Love hate relationship with Random Debut.

[David Watts]

Ever had something added to OOTP that becomes a personal obsession? That's random debut for me. The whole concept is so unique I just can't get myself to move away from it, even though I can't seem to find the ideal setup. Stop start, stop start over and over...UGH! I may need therapy soon.

[elfsutton]

Put down the mouse and slowly back away from the computer. I sort of did the same but it is very difficult to stop using it once you start. I guess mine is cause I love to get guys like Ruth and have him on the field or competing with the Belles and Sosas and see how Young pitches against the new era guys.

Just a lot of fun mixing things up.

[Painmantle]

Mix it up, do historical entry on the even years and random on the odd years! That will mess you up!

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by elfsutton

Put down the mouse and slowly back away from the computer. I sort of did the same but it is very difficult to stop using it once you start. I guess mine is cause I love to get guys like Ruth and have him on the field or competing with the Belles and Sosas and see how Young pitches against the new era guys.

Just a lot of fun mixing things up.

My last try was one using recalc and neutralized stats. I love the league, but it's the pitchers from the 1800's that have me junking the league. Really wish we could pick a starting point (example 1901) for players to enter.

I think tonight I will give it one more try. This time I'm going to use real stats instead of neutered ones.

Ideally I wouldn't use recalc at all, but after several tries doing so, I realize recalc is pretty much needed for random debut.

[SpaceMonkey13]

Originally Posted by David Watts

My last try was one using recalc and neutralized stats. I love the league, but it's the pitchers from the 1800's that have me junking the league. Really wish we could pick a starting point (example 1901) for players to enter.

I think tonight I will give it one more try. This time I'm going to use real stats instead of neutered ones.

Ideally I wouldn't use recalc at all, but after several tries doing so, I realize recalc is pretty much needed for random debut.

What about the 1800s pitchers is a problem? I'm 8 years into a random debut dynasty (no recalc), and 1800s pitchers don't seem to be more or less remarkable than any others. 70's pitchers have stood out: John Candelaria, Steve Rogers, Bill Stoneman.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey13

What about the 1800s pitchers is a problem? I'm 8 years into a random debut dynasty (no recalc), and 1800s pitchers don't seem to be more or less remarkable than any others. 70's pitchers have stood out: John Candelaria, Steve Rogers, Bill Stoneman.

Just for example, lets take a guy named The Only Nolan. This guy pitched 5 seasons going 23-52 in real life 1878-1885. He was 13-22 in 1878. The OOTP neutralized DB has him going 70-28 in 1878, pitching 889 innings. Another guy named Harry Salisbury. Harry pitched 2 seasons in real life and went 24-24. The neutralized db has him winning something like 152 games...and I think 58 games in one season. Both these guys are consistently at the tops of my leaderboards...Salibury for wins, The Only Nolan for strikeouts.

I like the neutralized db for the fact that if fills in gaps for missing years, but I think in the case of the 1800 guys it's going overboard.

I doubt you would see the problem if you aren't using recalc. I would also like to make it clear that these guys aren't pitching like supermen either. It's just the fact that they are performing above their abilities based on inflated fictional numbers.

[David Watts]

Wow, learn something new everyday. Just looked at neutralized stats for the players mentioned on BB reference. Though not the same, they are done much the same way. Maybe I'm creating a mountain out of nothing. Ugh!