Paging David Watts...

[luckymann]

Hey DW a while back we were discussing using the HIGH player fatigue setting and I kind of pooh-poohed the concept without actually having tried it.

Must say, I was wrong. I am using it now in one of my saves (the PBL) and am really liking what I am seeing with regard to roster maintenance and player usage. So much so that I just switched the EL across to using it as well.

Have you been using it with any of your saves?

G

[Reed]

I am not David Watts but I think it is pretty realistic on my Random League. Of course a lot of it depends on your schedule and how often you have a day off.

[luckymann]

Originally Posted by Reed

I am not David Watts but I think it is pretty realistic on my Random League. Of course a lot of it depends on your schedule and how often you have a day off.

Yeah, I doubt I'd ever set it to VERY HIGH, but HIGH is certainly making the GMs utilise their full roster more, rather than guys playing an unrealistically high amount of games.

[The Game]

I need more info, this sounds interesting. Are you using it just for Modern or? How often does the backup C play? How many lineups are used on average? Tony's White Sox have used a different lineup in every game this season. 2 other team also have done that. Only the BoSox have used 8 same lineups which leads the league.

[David Watts]

I have started to use high fatigue as well, but I tend to tie it into what injury setting I'm using. If I have adequate numbers of subs to allow for the high normal injury settings, I will use average fatigue. If I use low injurie settings I will use High fatigue.

I do dislike the fake boundaries aspect of high fatigue, but I do think the stat output and games played often look better when using it. Was messing around with a 1970 mlb replay with retire according to history turned on. I had injuries turned off. 1 year recalc. Realized without high fatigue, Willie Horton was going to be Gates Brown. 34 games into the season, he had yet to start a game. He was simply pinch hitting. Now with high fatigue, I'm sure he would have already made at least 2 or 3 starts in the OF in relief of Northrup and Kaline.

[Reed]

I am currently playing a random league using 1984 as a base for output.
What I would suggest and what I did was backup up my league, then restore to test league. Set average fatigue and fast sim a season and looked at usage for the year.
Then restored to a another test league and set to high fatigue and fast sim a season then looked at usage.
Then restore to a third test league, set to very high fatigue. Fast sim the season and look at usage.
Compare all 3 and go with the one that looks best to you.
Like David said, injury settings might play a role in what you decide.

[Reed]

Delete double post. Silly iPad has decided to start making double post.

[luckymann]

Originally Posted by The Game

I need more info, this sounds interesting. Are you using it just for Modern or? How often does the backup C play? How many lineups are used on average? Tony's White Sox have used a different lineup in every game this season. 2 other team also have done that. Only the BoSox have used 8 same lineups which leads the league.

Here are starter and backup catcher usage for a couple teams - 1965 was NORMAL, 1966 HIGH. No injuries.

Berra - starter



Carter - backup




Mauer - starter



Lombardi - backup




In 1965, a bunch of catchers played 139 of 168 at C.

In 1966, only three played >130.

DH is on.

That's as scientific as I get, Game. Hope it helps.

[luckymann]

Originally Posted by David Watts

I have started to use high fatigue as well, but I tend to tie it into what injury setting I'm using. If I have adequate numbers of subs to allow for the high normal injury settings, I will use average fatigue. If I use low injurie settings I will use High fatigue.

I do dislike the fake boundaries aspect of high fatigue, but I do think the stat output and games played often look better when using it. Was messing around with a 1970 mlb replay with retire according to history turned on. I had injuries turned off. 1 year recalc. Realized without high fatigue, Willie Horton was going to be Gates Brown. 34 games into the season, he had yet to start a game. He was simply pinch hitting. Now with high fatigue, I'm sure he would have already made at least 2 or 3 starts in the OF in relief of Northrup and Kaline.

Yeah, if a guy is stuck behind someone else at a position, it isn't going to get them getting enough AB to qualify or anything, but it seems at a glance as if it ups their usage in the realm of 10%-20%. I haven't studied how this changes per position, but those C numbers are a decent baseline.

Vaughan, one of the league's premier SS, went down by 9 games / 23 PA.

Williams, as everyday a RF as there is, dropped from 160 to 156 and lost 30-odd PA.

Rickey Run, playing at CF, lost 12 G / 50 PA.

Now this is a very closed environment I'm sampling - no trades, no injuries or finances, just an Active Roster of 27 with just enough coverage at each position. So it is far from representative. Then again, it may well be in this case.

I have just switched over for my EL, which is much more standard in nature with all the usual facets of the game. I'll keep an eye on it and report back.

[The Game]

Originally Posted by luckymann

Here are starter and backup catcher usage for a couple teams - 1965 was NORMAL, 1966 HIGH. No injuries.

Berra - starter



Carter - backup




Mauer - starter



Lombardi - backup




In 1965, a bunch of catchers played 139 of 168 at C.

In 1966, only three played >130.

DH is on.

That's as scientific as I get, Game. Hope it helps.

thank you. Think i will give this a try in my EBL vs MLB dynasty.

[luckymann]

Let us know how it goes.

I have to this point only introduced it into saves for which I merely commish and do the reporting on. I'm going to give it some more time and get a bigger sample size before considering doing likewise for the saves in which I have a more active role. 26-man active rosters are tough enough for me to manage as it is.

[sprague]

Originally Posted by David Watts

I have started to use high fatigue as well, but I tend to tie it into what injury setting I'm using. If I have adequate numbers of subs to allow for the high normal injury settings, I will use average fatigue. If I use low injurie settings I will use High fatigue.

I do dislike the fake boundaries aspect of high fatigue, but I do think the stat output and games played often look better when using it. Was messing around with a 1970 mlb replay with retire according to history turned on. I had injuries turned off. 1 year recalc. Realized without high fatigue, Willie Horton was going to be Gates Brown. 34 games into the season, he had yet to start a game. He was simply pinch hitting. Now with high fatigue, I'm sure he would have already made at least 2 or 3 starts in the OF in relief of Northrup and Kaline.

David this is my recomendation to get the best of both worlds. I play this way with either injuries off, or lowest setting possible.


Half of the season my fatigue level is Normal
The other half the fatigue is High
(I change at the 80 game mark)
Even years normal is first, odd years high is first.
To me this does a great job in getting some players more at bats, yet not going back to normal and having catchers only start 105 games or whatnot.
Try it out, see what you think

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by sprague

David this is my recomendation to get the best of both worlds. I play this way with either injuries off, or lowest setting possible.


Half of the season my fatigue level is Normal
The other half the fatigue is High
(I change at the 80 game mark)
Even years normal is first, odd years high is first.
To me this does a great job in getting some players more at bats, yet not going back to normal and having catchers only start 105 games or whatnot.
Try it out, see what you think

Thanks.

[David Watts]

I like the numbers high fatigue provides and I like the fact that teams have to make use of their entire roster. That being said, I just had something occur that shines a light on the bad side of having high fatigue turned on. Boston Americans are leading the St Louis Browns, but just barely.. Americans have 2 games remaining, Browns have 3. Thing is Stan Musial, Billy Hamilton and Harmon Killebrew are all gassed for the Americans. That being said, these last 2 games are pretty much do or die for both the Americans and the Browns. Game 153 the Americans sit Musial(Stan is going to win the Triple Crown) and go on to lose to the Yankees 2-0. Boston is now a 1/2 game up with one game remaining. The Browns have 2 left to play,

Oh and just in case someone from the regular forum decides to read this, I am in no way gassing or disparaging the game. Just an observation. The game is just doing what I set it to do.

Might do what Sprague said he does in the future.

[luckymann]

Originally Posted by David Watts

I like the numbers high fatigue provides and I like the fact that teams have to make use of their entire roster. That being said, I just had something occur that shines a light on the bad side of having high fatigue turned on. Boston Americans are leading the St Louis Browns, but just barely.. Americans have 2 games remaining, Browns have 3. Thing is Stan Musial, Billy Hamilton and Harmon Killebrew are all gassed for the Americans. That being said, these last 2 games are pretty much do or die for both the Americans and the Browns. Game 153 the Americans sit Musial(Stan is going to win the Triple Crown) and go on to lose to the Yankees 2-0. Boston is now a 1/2 game up with one game remaining. The Browns have 2 left to play,

Oh and just in case someone from the regular forum decides to read this, I am in no way gassing or disparaging the game. Just an observation. The game is just doing what I set it to do.

Might do what Sprague said he does in the future.

Yeah, but we both know IRL Stan never misses that game unless he absolutely can't walk.

Still, I can't imagine NOT using this setting now. For the reasons you mention above.

What was Sprague's plan - different settings in different parts of the season wasn't it?

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by luckymann

Yeah, but we both know IRL Stan never misses that game unless he absolutely can't walk.

Still, I can't imagine NOT using this setting now. For the reasons you mention above.

What was Sprague's plan - different settings in different parts of the season wasn't it?

Yes. I was thinking I might turn fatigue down for September. Still trying to decide.

[luckymann]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Yes. I was thinking I might turn fatigue down for September. Still trying to decide.

It's a tough one because, in reality, that's kind of counterintuitive - don't you think? Players would be more susceptible to physical fatigue as the season wears on. What is perhaps needed is some sort of override in these key game situations, but I doubt that would be possible.

I'm finding with 23 that the AI will play them unless they have hit a certain fatigue level, somewhere around 65% from the look of it. But, even then, that isn't fully representative of how it would work in a must-win game at the very pointy end of a regular season.