Winning in the 1800s
 

I'm always looking for ways to play this game better. There is so much to learn.

So I started a fictional league in the 1880s, with historical players importing randomly. For now, my league has just six teams and no financials. It will eventually evolve into a bigger league over the decades, likely up to 24-30 teams (with several layers of minors). Eventually I'll add financials and all that jazz

My question now, how do you build a winner in the 1880s-90s era? I have what I think is a solid team ratings wise. But we're just average on the field, sometimes downright bad. We lose often to teams with 1- and 2-star guys. No matter how strong my players are on defense, they boot the ball all over the field.

Anyways, would love some tips on how to build a solid, competitive team for this era (my owner is quite demanding). I am assuming good defense especially up the middle, speedy base-runners, pitchers with decent stuff and control.

One thing I have found is that I am stuck with my coaches (some are good, some are below average). Since the league is so small, the only FA coaches are terrible. And the coaches from other teams don't want to work for me or are too new in their current jobs to consider a change. I am thinking my scouting could use an upgrade but there isn't another, better option.

Is there a way to boost player development when you don't play with financials? It seems a lot of my guys regress? Is there a simpler financial system than all the bells and whistles I see when I click "enable financials"?

Thanks! Love this game.

" I am assuming good defense especially up the middle,"

There is no good defense in 1880.

That is true.
Not always because of bad players but also bad equipment.

However i have noticed less 20 + errors for games in historical leagues starting in 1871.
It wasn't the large amount of errors that bothered me. It was that they all seemed to come in bunches.
In previous versions i could swear i would see the first baseman drop the ball 10 times in a row without being pulled.

I have only played historical for that era.
Are you planning to follow the the real leagues as a guide or are you gonna have 162 game schedule.
I think that would wreck your stats for 162 game schedule with only 6 teams.
You may want to look how many players you have in your league with only 6 teams to start with.
Too many and they may never play.

If your going completely fictional in the 1800s then i can't advise on that.
However if you decide to follow closer to the historical path.
Then i would leave injuries and fatigue low for the time being.
I would advise forgetting about defense.
It just ain't gonna happen.
I would get that top pitcher as there won't be much of a bullpen if your going the historical route.
I would get hitters with good averages next.
I wouldn't worry so much about positions because with not many players, they had to play everywhere. Other teams are gonna have to do the same due to roster size limits in the 1800s
Probably part of the reason for so many errors.
Forget about the home run hitter.
5 home runs a year isn't worth as much as guys that get on base.

Thanks for the heads up about defense. I'm building a fictional world from scratch, starting with two teams who played one game in 1880. We're up to six teams now that it's 1885, playing a 30-game schedule... By the early 1900s the league will likely grow to 16 teams with a full schedule.

It's trial and error but fun.

Right now I have rosters set to 18 players, with eight spots on the reserve roster. I have pondered creating some type of "club" teams (minor leagues) just so the reserve guys get to play and don't regress...

If you are using fictional players you might see better defense.
I just know with historical players a 10 run lead isn't safe.
You can be leading 10-0 and 5 errors later you're behind by 1.
I would advise making a backup schedule until
you are satisfied with the results.

The manual claims players on the reserve roster practice. So they'd develop or regress based on recalc or development or whatever.The manual is wrong about lots of things but this seems simple enough for it to have gotten it right.

It's not that you should forget about defense, it's that you should forget about looking at overall ratings. In the 19th century especially but this is true to an extent into the 1920s, fielding average is king. You want to look for guys with good hands (Avoid Errors) first, foremost, and sometimes only. If your shortstop has a 30 range but 70 Avoid Errors (I've never seen that happen but in theory I guess), go for it. A low-hands 3B will absolutely murder you in this era.

Pitcher stuff almost doesn't matter because K rates are so low and frankly Movement doesn't mean a lot either. If you go back far enough, Control is meaningless too. Yeah... so go for high-stamina guys and just have them throw complete games every time you can.

I don't have a huge sample size yet but it does seem pitcher "stuff" makes some difference in the 1880s. The top team in the league has a couple of guys with great stuff and they seem to confound everyone (especially me). And it seems stamina doesn't matter a whole lot. I had a reliever with practically no stamina but great stuff and movement. He threw several complete games for me one season, albeit with one real clunker in what otherwise was a pretty solid year as the No. 3 guy.

As for the players: I started the league with fictional guys and then set it to import historical players randomly after year one. Some of the fictional guys are starting to retire. There was one IF who had 100/100 speed & stealing ratings. If he got on base, he was going to end up at third and there was nothing you could do about it. Meanwhile, my top runners with speed/steal ratings in the 70s keep getting gunned down...

This is the truth! I played out a lot of games the first few seasons and won/lost several because players were booting the ball all over the yard. :rolleyes: