Party Like It's 1999... Pedro, Schilling, Manny, or Other?

[Hendu Style]

Strongly leaning towards Pedro. I only have $10.5 million for the upcoming season, so I may have to backload the deal a little bit.

[Cigar_City_Rays]

Originally Posted by Hendu Style

Strongly leaning towards Pedro. I only have $10.5 million for the upcoming season, so I may have to backload the deal a little bit.

This shouldn't even be a question. You had a ton of offense, don't let their efforts to to waste. Schilling or Pedro, it doesn't matter, sign a starter!

[Hendu Style]

Debate settled. I went hard after Pedro Martinez at your guys' urging. I wound up getting him for 7 years at $85.5m. This will take him all the way through the 2005 season. It turns out I could've had Curt Schilling for much cheaper (5 years, $45 million), but I'd be hard-pressed to find a better 1-2 punch in the history of the game than Randy Johnson and Pedro Martinez.


Thanks for voting, guys. Next order of business: beef up that bullpen.

[Ruthian23]

Originally Posted by Hendu Style

Debate settled. I went hard after Pedro Martinez at your guys' urging. I wound up getting him for 7 years at $85.5m. This will take him all the way through the 2005 season. It turns out I could've had Curt Schilling for much cheaper (5 years, $45 million), but I'd be hard-pressed to find a better 1-2 punch in the history of the game than Randy Johnson and Pedro Martinez.

1998 going into 1999 Pedro at 12 mil a year is a much better deal than Schilling at 9 mil a year. Good choice.

[DustinthePOWERHOUSE]

Originally Posted by Ruthian23

1998 going into 1999 Pedro at 12 mil a year is a much better deal than Schilling at 9 mil a year. Good choice.

Agreed, 12 mil a year for Pedro in his absolute prime (best ever) is the best decision you've ever made. This shouldn't have been a debate if you're only paying pennies for arguably the greatest three season span in league history.

[SodoMojo]

While either pitcher is nice I think there is too much emphasis put on name recognition in a simulation game.

If you remove the names and just asked which scenario should I take:

Pitcher #1
18-9, 2.69 ERA, 311 K in 1998

or

Pitcher #2 & a solid reliever
17-11, 3.04 ERA, 251 K in 1998

I wonder if you would have gotten different responses.

That aspect alone had me switch to liking fictional leagues more which in the beginning I would have scoffed at the idea.

[Ruthian23]

Originally Posted by SodoMojo

While either pitcher is nice I think there is too much emphasis put on name recognition in a simulation game.

If you remove the names and just asked which scenario should I take:

Pitcher #1
18-9, 2.69 ERA, 311 K in 1998

or

Pitcher #2 & a solid reliever
17-11, 3.04 ERA, 251 K in 1998

I wonder if you would have gotten different responses.

That aspect alone had me switch to liking fictional leagues more which in the beginning I would have scoffed at the idea.

But he's going into 1999. If you took away the names and said:

Pitcher #1

2.10 ERA, 11.6 K/9, 228 ERA+, .905 WHIP over the next five years. (in the AL)

OR

Pitcher #2 and a solid reliever

3.29 ERA, 9.4 K/9, 142 ERA+, 1.075 WHIP over the next five years (in the NL)

I don't think you would get results that are much different.

[DustinthePOWERHOUSE]

Originally Posted by SodoMojo

While either pitcher is nice I think there is too much emphasis put on name recognition in a simulation game.

If you remove the names and just asked which scenario should I take:

Pitcher #1
18-9, 2.69 ERA, 311 K in 1998

or

Pitcher #2 & a solid reliever
17-11, 3.04 ERA, 251 K in 1998

I wonder if you would have gotten different responses.

That aspect alone had me switch to liking fictional leagues more which in the beginning I would have scoffed at the idea.

Not the case though because we can see into the future and know how these players can perform. If you can take an above average/good pitcher or the best pitcher for the next three years by a large margin which do you take?

[Ruthian23]

Originally Posted by DustinthePOWERHOUSE

Not the case though because we can see into the future and know how these players can perform. If you can take an above average/good pitcher or the best pitcher for the next three years by a large margin which do you take?

In fairness I think Schilling was probably better than just good over the next five years, and certainly better than above average. Pedro was just so gonzo off the wall crazy good that he makes pretty much everyone else look like chumps. If there was a bell curve for performance, Schilling would be way to the right over the next five years. Pedro would be on a different chart.

P.S. Can we all just agree on this so I can stop complimenting Pedro Martinez? Blech.

[SodoMojo]

Originally Posted by Ruthian23

But he's going into 1999. If you took away the names and said:

Pitcher #1

2.10 ERA, 11.6 K/9, 228 ERA+, .905 WHIP over the next five years. (in the AL)

OR

Pitcher #2 and a solid reliever

3.29 ERA, 9.4 K/9, 142 ERA+, 1.075 WHIP over the next five years (in the NL)

I don't think you would get results that are much different.

I think you just emphasized my point, name recognition or the knowledge of how they might perform in the future lessens the experience for me.

Unless I'm mistaken you don't know how well they will pitch going forward but you assume they will pitch well because of name recognition.

Not an argument simply an observation.

[SodoMojo]

Originally Posted by DustinthePOWERHOUSE

Not the case though because we can see into the future and know how these players can perform. If you can take an above average/good pitcher or the best pitcher for the next three years by a large margin which do you take?

Don't forget he could add a reliever or two if he chose Schilling which with his bullpen shouldn't be discounted.

I still lean towards Schilling + relievers a bit but not knowing what relievers he could get is a big factor.

[Ruthian23]

Originally Posted by SodoMojo

I think you just emphasized my point, name recognition or the knowledge of how they might perform in the future lessens the experience for me.

Unless I'm mistaken you don't know how well they will pitch going forward but you assume they will pitch well because of name recognition.

Not an argument simply an observation.

I am assuming he is using some level of recalculation based on real life stats. There are a lot of options in historical leagues, and depending on the configuration he has, you could be correct.

Even if he has no historical adjustments on, though, I still think the case for Pedro is pretty strong. In 1998, Pedro was 27, while Schilling was 31. In my experience with OOTP, I would doubt the development engine will be as kind to Schilling as real life was as he ages.

I think the point you made in your first paragraph is certainly a valid criticism of playing with real players, and I know many feel the same way. Since we're making a recommendation here for an historical league, though, I was making much of the recommendation in light of the fact that he probably has some sort of configuration that will make things resemble the real future.

[DustinthePOWERHOUSE]

Originally Posted by Ruthian23

In fairness I think Schilling was probably better than just good over the next five years, and certainly better than above average. Pedro was just so gonzo off the wall crazy good that he makes pretty much everyone else look like chumps. If there was a bell curve for performance, Schilling would be way to the right over the next five years. Pedro would be on a different chart.

P.S. Can we all just agree on this so I can stop complimenting Pedro Martinez? Blech.

That's fair but I'd still take off the wall crazy good over great. Especially if the price is only 12

[SodoMojo]

Originally Posted by Ruthian23

I am assuming he is using some level of recalculation based on real life stats. There are a lot of options in historical leagues, and depending on the configuration he has, you could be correct.

Even if he has no historical adjustments on, though, I still think the case for Pedro is pretty strong. In 1998, Pedro was 27, while Schilling was 31. In my experience with OOTP, I would doubt the development engine will be as kind to Schilling as real life was as he ages.

I think the point you made in your first paragraph is certainly a valid criticism of playing with real players, and I know many feel the same way. Since we're making a recommendation here for an historical league, though, I was making much of the recommendation in light of the fact that he probably has some sort of configuration that will make things resemble the real future.

Agree, I went off topic. There are a lot of factors that can be taken into account that aren't listed and it should be taken at face value given the scenario.

[Ruthian23]

Originally Posted by DustinthePOWERHOUSE

That's fair but I'd still take off the wall crazy good over great. Especially if the price is only 12

Oh, me too. And only a 3m difference to boot.