SOMers - Stratomatic Baseball

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: The Devil is in the details...
«First  <  1 2 3 4  >  Last»  | Page of 4  sorted by


VP of Operations

Status: Offline
Posts: 16185
Date: Oct 28, 2015
RE: The Devil is in the details...
Permalink  
 


nacster wrote:
seajaw wrote:
nacster wrote:
seajaw wrote:

Next question: When a pitcher reaches POW, how quick are you remove him?  Automatic?  Or, do you move ahead, with reservations?

Again, this gets back to the thought of allowing a player to fail, rather than taking it out of their hands.  I had a game earlier this year, in my '48 replay, in which Bob Feller was nursing a lead going into the bottom of the ninth.

He reached his point of weakness with two outs, but still had the lead.

Do you relieve him?  Or, do you say "He's Bob Feller, so he finishes"?

The POW is based on a negative...that the pitcher in questions tires and "serves it up" once he reaches that point.  In real life, sometimes it happens, and sometimes it doesn't.

How often to you challenge the dice gods?


I am VERY old school when it comes to my starters.

In the comp game, not only is there "POW", but it actually is broken down so far as a "pitch count POW".  Say you have Bob Feller 1948....let's say, without checking, he completed 28 of 41 starts.  If he is fully rested, chances are his "pitch count POW" is something like 132.  Now this number is RARELY higher then 135.....even in deadball seasons when guys like Will White pitched every inning of every game his team played.

Do you remember the game in my 1986 replay, where Roger Clemens....on the EXACT day he fanned 20 Seattle Mariners.....whiffed 21 of them in the replay game I played (starting Clemens actually on an extra day rest because I knew of the historic date; just so happened Clemens went nuts).  Clemens didn't whiff 21 in regulation....took him FOURTEEN and ONE THIRD INNINGS......throw in 8 walks, and according to the "pitch count" factor, he threw 220 PITCHES!!!

Obviously, even in 1986 (man that sounds weird, like from another time period, but it is in fact almost 30 years ago, a whole generation actually), NO pitcher would be left in to absorb that abuse (unless Billy Martin was your skipper).  But he was rolling along, so why take him out?  Because "in real life" that wouldn't happen?  That is the great thing about doing these replays.  Guys take on a life of their own....within the boundaries of rules one makes.  Could I have used 1957 Bob Hazle in more then his allotted 147 at bats (134 plus 10% = 147), yes....MANY guys who do their own replays fudge at bats, innings pitched, etc.


I sure wish we knew more about the old pitch counts.

The 220 you had Clemens throw was a crazy number -- in my opinion (sorry) -- especially given the era.

We know Ryan threw as many as 250 on one occasion in the mid-'70's, and we have some other spotty data from that era (talk about sounding weird: "spotty data from that era," referring to the 1970s!!!).

But Ryan threw 222 complete games in his career.  In 773 career starts, he pitched into extra innings 21 times.  Given the huge numbers of walks and strikeouts, his pitch counts must have been sky high, particularly in his Angels' years.  I'd guess 140-150 was not unusual, and might even be lowballing him.

In 1989, at age 42, in eight innings against Kansas City, he threw 164 pitches.  The only time I was lucky enough to see him pitch in-person -- in 1990 -- he threw 114 pitches in just five innings against the Mariners (the start right after he no-hit Oakland).

Clemens was different, and usually never came close to finishing his starts (pitched into the ninth just 127 times in 707 career starts, with 118 CGs, only 29 of which were thrown after 1992), let alone going into extra frames (once in his entire career, gave up two runs in the 10th and lost, 4-2, to the Angels).

baseref doesn't have pitch counts for Clemens' '86 season, so I don't know, for sure, how many pitches he threw.  But he allowed just three hits and no walks, and faced just 30 batters in the game.

I spot-checked Clemens from '86 (no numbers) through 1992, his prime.  He threw in excess of 160 pitches (164, to be exact) once.


That is the point....I didn't have Clemens throw any sort of number.....the GAME did.  Just because we are talking 1986 baseball doesn't automatically mean he comes out after 100 pitches , or some other arbitrary "magic number".  I don't play the games saying "well Connie Mack would let a guy pitch 17 innings in relief, then start him the next day, so I will too".


You mean, HAL let it happen?  That makes it even stranger.  I would imagine the pitch-weakness indicator must have been near zero by the time he reached 170.  He'd literally be running on empty.

If a guy has a proven record of doing something like Mack did with Lefty Grove, Hod Lisenbee, or Eddie Rommel, I'd file it under "possible," to use if I had to.  I'm trying to recreate what was considered possible in that era, or season.  I want that sense of realism.

Another trick teams would try on occasion (if the pitching staff was running on fumes, perhaps) and they needed a reliever in the ninth: Bring on the second-game starter to finish the first game, then burn the pen as needed at the back end of the nightcap.



__________________

"No cell, no car, no credit cards, he's sixty-plus and gray...
Just sitting in his basement, with a Strat game underway."



General Manager

Status: Online
Posts: 13508
Date: Oct 28, 2015
Permalink  
 

seajaw wrote:
nacster wrote:
seajaw wrote:
nacster wrote:
seajaw wrote:

Next question: When a pitcher reaches POW, how quick are you remove him?  Automatic?  Or, do you move ahead, with reservations?

Again, this gets back to the thought of allowing a player to fail, rather than taking it out of their hands.  I had a game earlier this year, in my '48 replay, in which Bob Feller was nursing a lead going into the bottom of the ninth.

He reached his point of weakness with two outs, but still had the lead.

Do you relieve him?  Or, do you say "He's Bob Feller, so he finishes"?

The POW is based on a negative...that the pitcher in questions tires and "serves it up" once he reaches that point.  In real life, sometimes it happens, and sometimes it doesn't.

How often to you challenge the dice gods?


I am VERY old school when it comes to my starters.

In the comp game, not only is there "POW", but it actually is broken down so far as a "pitch count POW".  Say you have Bob Feller 1948....let's say, without checking, he completed 28 of 41 starts.  If he is fully rested, chances are his "pitch count POW" is something like 132.  Now this number is RARELY higher then 135.....even in deadball seasons when guys like Will White pitched every inning of every game his team played.

Do you remember the game in my 1986 replay, where Roger Clemens....on the EXACT day he fanned 20 Seattle Mariners.....whiffed 21 of them in the replay game I played (starting Clemens actually on an extra day rest because I knew of the historic date; just so happened Clemens went nuts).  Clemens didn't whiff 21 in regulation....took him FOURTEEN and ONE THIRD INNINGS......throw in 8 walks, and according to the "pitch count" factor, he threw 220 PITCHES!!!

Obviously, even in 1986 (man that sounds weird, like from another time period, but it is in fact almost 30 years ago, a whole generation actually), NO pitcher would be left in to absorb that abuse (unless Billy Martin was your skipper).  But he was rolling along, so why take him out?  Because "in real life" that wouldn't happen?  That is the great thing about doing these replays.  Guys take on a life of their own....within the boundaries of rules one makes.  Could I have used 1957 Bob Hazle in more then his allotted 147 at bats (134 plus 10% = 147), yes....MANY guys who do their own replays fudge at bats, innings pitched, etc.


I sure wish we knew more about the old pitch counts.

The 220 you had Clemens throw was a crazy number -- in my opinion (sorry) -- especially given the era.

We know Ryan threw as many as 250 on one occasion in the mid-'70's, and we have some other spotty data from that era (talk about sounding weird: "spotty data from that era," referring to the 1970s!!!).

But Ryan threw 222 complete games in his career.  In 773 career starts, he pitched into extra innings 21 times.  Given the huge numbers of walks and strikeouts, his pitch counts must have been sky high, particularly in his Angels' years.  I'd guess 140-150 was not unusual, and might even be lowballing him.

In 1989, at age 42, in eight innings against Kansas City, he threw 164 pitches.  The only time I was lucky enough to see him pitch in-person -- in 1990 -- he threw 114 pitches in just five innings against the Mariners (the start right after he no-hit Oakland).

Clemens was different, and usually never came close to finishing his starts (pitched into the ninth just 127 times in 707 career starts, with 118 CGs, only 29 of which were thrown after 1992), let alone going into extra frames (once in his entire career, gave up two runs in the 10th and lost, 4-2, to the Angels).

baseref doesn't have pitch counts for Clemens' '86 season, so I don't know, for sure, how many pitches he threw.  But he allowed just three hits and no walks, and faced just 30 batters in the game.

I spot-checked Clemens from '86 (no numbers) through 1992, his prime.  He threw in excess of 160 pitches (164, to be exact) once.


That is the point....I didn't have Clemens throw any sort of number.....the GAME did.  Just because we are talking 1986 baseball doesn't automatically mean he comes out after 100 pitches , or some other arbitrary "magic number".  I don't play the games saying "well Connie Mack would let a guy pitch 17 innings in relief, then start him the next day, so I will too".


You mean, HAL let it happen?  That makes it even stranger.  I would imagine the pitch-weakness indicator must have been near zero by the time he reached 170.  He'd literally be running on empty.

If a guy has a proven record of doing something like Mack did with Lefty Grove, Hod Lisenbee, or Eddie Rommel, I'd file it under "possible," to use if I had to.  I'm trying to recreate what was considered possible in that era, or season.  I want that sense of realism.

Another trick teams would try on occasion (if the pitching staff was running on fumes, perhaps) and they needed a reliever in the ninth: Bring on the second-game starter to finish the first game, then burn the pen as needed at the back end of the nightcap.


 No.....I played the full game, which means I, as "manager" had EVERY CHANCE to pull Clemens AT ANY POINT.

I actually was close to him tying the all-time NHR record for innings by a starter (15).  However, in the 15th he walked the bases loaded with one out, and lefty Alvin Davis up.  The "manager" went to the pen for lefty Joe Sambito who whiffed Davis, then called on Bob Stanley to face Jim Presley, who struck out as well.  Boston then won it in the bottom of the 15th, so Clemens got hung with the dreaded "no decision" after all that.



__________________

"NACSTER'S HISTORICAL REPLAY"

34 REPLAYS IN THE BOOKS!

1876-1883

1896-1900

1906

1916-1917

1921, 1929

1936-1937

1943, 1946

1956-1963

1976

1986

1991, 1996

37,117 regular season games through 34 replays!

 

 



First Base Coach

Status: Offline
Posts: 2666
Date: Oct 28, 2015
Permalink  
 

seajaw wrote:

Next question: When a pitcher reaches POW, how quick are you remove him?  Automatic?  Or, do you move ahead, with reservations?

Again, this gets back to the thought of allowing a player to fail, rather than taking it out of their hands.  I had a game earlier this year, in my '48 replay, in which Bob Feller was nursing a lead going into the bottom of the ninth.

He reached his point of weakness with two outs, but still had the lead.

Do you relieve him?  Or, do you say "He's Bob Feller, so he finishes"?

The POW is based on a negative...that the pitcher in questions tires and "serves it up" once he reaches that point.  In real life, sometimes it happens, and sometimes it doesn't.

How often to you challenge the dice gods?


 Having only played with the 1911 season, I let my pitchers go deep into the game.  I move ahead until they get into trouble.  And if it's an Ace the game is in their hands.  



-- Edited by glewis on Thursday 29th of October 2015 07:26:35 PM

__________________

"The players are the same age always, but the man in the crowd is older every season."

 



Season Ticket Holder - Lower Deck

Status: Offline
Posts: 260
Date: Oct 29, 2015
Permalink  
 

I don't really do season replays, mostly World Cup-style tournaments and NHL-style playoffs for the pre-1961 seasons so I don't know how relevant or useful this is to the discussion but here's my $0.02 anyway.

I pretty much follow Strat's "most frequently used line-up" that they have for the historic sets and steal the line-up sheets from APBA's web-site for the new sets. I obviously don't use transactions and injured players only miss the remainder of the current game. I usually don't platoon unless it's someone with a glaring disadvantage against the pitcher (like Twins' DH Glenn Adams on the '78 team vs. LHP). I only pinch hit for the pitcher when I know he's getting yanked for next inning or trailing with RISP in the 6th or later.

As for the POW, I use a simplified version of it. If a pitcher reaches his POW inning, and has allowed only run one, he can stay in without any negative effects. If he's given up 2 or more runs he must be pulled after finishing his POW inning or suffer negative effects. Same rule applies to RPs but all they have to do is give up one run and reach their POW. Also any SP that gives up 5 runs in any inning, is done after that inning provided they're still in the game. For RPs the run limit is 3 per inning.

 



-- Edited by NatsFan on Thursday 29th of October 2015 10:06:25 AM



-- Edited by NatsFan on Thursday 29th of October 2015 10:07:16 AM

__________________


VP of Operations

Status: Offline
Posts: 16185
Date: Oct 29, 2015
Permalink  
 

Glad to have you join in.

At the start, I wasn't sure how much of this topic would be applicable for folks who play tourneys, or all-star lineups, and other things like that.

Obviously, the over-arching rule is that there are a multitude of ways to play the game, and to build a lineup.

The Most Frequently Used Lineups are not a bad place to start.  However, in most cases, those lineups don't hang together for long.  When you compare them to the data at baseref, many are actually used no more than 8-10 times in a season.

It's amazing how unstable lineups are in baseball, even back in many of the earlier seasons.  As hitters get hot/cold/platooned/injured/traded/sent down/called up, the lineups change.  The modern devotion to sabermetrical data makes that even more so.  Hitters vs. specific pitchers stats invite even more tinkering.

Presumably, the further back you go, the more stability there is, what with factors like smaller rosters, and less emphasis on one-on-one matchups and platooning.

I do seem to recall, however, one time a SOM Most Frequently Used Lineup was never actually used!  There are plenty of players who never get carded, so it's quite possible that the lineup a manager trotted out for a run of 6-8 games early in the season has a guy who only played 15 games all year and wound up not getting carded.

In my '38 replay, I didn't have the catcher (Paul Chervenko) who actually started the Dodgers' first seven games.  Babe Phelps didn't play until the first week of May that season, so I had one carded catcher (Roy Spencer) who was on the Opening Day roster.  And he only play 16 games all season.

The Dodgers went through eight different catchers that season, so I understand the logistical problems SOM faced in creating that team set.

The 1927 A's had so many games missed by various players, due to injury and old age, that two first basemen who each had 100+ plate appearances (Jim Poole and Dud Branom), went uncarded.  That's roughly 30% of the PAs for that position that you have to make up through extending other players' appearances.

That was when SOM had a more limited number of players carded for each set, and they certainly would be carded if that set were just being released now (I hope).

You never know, for sure.  SOM usually tries to get each team's most-impactful players carded, but they are bound by logical limits for a production that is based on perforated card sheet sizes.

There is one other set that, in order to have the same number of players for each team, St. Louis Browns' shortstop John Shovlin was carded despite having just seven at bats!  Of the regulars that season, only catcher Hank Severeid (465) and 40-year-old third baseman Jimmy Austin (330) had fewer than 591 plate appearances.

That's practically an Iron Man lineup, especially when you consider summertime conditions in a place like St. Louis.  Six of the eight regulars played 140+ games.  First baseman George Sisler, second baseman Joe Gedeon, shortstop Wally Gerber, and outfielder Baby Doll Jacobsen missed a total of one game between them (Gedeon).

Gedeon, ironically, was tossed out of baseball by Commissioner Kenesaw Mountain Landis after the 1920 season, for his connection to the Black Sox scandal.  He has been called "The Ninth Man Out."

He was friends with several of the members on the Sox squad, including Chick Gandil.  He hung around to watch the the Series after the Browns' season ended at Chicago, and learned of what was taking place.

He placed some bets and won around $600.

Gedeon's SABR writeup is fascinating.  He was even traveling with the Sox during the Series.

As his name became connected to the scandal a year later, Gedeon was freaking out, especially as the Sox and Browns faced off for the last three games of the season, and the Chicago Eight had already been suspended.

Okay...we started with Most Frequently Used Lineups, and wound up in the midst of the Black Sox scandal.  Yogi lives on, I guess:

"When you come to the fork in the road, take it."



__________________

"No cell, no car, no credit cards, he's sixty-plus and gray...
Just sitting in his basement, with a Strat game underway."



General Manager

Status: Online
Posts: 13508
Date: Oct 29, 2015
Permalink  
 

Get the computer game and every player who appeared for a particular team gets "carded"..........there is your solution.....



__________________

"NACSTER'S HISTORICAL REPLAY"

34 REPLAYS IN THE BOOKS!

1876-1883

1896-1900

1906

1916-1917

1921, 1929

1936-1937

1943, 1946

1956-1963

1976

1986

1991, 1996

37,117 regular season games through 34 replays!

 

 



Umpire

Status: Offline
Posts: 9230
Date: Oct 29, 2015
Permalink  
 

nacster wrote:

Get the computer game and every player who appeared for a particular team gets "carded"..........there is your solution.....


 It does make things easierbiggrin

If I replay a season I'll do it as played. That will take care of the lineup and starting pitcher. I control useage tightly (under 110% almost always and shoot for under 105%). As far as pinch hitters and bullpen....I manage both teams and manage to win. I look at the card itself and go from there. I manage how I want to after the first pitch. I have found that by tightly controlling useage most other issues take care of themselves, and I get a pretty realistic feel to the team. That is another reason I like to play out an entire season.

Tournaments and short series...best matchup to the max extent.



__________________


VP of Operations

Status: Offline
Posts: 16185
Date: Oct 29, 2015
Permalink  
 

nacster wrote:

Get the computer game and every player who appeared for a particular team gets "carded"..........there is your solution.....


Spoil sport. biggrin

I clutch very dearly what little sanity I have remaining, and have little patience for all of the pitfalls I have read about, concerning the computer game.  Crashes.  HAL's logic (?).  My own semi-technophobic nature.

Not to mention that our household has one computer, and three of us jousting for time.  If I had to add the actual game-playing time to my already exhaustive hours at the keyboard, I'd have to cut back somewhere else.  Like in my summary research/writing, and other posting.

Surely, you wouldn't want me to have to cut back on the time we share here...? wink

I write during the day, when the others are away, and roll during the hours they are on the computer, or when I have nothing to post.



__________________

"No cell, no car, no credit cards, he's sixty-plus and gray...
Just sitting in his basement, with a Strat game underway."



General Manager

Status: Online
Posts: 13508
Date: Oct 29, 2015
Permalink  
 

seajaw wrote:
nacster wrote:

Get the computer game and every player who appeared for a particular team gets "carded"..........there is your solution.....


Spoil sport. biggrin

I clutch very dearly what little sanity I have remaining, and have little patience for all of the pitfalls I have read about, concerning the computer game.  Crashes.  HAL's logic (?).  My own semi-technophobic nature.

Not to mention that our household has one computer, and three of us jousting for time.  If I had to add the actual game-playing time to my already exhaustive hours at the keyboard, I'd have to cut back somewhere else.  Like in my summary research/writing, and other posting.

Surely, you wouldn't want me to have to cut back on the time we share here...? wink

I write during the day, when the others are away, and roll during the hours they are on the computer, or when I have nothing to post.


 Believe me....if I had the time and patience, I would roll instead of do the comp game.  It is just so much easier for my project.

Seajaw.....are you retired?  Not trying to be a jerk, I am just curious.......it is another reason I can't do C&D.  Also, your son is grown correct?.....mine is 10 and since I am single dad, he needs my time.

I am not nitpicking, please understand this.  I admire guys that do full-on replays that take years.   I honestly kind of miss having "the cards", and actually rolling the dice to get the results.  What I DON'T miss AT ALL is the paperwork.  Not to mention the inevitable messup (reading the cards wrong, forgetting to replace a pitcher/hitter, having a card in the lineup out of order so they bat "out of turn", etc).



__________________

"NACSTER'S HISTORICAL REPLAY"

34 REPLAYS IN THE BOOKS!

1876-1883

1896-1900

1906

1916-1917

1921, 1929

1936-1937

1943, 1946

1956-1963

1976

1986

1991, 1996

37,117 regular season games through 34 replays!

 

 



VP of Operations

Status: Offline
Posts: 16185
Date: Oct 29, 2015
Permalink  
 

nacster wrote:
seajaw wrote:
nacster wrote:

Get the computer game and every player who appeared for a particular team gets "carded"..........there is your solution.....


Spoil sport. biggrin

I clutch very dearly what little sanity I have remaining, and have little patience for all of the pitfalls I have read about, concerning the computer game.  Crashes.  HAL's logic (?).  My own semi-technophobic nature.

Not to mention that our household has one computer, and three of us jousting for time.  If I had to add the actual game-playing time to my already exhaustive hours at the keyboard, I'd have to cut back somewhere else.  Like in my summary research/writing, and other posting.

Surely, you wouldn't want me to have to cut back on the time we share here...? wink

I write during the day, when the others are away, and roll during the hours they are on the computer, or when I have nothing to post.


 Believe me....if I had the time and patience, I would roll instead of do the comp game.  It is just so much easier for my project.

Seajaw.....are you retired?  Not trying to be a jerk, I am just curious.......it is another reason I can't do C&D.  Also, your son is grown correct?.....mine is 10 and since I am single dad, he needs my time.

I am not nitpicking, please understand this.  I admire guys that do full-on replays that take years.   I honestly kind of miss having "the cards", and actually rolling the dice to get the results.  What I DON'T miss AT ALL is the paperwork.  Not to mention the inevitable messup (reading the cards wrong, forgetting to replace a pitcher/hitter, having a card in the lineup out of order so they bat "out of turn", etc).


No nits assumed. wink

I am retired, and my son is an adult (who admittedly needs to be beating the streets, looking for work).

I just love handling the cards, writing everything down.  It's a sense of satisfaction in completing a project after 10-11 months.

My computer skills are lacking, at best, and I do not really have a mind for that stuff (you also see it on display with my shakiness on things like card formats, and advanced statistical analysis).  I can't say it any other way than, I am "Old School," set in my ways.  And I like it.

And while I rail at things like not having enough players carded, I like the challenge it presents, when it gets down to game time.  I like the tweaks that I add to my gaming, for the sake of enhanced realism.



__________________

"No cell, no car, no credit cards, he's sixty-plus and gray...
Just sitting in his basement, with a Strat game underway."



VP of Operations

Status: Offline
Posts: 16185
Date: Nov 2, 2015
Permalink  
 

Moving on (as this was never meant to be a computer-versus-C&D discussion)...

How much do you at least try to play in a "style" that would be considered the norm in a given replay season?  Or, do you still play with a "modern" sensibility?



__________________

"No cell, no car, no credit cards, he's sixty-plus and gray...
Just sitting in his basement, with a Strat game underway."



Umpire

Status: Offline
Posts: 9230
Date: Nov 2, 2015
Permalink  
 

I will not manage a team into unnecessary outs by stealing with horrible success rates. Any 1911 team will run less with me.

Honestly I don't think I could play a stock 1911 replay.

__________________


General Manager

Status: Online
Posts: 13508
Date: Nov 2, 2015
Permalink  
 

Nitrous Oxide wrote:

I will not manage a team into unnecessary outs by stealing with horrible success rates. Any 1911 team will run less with me.

Honestly I don't think I could play a stock 1911 replay.


 Most all of my deadball teams/players stole FAR less bases then they did in real life for that reason.



__________________

"NACSTER'S HISTORICAL REPLAY"

34 REPLAYS IN THE BOOKS!

1876-1883

1896-1900

1906

1916-1917

1921, 1929

1936-1937

1943, 1946

1956-1963

1976

1986

1991, 1996

37,117 regular season games through 34 replays!

 

 



First Base Coach

Status: Offline
Posts: 2666
Date: Nov 2, 2015
Permalink  
 

seajaw wrote:

Moving on (as this was never meant to be a computer-versus-C&D discussion)...

How much do you at least try to play in a "style" that would be considered the norm in a given replay season?  Or, do you still play with a "modern" sensibility?


 I play with as much accuracy of the style of the era as I know.  I read a lot about the Dead Ball era and I attempt to play that style of ball.  I attempt steals at a high rate.  I bunt the runners along or hit and run almost every time someone is on base.  I suicide squeeze.  I leave the pitchers in as long as possible.  I read McGraw didn't sacrifice as much as other managers of the era, but was aggressive on the base paths - so I managed the NY Giants that way.  

If I was playing someone head to head, I'm not sure I would rely as heavily on these strategies.  I'm attempting to do a historical replay and so I try to play the style of baseball of the time period.  I have the same philosophy with trades, transactions, suspensions, and significant injuries - I have them occur close to when they actually occurred. 



__________________

"The players are the same age always, but the man in the crowd is older every season."

 



General Manager

Status: Online
Posts: 13508
Date: Nov 3, 2015
Permalink  
 

glewis wrote:
seajaw wrote:

Moving on (as this was never meant to be a computer-versus-C&D discussion)...

How much do you at least try to play in a "style" that would be considered the norm in a given replay season?  Or, do you still play with a "modern" sensibility?


 I play with as much accuracy of the style of the era as I know.  I read a lot about the Dead Ball era and I attempt to play that style of ball.  I attempt steals at a high rate.  I bunt the runners along or hit and run almost every time someone is on base.  I suicide squeeze.  I leave the pitchers in as long as possible.  I read McGraw didn't sacrifice as much as other managers of the era, but was aggressive on the base paths - so I managed the NY Giants that way.  

If I was playing someone head to head, I'm not sure I would rely as heavily on these strategies.  I'm attempting to do a historical replay and so I try to play the style of baseball of the time period.  I have the same philosophy with trades, transactions, suspensions, and significant injuries - I have them occur close to when they actually occurred. 


 Tomorrow..........when I have a little time..........I shall post some stats regarding some of my replays.  Certain categories over certain eras.....for example, how many SB's did the 1906 season produce?  How many CG's did 1986 get (remember, historically I leave my starters in much longer then normal)?  How about steals in the 50's when teams hardly ran at all?



__________________

"NACSTER'S HISTORICAL REPLAY"

34 REPLAYS IN THE BOOKS!

1876-1883

1896-1900

1906

1916-1917

1921, 1929

1936-1937

1943, 1946

1956-1963

1976

1986

1991, 1996

37,117 regular season games through 34 replays!

 

 

«First  <  1 2 3 4  >  Last»  | Page of 4  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.



Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard