Discussion Forum

Forum >> Discussions >> New manager effect  

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date	Function
#25696	10/23/2015 11:15:47 pm		Ignore
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive	I didn't say it's perfect, but I still submit it's the best way to measure it. This is especially true because most of the factors have remained as close to the same as possible--position players, ballpark, etc. I didn't go into all the details originally because the post was already long. Yes, I've jumped up to a III league where the hitters are probably better. My pitchers are also better, though. When I took over as owner, my staff needed some work. Now they're much more solid as I've been able to develop a few guys. If you think there's a better way to judge defense, I'd love to hear it. No one offered anything other than simply looking at FPCT, which I think is vastly inferior. Also, the way the game assigns plays makes looking at individual players defensive chances irrelevant and inaccurate. You have to consider the entire team.
#25702	10/24/2015 7:34:08 am		Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5199 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	Why is F% "vastly inferior"? if the intention is to quantify the effect of the manager on player skills, F% seems like the perfect stat. It is tied to a single player skill (fielding), not a collection of player skills. It is completely individual, and not affected in any way by teammates or opposition. The main problem with F% that I see is that error assignment by the ME can look pretty RNG. But that problem diminishes with sample size. Maybe the intention isn't to quantify the effect on player skills, but the effect on winning? If that's the goal ... good luck. There are far too many variables to do anything resembling science. The black box is much too opaque.
#25703	10/24/2015 7:46:38 am		Ignore
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive	I'd say that the team's Fielding Percentage actually would be more accurate because it takes the random assignment of errors out of the equation and just looks at the frequency. To me if you then really have position players with the same skills, that is by far the closest you will be able to come to whether the defense got better or worse under the manager. Still other factors involved, but it seems least influenced.
#25705	10/24/2015 7:59:18 am		Ignore
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9599 Haverhill Halflings III.1	Reality is, with all the factors involved and as Seca mentioned a lot of it black boxed, its virtually impossible to isolate the impact of a single variable. Its probably highly inaccurate but I don't think Mike's attempt is going to be any less valid than any other approach. They will simply all be doomed efforts.
#25723	10/24/2015 11:50:55 pm		Ignore
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive	I think fielding percentage is inferior because it completely neglects players getting to batted balls (range). The manager's rating is on defense; I'm assuming that affects range, arm, as well as error rates. If that's not the case, FPCT would be a better measurement. Hmmm. When I put it that way, it seems like having a positive defensive coach might be the best thing to have. I grabbed one with poor defensive coaching because I thought it would impact things less than pitching and hitting. Now I'm rethinking that.
#25731	10/25/2015 7:39:50 am		Ignore
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9599 Haverhill Halflings III.1	Yeah, assuming Steve got the balance right all three of those should have approximately equal impact on the field. The development rating is a bit of a wildcard since it deals with a completely different aspect of the game.
#25735	10/25/2015 10:48:24 am		Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5199 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	I don't think it's an assumption the manager affects all 3 - think that can be taken as a fact. If you are trying to determine a relationship, you want to eliminate all variables but 2. The best shot of doing that is with F%. If you get an idea of the effect there, you can attempt to extrapolate to other skills. Fielding skill and F% are really the only one that could be studied. Everything else mixes skills, incorporates opposition, management settings, etc..
#39960	09/23/2016 8:21:48 pm		Ignore
wuggla Joined: 05/10/2013 Posts: 1059 Colorado Springs Vultures VI.28	#25703 10/24/2015 7:46:38 am newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 2284 """""""" I'd say that the team's Fielding Percentage actually would be more accurate because it takes the random assignment of errors out of the equation and just looks at the frequency. To me if you then really have position players with the same skills, that is by far the closest you will be able to come to whether the defense got better or worse under the manager. Still other factors involved, but it seems least influenced."""""""""my REPLY hey just look at last 3 years of my teams Stats some of this is true working's with the new Manager...i have changed players from positions also had 5 gold gloves in 1 season and my teams had lower runs score against it than any or most upper league V, IV,III,II or legends teams... just my small sample i useing....
#39961	09/23/2016 8:37:22 pm		Ignore
wuggla Joined: 05/10/2013 Posts: 1059 Colorado Springs Vultures VI.28	Also look at double plays they have improved all 3 years the only thing thats not improved was outfield assist. i think that had to do with last year i used a player with 10 arm in center field 1/2 the season. i got 2 OF who will be able to increase OA for sure this year. but my F% for my team has just gotten way better evry year as well as my players stat F%. This not luck putting the work into my team.
#39966	09/23/2016 10:35:29 pm
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator	We continue to tweak the game engine to try to match real world fielding statistics. The aggregate is quite close to the MLB averages now. Steve

| |

Reply