With the fielding update, I'm hoping we'll see less deadball pitchers who will now drag down the fielding of the defense behind them. I'd certainly like to see a more even distribution of pitchers from different eras in the game; it seems likely now that that could happen as a result of this update.

it will definitely change the player mix to some extent... i'm looking forward to it.

I posted this in the update thread and got this answer:

Quote: Originally posted by Ox on 10/13/2009

Why does the league fielding percentage average of the batter and pitcher's season have any impact on how well a player fields? This would mean that a fielder would field better behind Roger Clemens than Walter Johnson. And if Ty Cobb came up to bat suddenly all of the fielders would be much worse than if Barry Bonds is batting. That doesn't seem to make any sense. Why isn't fielding just normalized based on the league average that year vs. historical average?

And, even though this aspect doesn't make any logical sense to me, are pitchers and hitters going to be priced on their effect on the defense behind them or the opposing defense? Or else, there are going to be teams of deadball hitters and modern pitchers because they will be getting a free advantage by making the opposing fielders worse and their's better.

Good questions (ones we dealt with internally).

Comparing the fielder only to his league average doesn't do much because the player is already better/worse compared to the average. For instance, a .980 SS from a season with an average of .970 is already better than the average.

More inputs are needed to make it a true system. The batter and pitcher are the other inputs, even though it's odd to think they would be involved in the decision as to whether the fielder makes an error or not.

Try to think about it another way: the fielder is playing a game with players from different eras and all the eras have to be represented. A deadball pitcher currently suppresses homers because during his era there weren't many homers. But, his era had low fielding percentages. This system now reflects that. Spun the other way, pitchers today give up a bunch of homers but have good defense behind them. Throw Clemens on the mound with a bunch of 1890 fielders and he'll give up more homers but the defense will improve. It's meeting closer to the middle of all parties involved.

For the other question, there are pros and cons to these strategies. While you can pull the opposition down or your own defense up, it comes at a cost as you're also incurring the penalty.

Historically, a lot of the pitchers with miniscule ERA's and OAV are partially because their fielders gave up 2 or 3 errors per game. Some of it was due to the equipment, some of it was due the the official scoring. But those pitchers really allowed a few more base runners per game than modern pitchers.

This change helps reflect that.... I hated it when I first heard about it, but I'm getting used to the idea. I'm willing to try it to see what happens. It'll probably need tweaked, and as far as I know, no users have tested it yet.

I'll be fielding a team in the first champs league on Friday morning!

Len's right...admin has said this will take some tweaking. Its not perfect, but I think its worth trying. I actually look forward to using infielders that I've never considered in the past.

Frankly it will just keep me from ever playing anything but progressives because it is way more frigging complicated than it needs to be.

Then again maybe it isn'y complicated. Basicly doesn't it end up that deadball guys like Billy Hamilton will still suck in the field, still not be able to steal bases better than the average modern day player and will still have their batting average depressed.

I Think?

I need some help here.

Quote: Originally posted by amycox67 on 10/13/2009So if Bob Caruthers is pitching and Cy Cobb Is batting Ozzie could not catch a cold

I don't think Ozzie will regress to the level of a no-glove fielder or even a deadball fielder... his normalized rating will still be based on his RL Fielding %.

Now, a below average DB fielder in the same situation will probably be a total horror show. Not that that should be a surprise.

I'm looking forward to the update and have three team ideas ready to go...

I am just hoping the pitcher and hitter only have a minimal impact on defense. Not enough to focus building teams around or really even notice. I get the response that I got of having the eras represented, but I think if you normalize, for example, the season's average fielding percentage at a position to the historical fielding percentage at a position, you accounting for all of the eras of baseball.

If the batter and pitcher have minimal effects, I still don't like it and don't think it makes sense but it's not going to be a huge deal for me and won't really affect my enjoyment. However, if manipulating the opponent's or your own defense by putting in different hitters or pitchers becomes a vital part of the game, I couldn't see myself enjoying that.

Ozzie Smith's name has been mentioned,so let me use another example:

Ozzie in 1987: 0.987
1987 League Average: 0.968
1887 Pitcher: 0.874
1902 Hitter: 0.921
Result: 0.980

Ozzie will still be a great fielder. Will he make more errors in this situation? Yes, a few over the course of a season. But he's also "playing" with inferior equipment on a worse field.

Ozzie comes down a bit, but is still .012 better than his league average.

On the flip side, many deadballers and early 20th century players will now be usable again because they won't be as awful of fielders because they'll be "playing" with better equipment and on better fields.

If you are going to mess with their fielding grades/range because they will be "playing" with/against players from other generations who will have better/worse equipment and/or fields, why stop there? Why not allow Babe Ruth to be even more of a beast since he'll theoretically be "playing" alongside guys like Canseco who can supply him w/ HGH and steroids?

WORDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
BABE RUTH ON THE CLEAR LOOK OUT

Quote: Originally Posted By 5thbeatle on 10/14/2009Why not allow Babe Ruth to be even more of a beast since he'll theoretically be "playing" alongside guys like Canseco who can supply him w/ HGH and steroids

Because everyone knows Jimmie Foxx is the Beast.

Hey- if the Beast can't handle his steaks, how's he going to handle a little juice?

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,908053,00.html