WKRP Makes A New Hire - Hardball Dynasty

Posts: 675 (2)

Hall of Famer

3 1 34 3 159

Prospect

Once upon a time, csherwood started a thread called “WKRP Radio (or How to Rebuild a Disaster)” that has been referred to time and time again since its inception. However, it was started when the game was significantly different and at one point he made the observation that people should “Just be careful a few of the things mentioned in here no longer apply due to changes/updates by WIS. One of these days I will go through a clean it up/make edits. (yeah right!)”

The goal of this thread is two fold: 1) to consolidate the information sprinkled through 27 pages of the previous thread and to “clean it up/make edits” as best I can. 2) I will also be using csherwood’s advice for reference in cleaning up a couple of my teams that are off to a rough start, and welcome any advice. Hopefully my experience will serve as an update on the Venus Fly Traps experiment from all those seasons ago. That being said, I am going to more or less adopt this approach for each of my 5 teams and will detail the adventures of Jacksonville Giants in Fisk World while occasionally touching on my other teams as well. The first installment (EVALUATING YOUR TEAM -- POSITION PLAYERS) should be up in the next couple of days.

10/11/2018 9:10 PM

Sportsbulls

Posts: 1291 (0)

Hall of Famer

84 7

Rookie

Looking forward to this!

10/11/2018 11:17 PM

bruinsfan911

Posts: 675 (2)

Hall of Famer

3 1 34 3 159

Prospect

As I mentioned in my first post, I have several teams that I am trying to salvage using this strategy at the moment (which is what first drew my attention to the original thread.) I have diligently been making my way through the Jacksonville Giants roster preview in my spare time, but right now both salvage projects are in the Amateur Draft prep phase of the season and since that’s a very important step towards saving a floundering franchise, that’s where my attention has been for the last couple of days.
However, I figured that writing up my thought process for those two teams would serve multiple purposes: 1) If it doesn’t work, I can refer someone to this thread so that they can critique my thought process and help me improve my managerial style 1a) If it does work, then my thought process might be able to help someone else in the future 2) It can act as a reminder to myself of what I need to do between now and the draft in those two worlds in the event that I can’t get through the entire process in one sitting. Here is the annotated version of csherwood’s original thoughts on the Amateur Draft:

STEP 9: AMATEUR DRAFT SETTINGS

There has been some debate over the best way to set your Amateur Draft Settings. Some people believe in going for 25 guys from "Any" position. Personally, I do not use the Any Position theory, but instead go for 1-2 players at each position, including making certain to draft at least one DH, regardless of which league I am in (sometimes the DH guys you draft can actually play a real position. If not, they may still have trade value to an AL squad if you play in the NL). I always make certain to draft 2-3 Shortstops and at least 2 catchers. I also like to go for at least 7 starting pitchers, because I may need some of the late round guys to fill out my lineup.

***EDITOR’S NOTE: My initial strategy is going to be to go for 1 player at positions where I currently have an ML starter and 2 players at positions where I don’t have an ML starter. For SS and C, I’ll go with 2 when I have an ML starter and 3 when I don’t. I also plan on getting 7 SP’s. For RP’s, I’ll probably go with the 2 or 3 format depending on how many openings I have in my ‘pen at the time. Once I set those, I’ll set “any” to however many guys I’ll need to get to the total of 25 that I’ll end up drafting. In other words, if the positional targets above add up to drafting 20 players, then I’ll set “any” at 5. If it adds up to 22, I’d set it at 3 etc.

The first of the two salvage projects that I will take a look at is my Salem team in Champions world. This is one of two worlds currently functioning under variations on the Draft Theme, and therefore I had lots of say in the makeup of the entire roster. That means that I really like the majority of guys on my squad, but after playing .600ish baseball for the first 15 games of the year we ran into fatigue issues that we have yet to recover from. To figure out how many players I will target at each position, I break down my roster into several groups based on csherwood’s advice and my thoughts described above:

Group 1 = 1B,2B,3B,LF,CF,RF,DH
Group 2 = SS, C, RP
Group 3 = SP

I start with Group 1, and work my way through: My starter at 1B is everyday quality, my 2B is All-Star quality, my 3B should be a bench player, my LF is All-Star quality, my CF should be a bench player and my RF is everyday quality. That means I’ll be targeting one player each at 1B, 2B, LF and RF and two each at 3B and CF. That brings my total number of players targeted to eight. Oh, and I’m in the NL which means I don’t have a DH and will be targeting one of them, to bring the total to nine.

In group 2 my SS is All-Star quality, my two catchers are everyday starter and MVP caliber respectively and I have 2 relievers that I would consider to be “everyday starter” quality. Since the kind of roster I’m trying to create has 4 SU and a closer, I’m missing 3 relievers, which means I’ll target 3 of them. I seem to be pretty much set everywhere else, so that means my total number of targeted players has now reached 12.

Finally, in group 3, I have my starting pitchers. Right now I have three guys that I think are either “everyday starter” (but not literally) or All-Star quality, meaning the back two spots in my rotation are open. Since the base target in this system is 7 guys, if this weren’t a salvage project I’d probably bump my target number to nine (base of 7 + the 2 empty spots in the rotation = 9.) However, it is a salvage project, so I’m going to bump my target number up even further (to 12.) That brings my total number of targeted players to 24, which means I’ll also have 1 spot leftover for the “any” category.

My other salvage project at the moment (Oakland in Diamond Kings) is a total rebuild, as we are currently on pace for our third straight 100-loss season. That would violate the MWR, and at this point that’s looking more like an inevitability rather than a possibility...but the least I can do is provide the next guy with some solid prospects to work with.
I take a fresh look at my roster using csherwood’s method and find the following in Group 1: an everyday 1B, a 2B who should be a bench guy, a 3B who should be a longshot for the majors, an LF who should be on the bench, an everyday CF and an RF who should be a bench guy. Ouch. Let’s see...that’s 1 guy targeted at 1B and CF, two at 2B, 3B, LF and RF. This is another NL team, which means one more for a DH target to make a total of 11.
Group 2 features an SS who could start everyday if he had a better glove, one All-Star Catcher and one bench-quality backstop and one solid RP. Ouch again. That’s going to be 3 SS, 3 RP and 2 C for a total of 19 targeted guys.
I don’t even bother to analyze the starting pitchers, because I know it’s a salvage project which means I’ll use the same kind of logic as above...7 SP’s who can eat innings. That would bring my total number of targeted players to 26 in an ideal world. Since I already have a semi-respectable SS at the ML level, I figure I can afford to draft 2 SS prospects rather than three.

As for the weight column, it really doesn't matter much if you are going to manually rank guys. I just try to keep these numbers as close to even as possible. The Rating Threshhold selection I normally set low. I don't want the SIM skipping my highest rated guy in order to draft some other position. In fact, for the first time, I am actually setting it to "None" and think this may be the best way to go if you do manual pre-ranking.

***EDITOR’S NOTE: It looks to me like the default setting for Player Weight is now 5 and the default Rating Threshold is “None.” Based on my personal experiences and csherwood’s advice above, I am not going to touch either one.

Nothing to do here for salvage project #1...or salvage project #2 (actually, it turns out I'd had this set at "5" for my Oakland team, so that gets set to none.)

Player type is personal preference. I do not normally look for lefties or righties only, but I may select Slugging or Defense or even Speed. I also tend to leave several positions at "None". I have had more success with the SIMs ordering of pitchers set to None than with any other setting. Of course, player type does not matter much after you move guys around with the manual pre-rankings.

***EDITOR’S NOTE: If I already have an SS who meets the defensive rec’s, I’ll leave that at “none.” Otherwise, I’ll select “defensive” player type there with the goal of drafting a defensive-replacement type...or maybe if I get really lucky I’ll get a stud who can also hit. The DH will always be “slugging” because that is literally in a DH’s job description...as csherwood notes, if he can field you can put him somewhere else in the lineup. If he can’t he can always be trade bait. Any corner positions where I set the target count at 2, I will select “speed.” My thought process here is that if I draft a couple of guys at a certain position, then in theory one could be an all-around player that will be helpful, and the second could be a speedster that I can eventually use off the bench. The potential drawback here is that I’ll end up drafting 2 speedsters, but that’s why I’m going with corner players here...if that happens, it’s easier to fill that spot with a player from elsewhere or outside the organization than if I did that with an up-the-middle type.

Now I have a couple things to look at: the defensive ratings of my current starting SS and the number of corner positions with 2 targeted players. The defensive ratings of my SS don’t seem like they’d result in results as poor as they have been so far this year, with two out of the four categories meeting rec’s and the others one of the others just two points shy...and yet he’s got a career .953 FLD% at SS and is marginally better than that this season. Looks like I’ll be on the hunt for a defensive SS in the draft. According to my notes above, 3B is the only corner position that I will be targeting 2 guys so they’ll get tabbed as the speedsters.

In Oakland, the guy I’ve got playing SS has a history of making a bunch of errors but making up for it through bunches upon bunches of plus plays and a .220ish batting average. This season, though, he’s not making plus plays and hitting .180ish...since he’s now 34 and performing at this level, it’s time to move on. Make that two squads in the hunt for defensive shortstops. These guys are going to be targeting 2 players at three different corner positions: 3B, LF and RF. Since those two outfield spots are easier to fill with heavy-hitting (and oftentimes slow) players, once again the 3Bs get tabbed as the base-stealers.
Finally, setting the aggressiveness is a factor of how high you pick and your prospect budget. You want to be conservative with a very high pick because you don’t want to risk losing him, but if you pick late in the first round or don't have a first round pick, you can be more aggressive and try to get someone that slipped through the cracks. The more Aggressive you go, the more money you will need to sign guys.

EDITOR’S NOTE: There are 5 levels of aggressiveness and 32 first round picks. According to csherwood, you should be more aggressive the later you get in the first round. My initial thought is that 32 divided by 5 is 6.4, which means that you should be the most conservative if you’re within the top 6, the second-most conservative if you’re within the top 12 etc. Applying this line of reasoning would work out like this:

Picks 1-6 = Very Conservative
Picks 7-12 = Conservative
Picks 13-18 = Balanced
Picks 19-24 = Aggressive
Picks 25-32 = Very Aggressive

In Salem, I have the 21st and 32nd picks of Round 1. According to the scale that I’ve worked out above I should be “Aggressive” with the 21st pick and “Very Aggressive” with the 32nd. However, since this is a salvage project, I’m going to move down (up?) the ladder a couple of rungs and go with “Conservative” to ensure I can sign some guys to help relieve the pressure.

Oakland has a trio of 1st round picks: 2nd, 22nd and 45th. In an ideal world where I could set levels of aggressiveness for each, I’d go “Very Conservative”, “Aggressive” and “Very Aggressive” but since I can only pick one for all three I side with “Very Conservative” for many of the same reasons that I backed off in Salem.

Now that I’ve figured out what my Draft Settings will be, the next step is to actually go enter those into the site and then start looking at the prospects themselves. I will have an annotated version of csherwood’s post (that will look quite similar to this one) on that subject up soon as well...draft day for both of these franchises is Tuesday, Oct. 16th.

10/14/2018 1:29 PM (edited)

bruinsfan911

Posts: 675 (2)

Hall of Famer

3 1 34 3 159

Prospect

MANUALLY RANKING PROSPECTS

Assuming I have a top 15 or so draft pick, I want to carefully rank my first few players so that I am absolutely certain the guy I draft with that first pick will be a stud. If I do not have a high first round pick, or for all players below the number of my first round pick, I am not quite as careful.
Since Salem has pick #21, I will probably start by testing csherwood’s ranking method with the top 25 prospects. The same can be said for Oakland, with the 2nd overall pick. Ideally, I’ll have enough time to do the top 25 in both places and then go back and expand my search.

The way I rank players is very simply to load up the Manual Ranking screen and use the "profile" button on it to look at each guy in the order I see them. If the guy looks like a good prospect, I leave him where he is. If he is total garbage, I use the double arrow to drop him to the bottom. If he is ok, but not good enough to be close to the other guys I have recently previewed, I drop him down 10-20 spots with the single down arrow. If a guy looks a lot better than guys I have recently looked at, I push him up a handful of spots with the single up arrow.
This seems like a fairly straightforward strategy, but also highly dependent on a decent scouting budget. In the original thread, csherwood notes that he always uses $14M scouting which is likely enough to get a good idea of a player’s quality even with the fuzzier ratings following the latest update. My Salem squad has $10M in advanced, which means that using this strategy won’t be as effective as it would be with the ideal $14M but it’s going to be close enough this time around. The other thing I need to do is decide what constitutes “total garbage”, “a good prospect”, and an “OK” prospect. At $10M in advanced plus fuzzy ratings, I’m going to estimate a drop in OVR of about 10 points for most guys. While there are certainly exceptions, I tend to think of any OVR under 50 as “total garbage”, 51-59 as career minor leaguers, 60-69 as bench guys, 70-79 as starters and 80+ as “studs.”
Using this as a guideline, I will therefore take the following approach: guys whose OVR rating minus 10 points = 50 or less: double down arrow, 51-59 = down 10 spots, 60-69: single down arrow, 70-79: up 10 spots, 80+: double up arrow. As previously mentioned, I will start with the top 25 and then move over to Oakland and repeat the process. Hopefully at that point I’ll have time to come back over here and evaluate players 26-50.
Just to make sure that the results were somewhat reasonable, I ended up starting with the top 10 guys on the draft board. After assessing them and making the moves in the proper order (ie keeping #1 at #1, dropping #2 down one, dropping #3 down 10, moving #4 up 10 etc) I ended up with the following order for my top 10: #6, #4, #1, #2, #7, #8, #9, #10, #11. That makes pretty good sense to me...some guys are a little underrated, some a little overrated and most in a pretty logical order. So far this way less intensive than how I usually approach the draft and seems to have more or less the same results. Onto #11-25.
Yep. This is definitely the way to go...the results this method gave me look similar to the ones that I probably would have gotten using my old method, but it was a million times quicker. It also takes out a lot of the guesswork that my other method used, and once I nail down for sure how much the fuzzy ratings effect advanced scouting metrics at the $14M level it should be scarily accurate.
I also happen to have $10M in Advanced Scouting in Oakland, so that’s going to work out really well in terms of knowing that I can be equally confident in both sets of ratings before and after signing everyone. The one flaw that I found with this system is that if there is a clear-cut #1, he’ll get bumped down by those who get the “up 10” treatment within the top 10 and/or if the #2 guy gets bumped up at all. This was the case here, as a guy I’d view as a clear top choice ended up in the 7th spot after making adjustments to those around him.
It’s not a big deal, because I just bumped him back up to the top after everything else was done, but it is something to watch out for. Similarly, there are going to be role guys (like defensive wizards or DHs) with fairly low OVR’s that you might need to move around a bit. However, in Oakland it looks like it’s just the one adjustment for now.

My point is to basically have players of similar quality grouped with one another, so that when it comes my turn to pick, I get someone of similar quality. Yes, I may be able to do better if I made certain that each guy was in an exact order, but that would take 5 times as long. I normally can get my top 50 players set in about 20 minutes, and then get then next 50 in another 20 minute shift with this system.
100% can confirm this...I didn’t put a clock on my ranking session for the first 25 guys here, but I’ll do that for Oakland and report back. I just finished going through the top 25 guys for my Oakland squad in about 12 minutes...there are probably going to be a few adjustments that I’ll make, but for the most part I agreed with the list that was generated this way. My old method probably would have seen me get through 4 or 5 guys in 12 minutes rather than 25, so even with the adjustments that I need to make this is significantly quicker. 10/10 would recommend if you don’t already do something similar. Just to circle back and prove csherwoods’ hypothesis, that would mean I could get through 50 players in 24 minutes, so his guess that it takes “about 20 minutes” to do 50 guys is correct.

I stop after I have manually ranked 100 guys (which normally means a review of 150+ players because a lot of guys get dumped to the bottom of the list for being garbage). By the time I get into the 80s or so, I have to start to stretch to find any reason why the guy may have an outside shot at the big leagues. Therefore, after the top 100, odds are you are only looking at career minor leaguers anyhow, so I don't really care who I draft at that point.

The way I interpret that is that he stops when he’s found 100 guys who don’t fall into the “garbage” category. After looking at the top 50 guys, there are five who have been given the boot into the “garbage” category...which means I’m at 45 ranked and 55 to go. Out of the top hundred, 83 are “rankable.” So now, I’ll extend my search by groups of 50 until I’ve found 17 more guys who rate as “not garbage.” That is, if there are 17 such guys out there...which I doubt, but I have the time to check so I’m going to play it safe. As I got deeper into the draft pool, I started to notice a pattern in OVR rankings, and made notes about the guys who broke the pattern. Those guys got added to my draft list, until I had a group of 100 “rankable” prospects. The last of the rankables checked in at #252 overall.
Oakland’s scouting department has tabbed 49 of the first 50 guys as rankable, so if this trend continues I won’t have to do much more to get to 100...let’s see how 51-100 shakes out. After looking at the top 100, there were 89 rankable players on Oakland’s list, leaving me with 11 to find. That should be much more doable since I’m 50 players behind Salem right now. Turns out that I had 100 “rankable” guys here after going through 117 prospects. For #s 51-117, I simply looked for the guys who look like they can contribute on the ML level and moved them up to be with guys of a similar potential in the top 50.

10/15/2018 7:29 PM

bruinsfan911

Posts: 675 (2)

Hall of Famer

3 1 34 3 159

Prospect

As I write this, it’s been a little over a week since I started the pair of salvage projects in Salem and Oakland. My first few actions were concentrated on the ML teams, and since then my focus has been on the minors and the drafts. I typically do an in-depth check on each of my ML teams once a week (usually on Sundays with football on in the background) but it made more sense to do it now, about a week on rather than waiting until Sunday.

The first game played after the intervention occurred during the 10/14 PM2 cycle. Including that game, Salem has been 7-18 in 25 games. That works out to a winning percentage of .280 over that span, which still isn’t great. However, it’s a marked improvement over the 13-43 (0.232 winning percentage) prior to the intervention. In their last ten Salem is 5-5, which suggests that things are certainly turning the corner.

Oakland has been 9-16 over the same stretch, including a five game winning streak that is ongoing...over their last ten they have posted a 7-3 mark. Definitely the kind of turn around that I want to see from a team fighting for their life. That 9-16 stretch is a winning percentage of .360, and they had been winning at just a .161 clip prior to the intervention.

Just looking at the two winning percentages before and after the intervention, both teams are trending in the right direction but still have a ways to go. If they continue to win at their respective paces for the rest of the season, Salem will end up at 43 wins and Oakland will finish with 47. Based on the respective MWRs, Salem needs roughly 65 (its currently year 1 of a 3-year tally) and Oakland needs 63...that means I need an improvement of about 15 more wins in both cases.

10/23/2018 8:49 PM

bruinsfan911

Posts: 675 (2)

Hall of Famer

3 1 34 3 159

Prospect

IN-SEASON EVENT #2: ALL-STAR BREAK

After the Amateur Draft/start of Rookie ball, the next major in-season event is the All-Star Break. As WIS does not actually simulate the events of the break, there is nothing to actually do here but sit back and catch your breath. It does make for a good chance to spend a few minutes evaluating your team.
WIS has started simulating the events of the break since csherwood initially put together this post, and they make for good blog content under the right circumstances. However, the results of the All Star Break don’t have any effect on a player’s ratings or anything like that (ie there is no such thing as an “AS Ratings Bump” that I have seen.) Even with the introduction of the AS Break events, it remains “a good chance to spend a few minutes evaluating your team.”
The Sharks enter the break at 26-65, good for a winning percentage of .286 overall. In our last ten games prior to the intermission, however, we were 6-4 which tells me progress is being made. Unsurprisingly, there aren’t any representatives of Salem in the festivities which means that everyone will get a nice break. On the downside, David Vargas (a capable LR type) went down with a season ending injury during those 10 games. Salem’s post-intervention winning percentage projected out the rest of the way gives the Sharks 26 more wins for a season mark of 52. While there is no danger of missing the MWR this season due to the fact that it’s year 1 of a three season cumulative total MWR framework, that total is 13 short of the average of 65 wins needed to hit the total by the time the MWR comes due.
That Oakland winning streak that I mentioned in my last post stretched all the way to 9 games. Since then we have gone 2-4, giving the Avalanche a 6-4 mark in the previous ten heading into the break, just like Salem. Thanks to that win streak, Oakland currently sits at 24-67 which works out to a winning percentage of .264 overall. As I mentioned in the last update, Oakland needs 63 wins to avoid becoming a MWR victim...their post-intervention winning percentage (0.429) projected over the remaining 71 games would translate to 30 more wins and a season total of 54.
During the 7AM off-cycle at the very end of the break, Diamonds in the Rough are announced. In about 7 or 8 of these Diamonds cycles so far, I have only seen 1 guy that has actually improved into projecting to be a major leaguer. Most of them are just garbage (only slightly worse garbage than they were before). If I do get a legitimate Diamond, I will evaluate the level that he is playing at and make certain I boost him up if he warrants it (for example, a guy with 3 years pro experience down at Low A - he should go to either AA or even AAA ASAP).
We have yet to reach that point in the AS Break here in Salem, but since the most recent update “legitimate diamonds” have become more common. That being said, they’re still fairly rare...most guys will likely jump from “trash” to a good career minor leaguer or ML longshot if I had to guess. However, they’ll get promotions just the same to make sure that I maximize their development potential.
The same approach will be taken in Oakland at the appropriate time.
The only other thing I make certain to do at the All-Star Break is to double check who I have on the Trade Block and what my Trade Needs are currently listed as. There are only a handful of real life days between the Break and the Trade Deadline, so this is the time to begin preparing for any late-season wheeling and dealing. Keep an eye on World Chat as well, as people will now begin to advertise what they are looking for/looking to move.
In Salem, my biggest needs are bench players to relieve the pressure that’s been placed on the 9 position players that have been in my lineup for the first 87 games of the year. At the moment, I don’t have anyone On The Block or any Trade Needs listed. I make the decision to put anyone who doesn’t fit into my depth chart OTB and list any current blanks in my depth chart as my Needs.
When looking at the guys I had on the roster pre-intervention, I only see two who rate worse than an “ML Bench or Role Player.” Those two get added to the Block, and then I look again at the guys I added as part of my intervention efforts. All three of those rubber arms fall into either the “Career Minor Leaguers” or “Trash” categories and are therefore also added to the Block. As for my needs, I am limited to 3 needs despite the fact that my depth chart suggests I have more than that...so I make my three needs the three everyday positions that are still blank.
Oakland has more needs on paper than Salem does despite outperforming the Sharks since the intervention. Therefore, I decide to make my Trade Needs the three positions with the most defensive significance which are still blank on my Depth Chart. Unfortunately for me, those three are also three of the most important overall: SS, CF and CvR. As for those who I put on the Trade Block, I decide to elevate the floor for the required category to avoid the block to “ML Starter” since those guys who fall into the “ML Bench” category are likely my best assets that I’m willing to give up. In total, 13 members of the Avalanche squad would have been put on the block but the maximum allowed is 10. To cut it down to 10, I remove two career minor leaguers and one ML longshot since I figure they’re market value is probably the lowest out of the group I’m trying to shop.
The next In-Season Event will be the Trade Deadline day, which includes the opening up of revocable waivers.
While csherwood doesn’t mention it, the All-Star Break is also a good time to clear out your inbox if you happen to have fallen behind. As I type this, there are 123 messages in the Inbox for Salem. Getting that down to a more workable number is certainly a priority. I scan each of those 123 and keep the ones that I want to go back to while deleting the rest.
I then shift over to Oakland, and do the same thing with the 78 new messages awaiting me there. At this point, I’ll move onto the Free Agency portion of the Steinbrenner world and return to the inbox messages of these two worlds when I have a little more time.

10/27/2018 3:15 PM

bruinsfan911

Posts: 675 (2)

Hall of Famer

3 1 34 3 159

Prospect

DITR Update

The DITR cycle occurred this morning, so I figured I’d post a follow up with a few more details on the process since I wasn’t able to say much in the previous All-Star Break post. Just as a reminder, here’s what csherwood had to say about DITR’s: “In about 7 or 8 of these Diamonds cycles so far, I have only seen 1 guy that has actually improved into projecting to be a major leaguer. Most of them are just garbage (only slightly worse garbage than they were before). If I do get a legitimate Diamond, I will evaluate the level that he is playing at and make certain I boost him up if he warrants it.”

In Salem, there is only one DITR: Ryota Wang. Before the bump, Wang was rated in the “Complete Trash” category. With the bump, he still rates in the “Trash” category but now looks like he could be on the edge of being a useful speedster off the bench. However, he’s going to need a little help getting there which will require a promotion at this point to make that happen. Due to the fact that his speed is his only shot at the ML level, I don’t want to promote him too far, but I do want to maximize that element of his game. My decision, then is to promote him to the single-A team with the best baserunning coaches...that turns out to be the Low A squad, so that’s where he goes.

Oakland has two DITR’s: Benny Guaipe and John Parrino. The eye test suggests that both could be useful at the ML level in some way or another. When taking a closer look, I start with Guaipe as his projected OVR rating is significantly higher than Parrino’s. Benny had been signed out of Training Camp as part of the intervention efforts, so any production I might get out of him would be an absolute bonus. So much so in fact, that I hadn’t even bothered to run the numbers on him to put him into one of the rating categories before. Now, he’s in the “ML longshot” category, but his base stealing ability looks like it will end up being elite. As with Wang is Salem, the ability to coach base stealing is going to factor heavily into where he ends up after his promotion, but I will also consider AA for him. In the end, the High A staff seems to be best equipped for this so that’s where he goes.

As for Parrino (last year’s 16th round pick), I hadn’t yet rated him using the Wichita Style system yet either but his projected OVR is up 16 points from when I drafted him so that’s a good sign. After running the numbers, he looks like someone who might be able to squeak onto an ML roster via a September call-up if he hits his projected ratings. In the event that he does hit those, he’d be able to play a capable 2B but wouldn’t have a good enough bat to warrant a roster spot as a defensive replacement all season. In the short term, he gets a promotion to the single-A team with a staff better equipped to coach defense, which ends up being the High A squad.

So, between the two worlds it looks like I got three guys who have the potential to be ML role players or at least capable minor leaguers. Given the fact that DITR’s used to mean players became “slightly worse garbage than they were before” I’d say that this is a pretty decent return. It could also mean that my scouts are dead wrong, but I would like to think they’re not going to go 0-for-3. Only time will tell, however.

10/28/2018 10:55 AM

bruinsfan911

Posts: 675 (2)

Hall of Famer

3 1 34 3 159

Prospect

ML Update #2: November 4, 2018 (Game #112)

In the week (give or take a little bit) since the All-Star Break ended, I have been mainly focused on my team in Steinbrenner which has been going through rollover and the offseason events but is now in the Spring Training stage of the season. However, both of my salvage projects have been plugging along and I have made sure to keep half an eye on them to avoid any backsliding. Here’s how they have fared so far in the second half:
Salem has posted a record of 10-11 since the All-Star Break, which brings their post-intervention mark to a total of 23-33. That works out to a winning percentage of .411, which would be a 67 win pace across a full 162 game schedule. Projected across the remaining 50 games, that works out to 21 more wins. With a current record of 36-76, that means that they are on pace for a season total of 57 in a year where they need roughly 65 victories to keep pace with the MWR.
Since pitching has been the biggest issue in both Salem and Oakland, I have adapted Bill James’ Game Score metric to apply to both starters and relievers as a way of measuring my staff’s success. In the second half to date, the Salem staff is averaging a Game Score of 51.56 per appearance. According to FanGraphs explaination of Game Score, that kind of performance can be described as “Above Average.” Overall, the post-intervention average checks in at 48.16, which FanGraphs would consider “Below Average.” Before the intervention occurred, FanGraphs would have considered the pitching staff’s average of 48.72 to be “Below Average.” When you look at this season as a whole, the average works out to be 48.33, or a Below Average performance via FanGraphs standards.
After I finish crunching the numbers on the Sharks, I shift my attention to the Oakland Avalanche who, as noted in previous posts, need 63 wins to meet the MWR this season. Due to a second half record of 7-14, they are on pace to win a total of 51 games this season: 9 pre intervention + 22 since intervention + 20 more in 50 remaining games if their post-intervention win percent of .393 continues. That is down from a projected total of 54 at the last update, and needs to be going in the other direction...
Pitching has been an issue in Oakland for a couple of seasons, thus the need for 63 wins to meet the MWR, so the modified Game Score metric comes in quite handy here. A bit of digging reveals that the second half performance so far as been Below Average, as indicated by an average Game Score of 48.95. Their post-intervention performance is also Below Average with the exact score checking in at an average of 47.72. Before the intervention, they were averaging a 44.72 Game Score, which yet again put them in the Below Average category. In total, the pitching in Oakland this season has averaged a Game Score of 46.93, which is once more classified as “Below Average.”
For context, the only other Game Score data I have outside of these teams is from the previous season of FYC. I only kept track of the SP data there, and that team won 67 games, so they aren’t exactly the model of success but it does help to see how those guys did and compare it to how these two salvage projects are going. My FYC starters posted an average game score of 50.43, which means that a higher average than that would likely result in more than 67 victories while a lower average means I can expect fewer than 67 wins.
Since the intervention, Oakland starters have posted a lower average than my FYC team (45.37) and Salem’s rotation has also posted a lower average (46.24). Therefore, I can conclude that neither team’s rotation is the same quality as that of a team that should win 67 games...which means I still have work to do. This conclusion is also supported by the projected win totals that I worked out above (57 for Salem and 51 for Oakland.)

11/4/2018 1:27 PM

bruinsfan911

Posts: 675 (2)

Hall of Famer

3 1 34 3 159

Prospect

Update #3: November 11, 2018 (Game #132)

The beginning of the season in Steinbrenner and a merger debated in Draft Theme World (not to mention recruiting for FYC) have been my top Hardball priorities this week, but Salem and Oakland have kept plugging along. In fact, they both seemed to have pretty productive weeks.

Salem’s current record is 45-87, which means that they have gone 9-11 in the twenty games that have been played since the last update of this post. That brings their post-intervention record to a total of 32-44, good for a .421 winning percentage. The upward trend continues, and the Sharks now project to win a total of 58 games this season: 13 pre-intervention, 32 post-intervention and 13 between now and the end of the season if they continue to win at a .421 clip. With the MWR requiring an average of 65 wins a season in a 3 year period, I feel pretty confident that my tenure will survive past this year in Salem.

Over in Oakland, the current record stands at 44-88, making their record since the last update 13-7. BREAKING NEWS FOLKS: This is the first winning week either team has had since the intervention, and could quite possibly be the first winning week of the whole season for either club. That’s great news to hear out of Oakland, as they are the team with their backs really up against the wall. The post-intervention record for the Avalanche now stands at 35-41, which equates to a .461 winning percentage. With that being the case, Oakland’s projected win total now stands at 58: 9 pre-intervention, 35 post-intervention and 14 over the remaining schedule. That’s still a bit short of the 63 wins we need to survive the MWR, but it’s much closer than at last check.

Overall, the outlook for both teams is technically better than it was a real-life week ago. Since the last update, Salem’s projected win total has edged up from 57 to 58 while Oakland’s has increased dramatically (from 51 to 58.) Both teams have a little more work to do, for sure, but seeing both projected win totals go in the right direction is certainly a good sign. Time to finish the job.

11/11/2018 12:21 PM

bruinsfan911

Posts: 675 (2)

Hall of Famer

3 1 34 3 159

Prospect

IN-SEASON EVENT #4(A) - ROSTER EXPANSION

Roster Expansion is the chance to promote any minor leaguers that are on or that you add to your 40 man roster up to the majors (thus you can have up to 40 guys on your major league roster now). I actually categorize this as event 4(A) because it is very closely followed by the end of minor league regular season and the start of minor league playoffs. That will be 4(B) and subject of a post a couple days from now.

Generally speaking, the guys that I will be looking to promote are the “dotted” prospects...those who I have identified as having ML futures and marked using the multi-colored dots on their player card. However, since fatigue may play a role due to the intervention (this is more likely to be true of position players rather than pitchers at this point) those may not be the only guys I call up this time around.

The fatigue factor will also play a role in my Oakland promotions, but not nearly as much of one because my position player group is much better rested on this roster.

Event 4(A) actually has 2 components. Before Roster Expansion day you need to make certain that anyone that you might want on your major league playoff roster is on the 40. This includes any minor leaguers you may want to bring up for the playoffs (I run a 13 man pitching staff during the regular season, I often cut it down to 11 or 12 for the playoffs and add an extra bat or two for the bench). If they are not on your 40 before Roster Expansion, you cannot use them in the playoffs. You also want to make certain you have a couple extra players on your 40 in case you need to make a DL move in between playoff rounds and may need an extra arm or bat.

In Salem I had only previously had time to put dots on people’s player cards based on their OVR rating, so my first step is to crunch the numbers on those who I had identified as possible ML talents. The AAA roster had three guys who I’d guessed might be useful in bench or platoon roles at the ML level, but those were based on projected ratings and I need their current ratings to be useful at the moment...none of those guys are better than an ML longshot right now. Since each has at least four years pro experience, I’m betting none of them will get much better either.

My AA team has many more options to choose from, with 10 of the 20 players currently on the roster featuring a dot of some color. The two guys who I figured might have a shot at being an ML starter currently grade out as a longshot and a career minor leaguer, but unlike the guys at AAA they’re not done developing. According to my projections, they’ll be a longshot and a bench guy by the time that process is over so they’ll likely get a September call-up. Out of the eight guys I labelled as being borderline ML prospects I find three elite base stealers, one of whom will even have a decent bat. All three base stealers get added to the call-up list, but the two without a bat to compliment their speed also get added to the trading block. The High A squad provides another speedster for both the ML team and trading block before Low A and Rookie come up empty.

Having previously run the numbers on my Oakland prospects, this process goes much quicker for the Avalanche as I can simply trust the dots. My AAA team has four pitchers who have been graced with a green dot, and one pitcher plus four position players who have an orange dot. Out of these nine players, two are out for the season with injuries and a third will miss about the next 15 days. After taking a quick look at the schedule, the pitcher who is out for ~15 days would only be able to play in the last series of the season at the ML level, so it is not worth promoting him. My catching platoon with both get the nod, as will the two remaining healthy arms on my list. Nobody from AA on down is currently at a point where they could meaningfully contribute to the ML team’s quest for 63 this year even though I do have a few “dotted” prospects at those levels.

Once roster expansion hits, I first look at how my AAA team is doing in the standings. I do not want to break up that team if they have a shot at the AAA playoffs. I will then promote any inactive AAA players, as well as possibly one or two active guys, if either (1) they have been in the big leagues before (such as those 37 year old guys that you DFA'd and stuck on the inactive list) or (2) are a certainty to be on my big league team next year. On occasion I will bring up one or two others just to have an extra couple of players in order to give my regulars some rest if my last few games of the season are meaningless for playoff seeding (if I am a playoff team). I do not bring up any true stud prospects that I do not think will be ready for the bigs next season. If you bring a guy up, his base salary next year will be up to the major league minimums and you risk potential ratings decreases when you send him back down.

Even though Roster Expansion doesn’t officially hit until tomorrow morning, I will still be able to get a pretty good idea of where my various teams stand in terms of the minor league playoffs. Based on the list above, all the guys I’m thinking about promoting are currently on the AA or High A teams. Neither one is going to make the playoffs, so I don’t have to worry about breaking up any chemistry and can just pull guys up to the ML team should they merit a promotion.
Csherwood’s observation that he doesn’t bring up stud prospects unless they’re going to play on the ML team next year give me pause about promoting the four speedsters this season since I’m only going to be using one off the bench next year. However, he also said that he will “bring up one or two others just to have an extra couple of players in order to give my regulars some rest if my last few games of the season are meaningless…” My ML team has long since been eliminated from playoff contention and a couple of my regulars could definitely use a break, so I’m going to promote all four.
I am going to have to manipulate the Player Rest settings a bit to get those guys in enough to provide a break without going to a lineup full of career minor leaguers...but that’s a problem for once they’re actually promoted which will be tomorrow’s task.

As I mentioned above, the only players I am considering for a promotion to the ML team this season are currently playing at AAA. That team has been officially eliminated from playoff contention, so those four are definitely going to get the call. A couple of my ML regulars are in the blue in terms of fatigue, but their positions should be covered by the promotions already planned, so I won’t worry about it for now. If it becomes an issue later, I can always promote a couple more players for the appropriate positions.

11/13/2018 6:46 PM

bruinsfan911

Posts: 675 (2)

Hall of Famer

3 1 34 3 159

Prospect

I'm a bit behind on publishing these posts, even though I've gotten them all written up. Here's the next one, with a few more to come over the next week or so:

IN-SEASON EVENT #4(B) - END OF MINOR LEAGUE SEASON/START OF MINOR LEAGUE PLAYOFFS

Coming only two days (8-9 game cycles) after roster expansion, the minor league seasons come to an end. At AAA, AA, High A, and Low A, the seasons all end on an AM cycle game. That cycle is followed by two Placeholder Day cycles and one Off Day, after which the first round games begin on the PM cycle the day after the seasons end. At Rookie League level, the season ends on the PM2 cycle before the other 4 minor league levels. The next day's AM cycle (same cycle that all other minor league levels complete their seasons) is an Off Day, and the very next (PM) cycle is the first game. Therefore, you need to move pretty quickly to set up your Rookie League team for the playoffs if you qualify as a 3, 4, 5, or 6 seed.
My Rookie team in Salem didn’t make the playoffs, so I don’t need to hurry to get them all set up.
The Avalanche’s rookie squad also didn’t make the second season, so there wasn’t a need for expediency here either.

Once minor league season ends, if my AAA team failed to make the playoffs, I may add another player or two from that team to my expanded big league roster. Normally this will only happen if I held off on making a promotion because I was in a fight for a playoff spot that I then lost out on. Similarly, if I kept a guy at AAA in order to keep that team together for the playoffs, and that team gets into the playoffs but gets eliminated from their playoffs before the major league season ends, I may make a promotion at that time.
My Salem AAA team missed out on the playoffs as well. However, there weren’t any guys on the AAA roster that I wanted to pull up to the ML team in the first place so this step isn’t needed in Salem either.
Much like Salem, I had already called up all Avalanche players that I wanted to so despite the fact that my AAA team missed out and gave me a chance to bring more guys up it didn’t happen.
For my AAA, AA, High A, and Low A teams that make the playoffs, I cut down to a 3 man starting rotation, moving my other 2 starters into long relief. I will also usually inactivate one or two long relievers and add an extra bat or two to the bench. I then edit pitcher settings, often increasing the Call Bullpen ratings. I am now trying to do whatever I can to win games with this roster and not trying to simply develop players. I also make certain to reset my player rest, defensive replacement, and pinch hitting heirarchies, and I turn off the use of Player Rest entirely in Manager Settings (last thing I want is to blow a big lead in the playoffs and have all my regulars on the bench, or be down by a bunch and not give myself that one outside shot at a huge comeback win). I will also reset my batting order and starting lineup to give myself the best shot at victories (I normally ignore my minor league batting order during regular season and just try to get key prospects playing time).

At Rookie League, because there is no Inactive Roster, I dont add any extra bats. I do however cut down from 4 tandem pairs of starting pitchers to 3, adding the two over guys to my bullpen. I do not necessarily keep pairs that pitched together during the season together here, but instead try to get my best 6 pitchers into my "3MT" starting rotation.

During minor league playoffs, you can make active/inactive moves, promotions, demotions, and DL moves between any games, not just between rounds like in the big leagues. I normally don't make any moves at all unless I suffer an injury. Unless it is to take an inactive Low A guy that is not a prospect down to Rookie to fill a roster spot due to injury, I never demote for the purpose of the playoffs. I will only very rarely promote a prospect for the playoffs, and only then if the lower level team he is on did not qualify for their own playoffs and if the guy fills a huge glaring hole in the level I am promoting him to. In Season 3 in NABCL, I had 2 catchers on my 6th seeded Low A team, both of whom hit about .160 for the season. I had a stud draft pick catcher at Rookie, and that did had not qualified for the playoffs. I brought the catcher up to Low A, and watched my Low A team knock off the top 4 overall records in Low A en route to the championship. It wasn't all the catcher's doing, but he definitely helped.

I do make certain during minor league playoffs to keep an eye on starting pitcher fatigue. With only a 3 man rotation, on occasion you will find a need to use a 4th starter if you get involved in multiple long series. If my next starter wont be 100% for his next game, I choose one of the starters that I turned into long relievers and bring him back to the rotation for one game.
This is all great information, but sadly it isn’t necessary for me since none of the Salem teams qualified for the postseason. The same thing can be said for Oakland...none of my minor league teams qualified, so I don’t really have to do any of this right now.

12/4/2018 5:15 PM

Forums

WKRP Makes A New Hire Topic

Search Criteria