There was a good thread on this a few months ago, but I can't find it. Post update, I would nominate a lot of the same guys I would have nominated pre-update. Joss `04 continues to be a big winner on my $80 MM OL teams. He has a ridiculously low ERA and OAV on every team I have him (watch him blow up now that I've posted this) and, if he's killing my normalized fielding, I'm not bright enough to have figured it out yet. Now he's a better value than ever and his only issue is that he has to lose a turn occasionally in a 4-man rotation because of fatigue. Northrop `18 continues to be one of the best closers money can buy. McGee `85 continues to bat over .400 for me with incredible RBI, SB and 3B totals when I put him on a good offensive team in an $80 MM OL.

Other thoughts?

Top tier pitchers! I've been using 2 or 3 on every team and haven't settled on which ones are best. '95 Maddux is now affordable but not doing as well. '19 Nehf makes most of my teams because he's underpriced. Jay Pettibon is my new Highball Wilson.

I'm getting good results from part time hitters and their lower salaries. partial seasons from Gamble, Wakefield, '19 Cravath, Shumpert, Joe Harris, Quinlan. There are some underpriced bench players in the $300-500k range. Sukeforth is my $200k backup C. Gagnier backup infielder.

Pete Alexander.

'87 Ozzie Smith - he is the most expensive Smith, but he is worth it with the new update.

Quote: Originally posted by rbow923 on 12/20/2009Top tier pitchers! I've been using 2 or 3 on every team and haven't settled on which ones are best. '95 Maddux is now affordable but not doing as well. '19 Nehf makes most of my teams because he's underpriced. Jay Pettibon is my new Highball Wilson. I'm getting good results from part time hitters and their lower salaries. partial seasons from Gamble, Wakefield, '19 Cravath, Shumpert, Joe Harris, Quinlan. There are some underpriced bench players in the $300-500k range. Sukeforth is my $200k backup C. Gagnier backup infielder.

Nehf the 317 inning one or the lower one

I found it thunder1008.And bumped it up for you.

Thanks, thurst.

Wow...I cannot catch a break w/ Northrop. Cannot go wrong w/ Adams at 1.4m either though, or check our Rasmussen at 1.1.

Northrop is currently one of the worst underperformers, as well as Adams. You pay for their shiny BB/9# under 1 and what u get is 2.5-3+ BB/9. If you do some searching you can find many guys who will give you similar or better OAV and walk many less batters for a much lower price. The fact is theres tons of Northrops and Adams I see people using and I cringe every time I see them.

Sooo many owners forget to look at performance history in regards to BB/9. W/L, WHIP, HR/9 and ERA are all heavily affected by ballpark and defense. BB/9 is as concrete a pitching stat as u can come by in performance histories as its the same regardless of park factors. So many guys underperform in the BB/9 department by leaps and bounds.

Agree..Bean but dont get the "BB's are unrealistic discussion started again, I had folks going nuts on me for even suggesting it was broken.

Reading the forums, seems go to guys or top players are more throwback guys? Are there any modern day go to hitters? From the last 5 to 7 years per say?

Quote: Originally posted by The_Creeper on 12/27/2009Agree..Bean but dont get the "BB's are unrealistic discussion started again, I had folks going nuts on me for even suggesting it was broken.

I don't think walks are broken at all, just that some seasons normalize terribly. Even the absolute best BB/9 guys give up more walks than they did during their real-life seasons, it's just the higher the BB/9 is, the more it goes up. From what I've seen is 95% of pitchers will walk 25-50% more than their RL numbers. The higher their BB/9 is the more likely they'll be closer to the 40% or higher. Some of the best normalized seasons see BB/9 close to their RL numbers or slightly lower. Add in the small sample sizes of alot of the pitchers and u get some crazy results.

Quote: Originally posted by lloyd1955 on 12/27/2009Reading the forums, seems go to guys or top players are more throwback guys? Are there any modern day go to hitters? From the last 5 to 7 years per say?

Forgot I was on my alias acct for the above response. As for hitters from the last 5-7 years compared to throwbacks yes there are some guys who are good players but in general expect TONS of strikeouts and worse power numbers than you expect. With the new fielding % change opening up a huge amount of previously unusable players I'll have a hard time using many players from the past 5-7 years. Pitchers are a different story but they still give up way too many HR for my tastes.

I understand what you're saying beaneball. But it sounds like something is wrong when modern hitters we should expect far less power from them, but with modern pitchers, expect the Hr's given up to come in bunches.

Seems like it is unevenly normalized?

Yep. You pretty much nailed it. The thing is only the deadball pitchers who gave up very few HR's don't give up many HR. The guys who gave up more than a few give up HR as much or more than many of the more modern pitchers. It's not so bad with RP's as there's tons of guys with 30-60 IP who gave up 1-2 HR. There is no real difference from 1885-2009 in that case but once u start dealing with guys over that amount of IP finding more modern guys who give up very few HR become super rare past the deadball times.

The sim attempts to reduce modern pitcher HR given up thru normalization but even the best still will give up more than the best deadballers. A HR/9# of 200+ is a good starting for more modern pitchers but 300+ is much better. There's also guys 150-200 that do well, you just have to do some searching.