Quote:
Originally Posted by thehef
Thanks for your reply 
I think you are suggesting that when OOTP grabbed Reiser's stats from Lahman (?), that Reiser's CS were 14, and that perhaps that number has since been updated due to work by researchers. Correct?
And that, regardless, OOTP would ignore pre-1951 CS stats and instead use estimates of its own? |
Correct
Quote:
Originally Posted by thehef
I'm thinking that my 1946 NL stolen base leaderboard...
Reiser 61
Adams 53
Haas 37
... does not jibe very well with what these three guys actually did in 1946...
Reiser 34
Adams 16
Haas 22
Granted, each of these guys did play a bit more in OOTP than they did in real life. So that partially explains their higher-than-real-life SB totals. But I'm thinking their high (imported, not necessarily real) success rates factored into them attempting more steals, also.
|
Stolen bases are so situational that it's difficult to tell what's going on when the OOTP stats don't match up to real life. I agree that those guys shouldn't have that many steals, but then they also shouldn't have that many
attempts. So they're stealing more bases, but they're also running way more than they should. That might be a problem with the individual ratings or it might be a problem with the strategy settings or it might be a problem with the AI or it might just be a statistical burp. Hard to say.
I'll just note that all but one of the guys that you mentioned were National Leaguers and, as I mentioned previously, the NL didn't keep CS stats before 1951. Evidently, the AL kept CS stats starting in 1920, so maybe this really is an estimated-stats problem. Perhaps the NL players get a boost because they look a lot faster than their AL counterparts who had all of their CS recorded. That might be worth a look. What, for instance, did
George Case do in your league?
If this is a known issue, then maybe the best we can hope for is that the development team will fix it eventually.