybody actually agrees on their priorities and desired changes, that won't matter. However, I don't exactly see that happening.

As far as re-adjusting prices based on usage goes, as I noted in an earlier post: the problem with basing it on usage is many overused players are only used because of their low price. Once their prices are raised, they will go unused, need to be re-priced, and we'd be right back where we were before.

Strether makes a sound point about the unused players, but I think it's more the nature of these essentially 'All Star teams' we end up constructing in the default format. There are lots of players/years of a player that go unused in a given ATG league, for example. With 12 team leagues, that's just a fact of life. If there were, say, a 16 or 20 team option that bridged the gap, we'd certainly get to those cards. 24 tm leagues make the best use of the set, in my opinion, but folks don't like waiting for them to fill. Ultimately though it really doesn't bother me because at some point, someone out there is always going to get shut out in the draft and say 'what the __, I'll try them out'. Maybe not in the Vets leagues so much, but it happens.

Like LMBombers said, though, it's just crazy NOT to have so many of the names we associate with the 80's not in the game. I looked at his lists and... ( Ruben Sierra!) instantly liked the 80s game a bit less. He made a point that a bunch of those names were aging 70s stars and it took me straight back to the '83 Phillies Wheez Kids that took the NL pennant. Where is the petition and where do I sign?!

The 80s (very first mystery card game) player pricing is way too low compared to the other mystery games. I suggested to SOM that there be a repricing of that game at least. Also that game has the lowest player pool.

I went through every team’s roster from 1982-1987 and looked at every player looking for prospects to add to the player pool. I used the following arbitrary criteria. Must have at least 5 years with at least 100 AB or 40 or so IP for a RP or 100 IP for a SP. If the player had 4 or 5 of such years within 1980-1989 that met this criteria I listed him in group A. If the player had 3 years in the 80s and 2 years in the 70s or 90s I listed him in group B. I only wanted players that had at least 3 qualifying seasons in the 80’s. These limits are not SOM’s but simply mine for use in compiling this list.

Some players had more than 5 seasons that met the minimum playing time criteria I used so for those players other years could be substituted for ones I have suggested. I tried to stay away from unusually good or bad seasons where possible. If all players in group A hitters and pitchers are added that would bring the player pool up to 731. That is on the low end of what I propose as the target range for the player pool. Maybe we add some of the group B players and/or don’t use all the players from group A. This post is simply to start a discussion and is not meant to be a final answer. I put a lot of work into researching these players because I love the mystery card games (all four decades) and want them all to be as much fun as possible and because I enjoyed doing it.

The players below are simply listed alphabetically within each group and not in any order of preference. There are not many superstars. They are largely ageing vets at the end of their career, young players that would be superstars in the 90s or bench players for the most part. Anyway I submitted this to SOM several years ago and they considered adding players and repricing the 80s but decided the return would not justify their time and expense.

HITTERS (Group A)
Bench, Johnny – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Bonds, Barry – 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 (the pre PED years)
Bosley, Thad – 80, 81, 85, 86, 87
Burroughs, Jeff – 80, 81, 82, 83, 85
Butera, Sal – 80, 81, 82, 85, 86
Cangelosi, John – 86, 87, 88, 89, 94
Coles, Darnell – 84, 86, 87, 88, 89
Cotto, Henry – 84, 87, 88, 89, 90
Dent, Bucky – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Galarraga, Andres – 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
Gross, Greg – 80, 83, 84, 85, 86
Hairston, Jerry – 83, 84, 85, 86, 87
Harper, Brian – 83, 84, 88, 89, 90
Harper, Terry - 82, 83, 84, 85, 86
Hebner, Richie – 80, 81, 82, 83, 85
Javier, Stan – 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
Jeltz, Steve – 85, 86, 87, 88, 89
Jones, Lynn – 79, 81, 82, 84, 85
Krenchicki, Wayne – 82, 83, 84, 85, 86
Kuiper, Duane – 80, 81, 82, 83, 84
Lefebvre, Joe – 80, 81, 82, 83), 84
Lyons, Steve – 85, 86, 87, 88, 89
Meacham, Bob – 84, 85, 86, 87, 88
Monday, Rick – 78, 80, 81, 82, 83 (then again maybe that ’81 season is just too good?)
Money, Don – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Moore, Charlie – 80, 82, 83, 85, 86
Morales, Jerry – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Morgan, Joe – 80, 81, 82, 83, 84
Nicosia, Steve – 79, 80, 81, 82, 84
Nixon, Otis – 85, 86, 88, 89, 90
O’Malley, Tom – 82, 83, 86, 87, 90
Ortiz, Junior – 83, 87, 88, 89 (the 5th year could be [84/91 - bad] or [86/90 – good])
Otis, Amos – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Perez, Tony – 80, 81, 82, 83, 86
Picciolo, Rob – 79, 80, 81, 84, 85 (possibly use ’77 for ’84 but that would throw him down into the next group with only three 80’s seasons)
Piniella, Lou – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Ramos, Domingo – 83, 85, 86, 89, 90
Reed, Jeff – 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
Russell, John – 84, 85, 86, 89, 90
Sakata, Lenn – 81, 82, 83, 84, 85
Sierra, Ruben – 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
Simpson, Joe – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Skinner, Joel – 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
Squires, Mike – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Thomas Derrel – 79, 80, 81, 83, 84
Thompson, Scot – 79, 80, 81, 84, 85
Venable, Max – 80, 82, 83, 85, 86
Washington, Ron – 82, 83, 84, 85, 88
Watson, Bob – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Wellman, Brad – 83, 84, 85, 88, 89
Wohlford, Jim – 79, 80, 82, 83, 85
Woods, Gary – 77, 81, 82, 83, 84
Wright, George – 82, 83, 84, 85, 86
Yastrzemski, Carl – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83

HITTERS (Group B)
Allenson, Gary – 79, 81, 82, 83, 84 (only 4 seasons of over 100 AB)
Anderson, Jim – 78, 79, 80, 81, 83
Ayala, Benny – 80, 81, 82, 83, 84 (only 4 seasons of over 100 AB)
Bell, Jay – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Bevacqua, Kurt – 78, 79, 82, 83, 85
Biittner, Larry – 78, 79, 80, 82, 83
Bilardello, Dann – 83, 84, 85, 86, 89 (only 4 seasons of over 100 AB)
Bochy, Bruce – 78, 79, 84, 85, 86
Burks, Ellis – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Candaele, Casey – 86, 87, 88, 90, 91
Cruz, Todd – 79, 80, 82, 83, 84 (can’t hit a lick, do we really care?)
Eisenreich, Jim – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Essian, Jim – 79, 80, 82, 83, 84 (only 4 of these seasons over 100 AB, you would have to go back further in the 70’s for another 100+ season. The 1983 season is close though.)
Gallego, Mike – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Garcia, Kiko – 78, 79, 80, 81, 83
Geronimo, Cesar – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
Hill, Marc – 79, 80 , 82, 83, 84 (only two seasons of 100+ AB in the 80’s)
Hodges, Ron – 76, 77, 82, 83, 84
Johnson, Lamar – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
Johnstone, Jay – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83 (1981 has below 100 AB)
Karkovice, Ron – 86, 88, 89, 90, 91
Kingery, Mike – 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 (1989 has 76 AB, you could substitute an awful 1991 season.)
Lake, Steve – 83, 85, 87, 89, 91 (1983 has only 85 AB)
Larkin, Gene – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Lee, Manuel – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Liriano, Nelson – 87, 88, 89, 90, 94
Magadan, Dave – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Mayberry, John – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
McBride, Bake – 78, 79, 80, 81, 83
McKay, Dave – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
McLemore, Mark – 87, 88, 89, 92, 93
Milbourne, Larry – 79, 80, 82, 83, 84 (1983 only 66 AB)
Murcer, Bobby – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
Narron, Jerry – 79, 80, 81, 84, 85 (can’t hit, does he really matter?)
Palmeiro, Rafael – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Perkins, Broderick – 78, 79, 81, 82, 83
Pujols, Luis – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82 (he is so awful does it really matter?)
Quinones, Luis – 86, 87, 89, 90, 91
Rayford, Floyd – 83, 84, 85, 86, 87 (1987 only 50 AB)
Revering, Dave – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
Rudi, Joe – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
Stanley, Mike – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Staub, Rusty – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83 (His 80, 81 & 83 cards may be too good for a part time player)
Surhoff, BJ – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Tenace, Gene – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
White, Jerry – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
Williams, Matt – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91


PITCHERS (Group A)
Beckwith, Joe – 80, 82, 83, 84, 85
Bird, Doug – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Castillo, Bobby – 80, 81, 82, 83, 85
Easterly, Jamie – 81, 82, 83, 84, 85
Fingers, Rollie – 80, 81, 82, 84, 85
Forster, Terry – 82, 83, 84, 85, 86
Franco, John – 85, 86, 87, 88, 89
Garrelts, Scott – 85, 86, 87, 88, 89 (another player who mixes RP only with mostly SP seasons but the difference here is that his best season was as a SP so I think it is OK to list him as a S/R.)
Havens, Brad – 81, 82, 83, 86, 88
Hooton, Burt – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Howell, Ken – 84, 85, 86, 87, 89
Jenkins, Fergie – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Koosman, Jerry – 79, 80, 82, 83, 84
McGraw, Tug – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Monge, Sid – 80, 81, 82, 83 and either 79 or 84
Morgan, Mike – 82, 86, 87, 89, 90
Niekro, Phil – 80, 82, 83, 84, 85
Palmer, Jim – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Perry, Gaylord – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Plesac, Dan – 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
Reed, Ron – 80, 81, 82, 83, 84
Renko, Steve – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Seaver, Tom – 80, 81, 83, 84, 85
Sosa, Elias – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Tidrow, Dick – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Tobik, Dave – 80, 81, 82, 83, 84
Torrez, Mike – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Underwood, Tom – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83
Witt, Bobby – 86, 87, 88, 89, 90

PITCHERS (Group B)
Aguilera, Rick – 85, 86, 87, 89, 90 (only 4 years as a SP & one dominant RP card makes it difficult I think. Maybe he is better left in the 90s as a RP?)
Augustine, Jerry – 79, 80, 81, 82, 83 (he is not very good so it might not matter)
Fisher, Brian – 85, 86, 87, 88, 92 (3 seasons as mainly a SP but 1 season as a dominant RP might be crazy if listed as a S/R and is able to start with those stats. Very much like Aguilera in that respect.)
Fryman, Woodie – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
Henneman, Mike – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Hood, Don – 78, 79, 80, 82, 83
Hrabosky, Al – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
Jackson, Michael – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Jones, Doug – 87. 88. 89. 90, 91
Lancaster, Les – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
LaRoche, Dave – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
Maddux, Greg – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Magrane, Joe – 87, 88, 89, 90, 93 (These are the exact cards he has for the 90s game. Even though 3 years are in the 80s would we really want a duplicate?)
Matlack, Jon – 77, 78, 80, 81, 82
May, Rudy – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
Medich, Doc – 78, 79, 80, 81, 82
Myers, Randy – 87, 88, 89, 90, 91
Owchinko, Bob – 79, 80, 81, 82, 84 (1981 he only had 39 IP. Maybe use 1978 in place of 1981?)
Rijo, Jose – 86, 88, 89, 90, 91
Roberge, Bert – 79, 82, 84, 85, 86 (maybe he didn’t really play enough)
Sanchez, Luis – 81, 82, 83, 84, 85 (all the seasons in the 80’s but his first season only has 33 IP. Is it enough?)
Searage, Ray – 81, 85, 86, 87, 89 (Similar to Luis Sanchez but he has two seasons of only 30 something IP instead of only one.)
Thomas, Roy – 79, 80, 83, 84, 85 (He has a few starts in these 5 years. If he would be listed as RP only then I would move him into Group A.)

Be still my heart. I would love to see more of these cards added.

Sorry about the paragraphs, I guess I'm not as smart as you. Quick Summary=Old sets in initial SOMO games are relatively poorly priced but have evolved into better priced models of the initial sets. The 70's and especial the 80's=old sets priced in the infancy of SOMO and are similarly poorly priced, but have not evolved at all. The problem has nothing to do with who is or is not drafted, but has to do with the un-evolved, twelve year old pricing structure that currently exists. It creates an un-level playing field favoring the experienced player. Re-pricing is needed to upgrade the current pricing model into the 2010's, creating a better, more accurately priced product. When were the 80's priced, 2003 maybe? Seems like someone may have learned a thing or two about pricing over the last dozen years and numerous new games/card sets that have been issued over that time period. Bring the pricing out of the dead-ball era of SOMO into the modern age.

Sorry about the paragraphs, I guess I'm not as smart as you.

Don't get maudlin on me. They teach paragraph usage in grade school. So, my request was not a comment on your intelligence; I was assuming your paragraph usage is fine.

As to your summary, I have no problem with your suggestion. A one-time re-pricing based on superior analysis, not who is drafted or undrafted, would be fine. I completely agree that mis-pricing, not unused or undrafted players, is the real issue at hand. If SOM can apply its garnered knowledge to a sound re-pricing based on superior analysis of the cards themselves, they could improve the sets.

Howdy,

Wouldn't a more accurate re-pricing (based on playing strength, value, injuries, et al) contribute to causing the draft to being more of a lottery, like in the non-mystery leagues? While this '70s enthusiast is all for bringing in Fred Lynn's '75 card and fixing Larry Bowa's card, it seems to me that a re-structuring could work against the very thing that makes the mystery-card feature so much fun: Even one who drafts low can be competitive, as the best players aren't always the most expensive. Perhaps I'm not correctly understanding what is meant by "correcting" the salaries in the mystery leagues? I welcome your replies.

Larry