- Posts: 1279
- Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 1:04 am
Thu Jul 05, 2018 9:13 pm
Rosie, I plan to suggest a few cards, but I haven't had time to complete my research and do the write ups. Plus, I don't have the over priced SOM card viewer. Is there a deadline for player suggestions?
Also, for the cards that are available online, I've noticed that many players rated 3L, 3R, 4L or 4R are better on the strong side of their cards than many players rated 5L or 5R or greater. Given such, it would appear that using 5L or 5R as the standard is somewhat arbitrary, as it is in no way an absolute measure of the strength of the strong side of the card, but rather is a measure of the strong side of the card only as compared to the weak side of the card. For example, Mike Heath and Cliff Johnson are both $.55 mil or less and are each 7L. However, no one would say that either is better against lefties than the rather modest Thurman Munson card $1.62 mil card, which is "only" a 3L. According to Diamond Dope, Heath and Johnson only create about 5.5 runs/27 outs against lefties in Minute Maid '05, while Munson creates about 70% more runs at 9.11 runs/27 outs. The difference may be even greater in "smallball" parks. Countless other examples can be given, but I think everyone understands the point.
While I understand the desire for platoon players, given that the rating for the strong side of a card only measures how it relates to the weak side of the card, and does not measure the strength of the card versus other similarly rated cards, I suggest that the standard for nominations be lowered to 3L and 3R. Not only may such yield equal or better platoon players, but unlike 9L or 9R players (such as Gates Brown) there will be a greater chance for success on the weak side of the card when HAL, with all his quirkiness, fails to substitute for the player when a change by the opposing manager causes use of the weak side of the card.
Also, for the cards that are available online, I've noticed that many players rated 3L, 3R, 4L or 4R are better on the strong side of their cards than many players rated 5L or 5R or greater. Given such, it would appear that using 5L or 5R as the standard is somewhat arbitrary, as it is in no way an absolute measure of the strength of the strong side of the card, but rather is a measure of the strong side of the card only as compared to the weak side of the card. For example, Mike Heath and Cliff Johnson are both $.55 mil or less and are each 7L. However, no one would say that either is better against lefties than the rather modest Thurman Munson card $1.62 mil card, which is "only" a 3L. According to Diamond Dope, Heath and Johnson only create about 5.5 runs/27 outs against lefties in Minute Maid '05, while Munson creates about 70% more runs at 9.11 runs/27 outs. The difference may be even greater in "smallball" parks. Countless other examples can be given, but I think everyone understands the point.
While I understand the desire for platoon players, given that the rating for the strong side of a card only measures how it relates to the weak side of the card, and does not measure the strength of the card versus other similarly rated cards, I suggest that the standard for nominations be lowered to 3L and 3R. Not only may such yield equal or better platoon players, but unlike 9L or 9R players (such as Gates Brown) there will be a greater chance for success on the weak side of the card when HAL, with all his quirkiness, fails to substitute for the player when a change by the opposing manager causes use of the weak side of the card.
Last edited by BDWard on Sat Jul 07, 2018 9:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
