2014 set sleepers

Well that isn't the case unless you only play in a certain type of park. If you know who the top whatever players are for a HR park they are not the top whatever players for a pitcher park so you would need to evaluate all over again. Same is true for other types of extreme parks. Each will have their own set of top whatever players.

That isn't what Valen said. He said: " you know who the top whatever is before you even start looking at cards." He didn't say anything about parks, he just said the ratings guide tell you who the "top whatever" are, period.

Even telling managers who the best players are for each park is a lot, since managers are almost always putting their teams together for particular parks. You combine that with telling managers every player's OBP total, and the ratings guides are providing substantial information.

It doesn't come right out and say " so and so is best in Coors" but it does list, by position, who the top 48 on base guys are the top total base, top Pure HR's top Ball Park hr's both left side and right side for each position. With the spread sheets you have to manipulate Excel to do that yourself, but if you know Excel at all it's pretty easy to do.

Lists all this info for pitchers too, fewest Ballpark HR's, fewest clean HR's, Highest gba's(double play chances), so it's pretty east to extrapolate who benefits from playing in the Bam boxes and which pitchers shouldn't pitch in them etc.

These charts are in the back of the ratings books after each team by team breakdown of every card is presented.

As has often been said it is a HUGE time saver and a fantastic tool to understand the current set and which players should be effective.

Sure you don't want that free peek?

I had no idea the ratings guides did that much for its users as well. They really provide a lot.

As to the ratings guides being a tool, they're not; they're valued deciphered information. Deciphered information given to negate the need of deciphering (cards) isn't a tool; it's valued deciphered information. A tool in this case would be an advanced logarithm that helped you arrive at or process that information. Maybe some math genius on this Forum could come up with that.

I have to, again, decline your generous offer. As I've said before, evaluating players has always been my favorite part of the game...and it's never taken me long to do it. So, I don't want to give that up so I can increase my win total.

I had no idea the ratings guides did that much for its users as well. They really provide a lot.

As to the ratings guides being a tool, they're not; they're valued deciphered information. Deciphered information given to negate the need of deciphering (cards) isn't a tool; it's valued deciphered information. A tool in this case would be an advanced logarithm that helped you arrive at or process that information. Maybe some math genius on this Forum could come up with that.

I have to, again, decline your generous offer. As I've said before, evaluating players has always been my favorite part of the game...and it's never taken me long to do it. So, I don't want to give that up so I can increase my win total.

I'll agree to disagree. It's a tool because you still need to look at the cards, you can't use the ratings book alone, ( well I suppose you could, but it would be foolish if you did). The ratings book does not tell you that your pitcher with 21 points of on base has that onbase exclusively on the 7 in every column, simply put, it doesn't give you card make up, show you which columns or numbers the hits walks etc are on, you still have to look at the cards to figure that out.

So because you can't use the book alone, it's an aid, or a tool, a device to save time, no matter how fancifully you want to flout your vocabulary to say otherwise.

Firstly, if you think using "decipher" and "negate" constitutes flouting vocabulary, then your vocabulary is seriously hurting...

Secondly, your definition of "tool" is so broad, that any object in the line of causality could be described as a "tool." That makes everything a tool, and nothing a tool. I never said the ratings guides were the end of all activity; nothing is. However, they are the exact information people seek when examining the cards. That means they are an end goal of people evaluating cards, not a means to achieving that goal...or a tool. The fact that information is then used to build teams makes them no more of a tool than the cards themselves. They become useful information or "aid," as you said.

So, as I said before, the ratings guides are deciphered information, not the tool used to attain that deciphered information. We can agree to disagree on that.

whatever

Incisive as ever, Steve. I wouldn't have expected any more from you...

The ratings book is a tool in deciphering what players to use. If you would rather substitute one of these words in place of tool so that you can tell yourself that you are always correct feel free to do so strether (apparatus, device, mechanism, means, implement or even gadget).

It only gives you offensive numbers. It does not factor in injury rating, base stealing, base running, throwing arms or defense so if you only use the ratings guide to create your team you will not be very successful. It is simply a time saving tool to help point you in the right direction towards the type of players you may want to evaluate more closely.

If it was more than simply a tool all you would need to do is draft all the top whatever players based on the ratings guide and be done with it.

Firstly, I haven't seen you admit being wrong in a debate once, Bombers, so spare me the "tell yourself you are always correct" sanctimony. It would certainly apply to you. And. since you claim to care about manners, try to keep to the debate without getting personal. It's counterproductive.

Also, If you want to see vital deciphered and/or demystifying information as a "tool," knock yourself out. As I said earlier, it would decidedly stretch out the definition of "tool." It would make the following all tools:

1. Accurate professional financial advice.
2. Accurate medical advice
3. Accurate and helpful insider trading information
4. Insider scouting reports on a future rival team's plays

Typically, such information is--like the ratings guides--seen as desired information that would directly help one accomplish his goals, not an "apparatus or instrument used in performing an operation." However, if you want to see the ratings guide, and pretty much everything else, as such, then I won't debate you further about it.

However, as previous accounts on this thread have shown, the ratings guides don't just save players time. They help players make more successful player choices than they would make without them. That makes them significantly more than just a time-saving "tool."

Not going to add to the debate as I've already stated my position but bombers has apparently never seen a ratings guide either. He is incorrect about the information contained , it does give steal ratings, running ratings, defensive ratings, arm strength, hold ratings, error ratings, postions played, throwing arms, injury ratings, etc., in short, all the info action found on the cards other than what did rolls results appear on.

Annnnnnd, like clockwork, another thread goes to pot.