|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Dec 4, 2017 11:11:17 GMT -5
I agree with Sean 100%.
I am okay with injuries, I am not okay with 3/5 of my rotation going down long-term, my top 3-4 bullpen guys going down long-term and 3-4 hitters in my lineup hitting the DL at the same time. Even with that said, the perfect solution which OOTP does not offer is the lowering the length of those injuries. I would be much more inclined to accept higher injuries like OOTP 18 gives us if they were in the nature of 2-3-4 weeks not 2-3-4 months each time.
Having to build a roster that is 25-man deep to compete is hard enough, building a 40-man roster where everyone has to be ML-level caliber to compete and manage option years, etc isn't fun at all.
|
|
|
Post by Dustin Ackley on Dec 4, 2017 15:34:11 GMT -5
I agree with Sean 100%. I am okay with injuries, I am not okay with 3/5 of my rotation going down long-term, my top 3-4 bullpen guys going down long-term and 3-4 hitters in my lineup hitting the DL at the same time. Even with that said, the perfect solution which OOTP does not offer is the lowering the length of those injuries. I would be much more inclined to accept higher injuries like OOTP 18 gives us if they were in the nature of 2-3-4 weeks not 2-3-4 months each time. Having to build a roster that is 25-man deep to compete is hard enough, building a 40-man roster where everyone has to be ML-level caliber to compete and manage option years, etc isn't fun at all. That is what happened to the real life Mets this year...
|
|
|
Post by Peter - Boston Red Sox on Dec 4, 2017 15:58:50 GMT -5
I can't remember but did we turn off the ability to see if a guy is "fragile" or "Iron man?" In one league I am in we did that. I'm not in favor of it. I think having this info allows you to see that you may be taking a risk when you acquire this guy. You can also see his injury history that should also tell you if you have a higher chance for injury with this guy.
I'm sure you all know all of this but just tossing it out there. I hate injuries as much as anyone else but they are a part of the game.
|
|
|
Post by earlweaver on Dec 4, 2017 16:22:32 GMT -5
again, i think this keeps getting lost in the discussion. This isn't about realism, and isn't about eliminating injuries...
Yes, teams in real life have lots of injuries at times which really effect things. There are examples of this going back years.
Turning the injury setting down doesn't eliminate injuries. We did this in the ABL, and there are still lots and lots of injuries. It just isn't a funeral every sim anymore.
Injuries will still be part of the game. Depth will still matter. Unlucky teams will still be hit hard. These things will all still happen. It just won't be as bad. Thats all.
I know it's been discussed, and i know the votes have been counted, but some of the comments aren't really addressing the lower injury settings side.
|
|
|
Post by Tim_GiantsGM on Dec 4, 2017 17:14:55 GMT -5
Keep in mind that a "very low" injury setting exists. I experimented with the very low setting and found it boring. Too few injuries to be challenging. I don't care for the very low setting.
As Fin wrote, the "low" setting still produces many injuries, just not as many as the "normal" setting. Personally, the numerous, major injuries fellow GMs and I have dealt with in both leagues in which I compete have taken some of the fun out of participating. I love the roster management related challenges injuries present, but I dislike the frequency of injuries, many of which are extreme injuries that could impact entire careers, resulting from our use of the normal setting.
In our league, I would rather see us choose a direction that is close to realistic, challenging, and fun. As a result, I voted for the reduction from normal to low.
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Dec 4, 2017 17:23:45 GMT -5
I agree with Sean 100%. I am okay with injuries, I am not okay with 3/5 of my rotation going down long-term, my top 3-4 bullpen guys going down long-term and 3-4 hitters in my lineup hitting the DL at the same time. Even with that said, the perfect solution which OOTP does not offer is the lowering the length of those injuries. I would be much more inclined to accept higher injuries like OOTP 18 gives us if they were in the nature of 2-3-4 weeks not 2-3-4 months each time. Having to build a roster that is 25-man deep to compete is hard enough, building a 40-man roster where everyone has to be ML-level caliber to compete and manage option years, etc isn't fun at all. That is what happened to the real life Mets this year... Not true... www.foxsports.com/mlb/new-york-mets-team-injuries?season=2017&active=0
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Dec 4, 2017 18:50:47 GMT -5
Great discussion. In the end this pretty much comes down to personal preference. Historically I have been against reducing injuries. I think building depth should be a challenge that separates good GMs from great ones. But even I have to admit the volume of injuries the last couple of seasons diminished my enjoyment of the game. The 9 votes currently logged are enough to kill it. But the poll still has a week and a half until it expires and people can change their votes. Do not mistake this for me lobbying for votes to change. Just an observation.
|
|
|
Post by Mac_Yankees GM on Dec 4, 2017 19:08:16 GMT -5
Great discussion. In the end this pretty much comes down to personal preference. Historically I have been against reducing injuries. I think building depth should be a challenge that separates good GMs from great ones. But even I have to admit the volume of injuries the last couple of seasons diminished my enjoyment of the game. The 9 votes currently logged are enough to kill it. But the poll still has a week and a half until it expires and people can change their votes. Do not mistake this for me lobbying for votes to change. Just an observation. Ron thanks for posting the poll and I agree there has been some great discussion. I am concerned about having the poll open for another 13 days. I think it is important that we all know what the rules for the upcoming season so we make informed decisions about free agent and trade values before we start simming through the off season. I wouldn't object to ending the poll around Friday. Everyone will have had a week to vote and we will be ready to move into arbitration and free agency knowing what the settings will be for next season.
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Dec 4, 2017 19:21:17 GMT -5
Great discussion. In the end this pretty much comes down to personal preference. Historically I have been against reducing injuries. I think building depth should be a challenge that separates good GMs from great ones. But even I have to admit the volume of injuries the last couple of seasons diminished my enjoyment of the game. The 9 votes currently logged are enough to kill it. But the poll still has a week and a half until it expires and people can change their votes. Do not mistake this for me lobbying for votes to change. Just an observation. Ron thanks for posting the poll and I agree there has been some great discussion. I am concerned about having the poll open for another 13 days. I think it is important that we all know what the rules for the upcoming season so we make informed decisions about free agent and trade values before we start simming through the off season. I wouldn't object to ending the poll around Friday. Everyone will have had a week to vote and we will be ready to move into arbitration and free agency knowing what the settings will be for next season. Fair enough. We'll revisit Friday and see if there has been any shake ups by then.
|
|
|
Injuries
Dec 4, 2017 19:46:19 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Dec 4, 2017 19:46:19 GMT -5
Great discussion. In the end this pretty much comes down to personal preference. Historically I have been against reducing injuries. I think building depth should be a challenge that separates good GMs from great ones. But even I have to admit the volume of injuries the last couple of seasons diminished my enjoyment of the game. The 9 votes currently logged are enough to kill it. But the poll still has a week and a half until it expires and people can change their votes. Do not mistake this for me lobbying for votes to change. Just an observation. Ron thanks for posting the poll and I agree there has been some great discussion. I am concerned about having the poll open for another 13 days. I think it is important that we all know what the rules for the upcoming season so we make informed decisions about free agent and trade values before we start simming through the off season. I wouldn't object to ending the poll around Friday. Everyone will have had a week to vote and we will be ready to move into arbitration and free agency knowing what the settings will be for next season. I really don't understand how your strategy would be any different. Can you explain more what you mean by this?
|
|
|
Post by Arizona_PBL on Dec 4, 2017 20:21:12 GMT -5
Ron thanks for posting the poll and I agree there has been some great discussion. I am concerned about having the poll open for another 13 days. I think it is important that we all know what the rules for the upcoming season so we make informed decisions about free agent and trade values before we start simming through the off season. I wouldn't object to ending the poll around Friday. Everyone will have had a week to vote and we will be ready to move into arbitration and free agency knowing what the settings will be for next season. I really don't understand how your strategy would be any different. Can you explain more what you mean by this? Injuries stay the same = more value on Durable players. Injuries reduced to low = Fragile and possibly wrecked now have more value.
|
|
|
Post by Texas Rangers on Dec 4, 2017 20:25:17 GMT -5
Have the OOTP developers addressed their plans with injuries going forward? It really made a significant jump the last two years, and I'm leaning towards voting yes. I've never been in favor of changing injury settings but goodness, there are pitchers that were injured 10 times this year. One would think in 2045 that medical technology and sports training would improve rather than get worse from levels in the 2010s
|
|
|
Post by Mac_Yankees GM on Dec 4, 2017 20:32:46 GMT -5
[/quote] I really don't understand how your strategy would be any different.
Can you explain more what you mean by this?[/quote]
Sure- If the injury rating was reduced from normal to low I might be more tempted to take a risk on a fragile pitcher. For example Dave Bean had a respectable 3.41 era and 1.14 whip last year but being fragile he spend a good portion of the season on the DL wasting a lot of my payroll $. If I thought he was less likely to be injuried he becomes a better value and someone I might be willing to spend some of my limited $'s on.
|
|
|
Post by Luc_AZdbacks on Dec 4, 2017 20:49:42 GMT -5
Not really sure where I stand here.. arguments on both side make sense to me.
One point that I should add, is that the PBL has not always had normal as the setting. We changed it a number of years back from low to normal, as I remember pushing for it to be more since low felt too low.
So it would not be breaking some precedent for us to go back to low. Have voted 'yes' for now
|
|
|
Post by Dustin Ackley on Dec 4, 2017 21:42:47 GMT -5
Lets just turn injuries off... and while were at it turn fatigue off... and suspensions too... and the financial stuff too!
|
|