The playoffs are STUPID!!!!

[Ranger Rick]

The playoffs in this game simply suck!! You can win 120 games, outscore the opposition at will and, yet, you will lose in the playoffs to some sucky team. I had FIVE 100+ win teams on the FAN CHALLENGE level not even win the World Series once!!! If anyone else has felt this frustration, please write back because this is something that Clay needs to fix!

[Ranger Rick]

Fine, you guys will want proof, right? Well, my teams had ERA's around 3.00 and ALL OF MY offenses for those 5 seasons would have ranked as the top scoring offenses of all time in the real major leagues. The top 10 scoring teams of all time, in terms of the run difference between themselves and the next highest team, ALL WON THE WORLD SERIES! That's right, ALL OF THEM and I should too when I have scored 1200 runs and the next guy pulled in 850! If the gap was that large in real baseball I would have won!

[khan]

Ranger Rick-

The playoffs are a dead horse around here. I took most of the hacks. These two threads should make you feel better.

http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=5495&highlight=playoffs

http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=4650&highlight=playoffs

I must say that paying extra attention to defense and pitching can help you sometimes.

[misterblond]

Runs mean nothing. Just like in real baseball, a team with a couple of solid starters and a good D can take you out. Stop whining and figure out how to win.

[Ranger Rick]

Hello Mr. Blonde:

First off, I am a Braves fan and I have had to endure post season after post season of crappy offensive performances that have yielded the team's wonderful starting pitching 4 world series losses and only 1 victory. They had plenty of great pitching and yet they could not score. What I am suggesting is that some sort of a minimum threshold is needed for the playoffs. Almost all of the teams that have won the WS have ranked at least in the top 5 (The Yankees especially!) in on base percentage and slugging put together (OPS). Some people here have said something to the effect of "The team with the most wins has never been guaranteed winning the WS and high scoring offenses don't matter." What I would suggest is that when a high scoring offense (By the way, Arizona scored more runs tham the Yankees last year, despite being without the DH and, yes, they also gave up fewer but they did not have to pitch to the DH most of the time) are a team with lots of wins is beaten by a team with a lesser offense or fewer wins that there surely MUST be some reason. Yeah, maybe they did have better pitching, but was it that much better? Was their offense really that much better than mine? Lets take a look at one baseball upset....the 1990 Cincinnati Reds sweeping the Oakland A's in the World Series.

The A's won 103 games and the Reds won 91, an upset by all regards. Would I be angry if I was a Mogul player and I was the A's? NO I WOULD NOT for the following reasons:

The A's scored 4.52 runs per game compared to Cincinnati's 4.28. That is awfully close and, when we factor in the DH, we can say that the two teams were about the same offensively. The A's only had a 4 point difference in OPS, so that hardly matters. Therefore, the offenses are dead even.

Pitching-wise, the Reds gave up 3.69 runs per game and the A;s only 3.52 in the American League. Again, a slight edge for the A's, but nothing too significant.

What about your glorious defense? Well, shock of shocks blondie, but the A's had a BETTER defense! Yeah, A's committed 87 errors compared to the 102 for the Reds. The Reds had a worse defense.

So, when I analyze the stats, I soon discover that not that much separates these two teams. They play a game with a bouncing ball and sometimes things just break poorly for one team over a best of seven series. Defense and pitching and hitting are all almost DEAD EVEN for these teams and one of them had to win.

However, I get angry in baseball mogul when my pitching staff with the 3.12 ERA loses to the staff with the Pirates staff that has a team ERA of 5.02 and the best starter on their team has an ERA of 4.73. Let's take the 1990 season that I just highlighted to issue here. Imagine that the Reds, with an ERA of 3.69 as a staff, lost in the playoffs to team that gave up 5.07 runs per game, which the 1990 Braves did! That would be outrageous, a statistical gap that, in a close game like baseball, should kill the Braves. I scored over 1000 runs and the Pirates could only muster 650. That would put them out of the playoffs in 1990 and they should get the CRUSHED by me. It is one thing to be beaten by a team that could give you a run for your money, that is at least close to competing with you, but what I am talking about are SORRY teams that shouldn't even be in the playoffs, teams that aren't even near .500. You tell me the last time a 79-83 team made the playoffs? Oh, that's right, you can't because a team with a losing record has NEVER won the World Series or made the playoffs in modern times (Well, at least stretching back to the days of Babe Ruth. Don't get all cheap on me and reach back to some obscure series around the turn of the century). That's my beef and, by the way, I have won the Series 6 out of 10 seasons on the hardest challenge level, so don't tell me that I don't know how to win. I did an experiment on the FAN LEVEL, which should be easier, just to show that it is hard on all levels. I have UNDESERVEDLY won the Series on several occasions, with teams that were subpar and should not have won. I am almost ashamed to call them championship teams and I will not. I GOT LUCKY, but I got far luckier that the real life stats would indicate.

Explain why it is so bad for Clay to fix the problem of 79-83 teams winning the World Series when history shows that it will probably NEVER EVER happen. I guarantee that it NEVER will!!! Write it down because 80 years of baseball history have proven me right! Counter that. Ranger Rick

[misterblond]

That is a good expository essay, and you make some excellent points (I skimmed some parts, but that's just my short attention span). I could, but won't address any of your points because it would take too long, and I have already taken part in these 'playoff result' discussions, and like someone said, it is a dead horse. You're not the first to whine about this issue, see Khan, Shaeffling, and others. All I will tell you is these three things:
1) In a seven or (especially) five game series, anything can happen. Small sample size.
2) Nothing is guaranteed -- that's why they bother to play the games.
3) If you're happy with the regular season engine (which it sounds like you are), then you should be happy with the playoff engine as well because it is the same thing. I do believe that some minor adjoustments may have been made because of such whining to actually aid the better team. I'm not sure though, so someone correct me if I'm wrong.

THE END No need to quote any stats. Yes, the better teams should on average win more often, and if you have won 6 out of 10 world series like you said, then that is more than happening. (Side note: Nobody here will be impressed with tales of dominance against the computer -- test yourself against the human managers on here)

Personally, I am quite happy with the playoff results in the only league I am currently playing in. I've made the playoffs eight years in a row, and have never lost in the first round (always being the team with the better record). Two NL championships, and two world series titles, in that time span as well. Sure, I've felt that my team was the best team in the league more than the two times that I won, but I'm not complaining because that's the way it is, and like I said, that's why they play the games. Good luck.

[James Grove]

Hi, Misterblonde -

Yes, you are correct.

It is the same game engine in the regular season and post season.

And yes, we did listen to public opinion, and we did tweak the postseason to give a slight advantage to the team with the better record. We also juiced the pitching slightly, since research showed that the good pitchers get even better in the post season.

In all, the adjustments are a few percentage points, but they can grow to be considerable if there is a big difference between the teams regular season records.


Rick -

I know it's frustrating to not win the series when you have a great team. (Heck - I'm living in Boston!)

But if we really slanted the postseason in a way that was obvious, well, the game wouldn't be much fun after that. If the team with the best record wins the series 75% or 80% of the time, then there isn't much thrill left in the post season.


Thanks for your feedback,
James

[Ranger Rick]

Mr. Blond:

Classy performance (seriously) and well thought out, albeit brief :). I guess I actually WANT to start a discussion about why teams win in real life and I just don't think that pitching and defense are the only answers. Surely, hitting has to have SOMETHING to do with it. I am just saying that, if you lack a certain amount of offense, the best pitching staff in the world will not be able to save you. Yes, you need starting pitching, no doubt about it and you can't have the worst defense ever. But, in explaining why sometimes the inferior team (record wise, at least) wins, maybe offense should be factored into the equation. The 1987 World Series between the Cardinals and the Twins is a good point to start this discussion because the Cardinals won 10 more games but lost the WS to the undergo Twins.....how could this have happened?

The Twins regular season ERA was 4.63, which is pretty bad, even by AL standards at that time. The Blue Jays, who blew their shot at the playoffs, gave up almost one fewer run a game. The Cardinals had a 3.91 ERA as a team, which was only slightly off from the NL low of 3.68. So, even adjusted for the DH, the Twins have an awful pitching staff overall (Yes, they did have a good starter in Frank Viola) compared to the Cardinals.

The defense for the Cardinals was outstanding, giving up only 116 errors, which scored for the LOWEST in the National League. However, the Twins posted only 98, which was the lowest in the majors that season. The advantage must go to the Homer Hankies but, in this instance, it is almost the same edge that the A's had over the Reds in 1990 and that didn't hold up. Let's just say that MAYBE the Twins D saves them a run or two in the 7 game WS.

Now, we come to offense and this is where the advantage begins for the Twins and the results are startling. They hit 196 HR's and the Cardinals only scored a sad 94, lowest in the major leagues. Sure, the Cards led both leagues with 248 SB's and they actually scored MORE runs per game than the Twins did during the regular season (4.93 to 4.85). Yet, I would agrue that the Twins slugging beat the Cardinals steals and led them to a tremendous baseball upset. It was a 7 game series, a short sample, but the results were almost exactly what we would have seen throughout the season as the Twins powered their way past the Cardinals track team. Sure, the Cardinals had double the steals (12 to 6) than the Twins, but the Twins outhomered them 7 to 2! Wow, the Twins outslugged them .424 to .319 in the Series! Again, we can find a REASON that the Cardinals lost to the "inferior" Twins. The thing that the Twins did at a far better level than the Cardinals, i.e. the long ball, worked well enough for them to win the Series. My only complaint with baseball mogul was that I could not find ANY reason for the losses that I suffered and I am sure that Khan felt the exact same way.

James Grove...I downloaded the unofficial patch and I noticed a tremendous change in the playoffs, as did my fellow players at my college dorm. I want to thank you because, even though I still lost on occassion, which is fine, my starter with the 2.00 ERA is not getting shelled for 10 runs over 3 innings and the playoffs are seeing the ridiculous fringe teams eliminated in the first round by the big boys almost every single time. By this I mean that teams that won 86 games, and squeaked in with a fair amount of luck, are finding that luck to be equalized when they play the 115 win team. Kudos to you and Clay for enhancing the game!!


Mr. Blonde, I play mogul against a few guys at George Mason University (Miguel, Steve, Chris and Alfredo) since we are too cheap to play online. We actually just sit in Steve's room and play the seasons all at once on Friday and Saturday nights. It is rather interesting and we have finished 10 seasons thus far. I have made the playoffs every year, won the pennant 5 times and the WS 4 times, which isn't so bad. What does it cost to join an online league because I might hook up with yours.

Cheers,

Ranger Rick

[Ranger Rick]

Never mind, the playoffs still stink, even with the patch. We have managed to sim through 20 seasons and the numbers just do not add up......for the love of god, EVERY ONE of our 120+ win teams was beaten, one by an 81 win squad! How can 4 120 win teams lose!??? Arrghhh....I stopped playing Baseball Mogul after the 1999 version because I thought that the playoff engine stunk and now I return to find the same thing. 20 win pitchers giving up 10 runs a game at will......by the way, why is it that I can set my scouting level to the 1st place position, far outspending the other teams, and my the pitchers that I sign with A ratings in every category SUCK!? I mean, I have a staff loaded with A men who can do no better than to put up ungodly ERA's at Turner Field. A staff ERA of 5.50 even though my scouting is superior.....and do not telling me that I am whining because it happens almost every year, year after year, to my pitchers. I have just given up and I just sign the best offensive players in the league, as do my fellow players.

Has anyone else also spent the most on the medical side of the game only to find that, almost every season, that 2 and sometimes 3 of your starting pitchers suffer season ending injuries even though their health was set at an A? This happens to me without fail....yeah, I know anything can happen in real life, but why even bother spending money on the medical staff if your going to still suffer season ending injuries to 2 pitchers and 2 hitters per year? I think that the injuries are happening more now than they ever did in the first few Mogul's. Opinions please.
Ranger Rick

[lancelot55]

A bunch of seasons back in now nonexistent league, I had Livian Hernandez as my ace. In the regular season, he recorded a unbelievable record of 32-1 with an ERA close to one (can't remember exactly but it was a little over one). He also had 13 shutouts. I finished the regular season with 121 wins with a strict five man rotation (I had two other guys win over 20 games). Come playoff time, Livian Hernandez got absolutley bombed. He didn't win one game and I was lucky to make it to the World Series (lost). His ERA was around nine. Needless to say I was pretty pissed, but I realize that Mogul, in my opinion hasn't got the playoff thing down just yet.

Whenever I mention this, there are lot of people that argue that good teams in real life lose the big games, which is true, but this is not real life, it is simulation. As far as I know, there aren't too many Major League teams winning 131 ballgames a year. The reason why there are teams that can win so much is because there are some very crafty mogul owners that can put together some unbelievable teams.

So here is where the catch is, Mogul, either one, must realize that their simulation allows for owners to build 120-30 win teams, and because of that, they should format the playoffs to justify such teams. Or two, find ways that handicap some of the strategies and technigues (believe it is pretty easy to build these powerhouse with tier one, two, or even three teams) so that these teams will become rarites, as they are in real life. Once these changes are made, the playoffs should be more reflective of the regular season--with the occasional upset from time to time.

Also, I would like to talk about the argument that some owners bring up about these powerhouse teams and that is of pitching and defense. In my past experiences, there have been sevral occasions where I have had the best hitting; the best defese;and by far, the best pitching, only to get beat my mediocre teams in the first round, so that argument really doesn't work in Mogul.

Finally, I don't concern myself with playoff performances, because if I know I build the best teams year in and year out--that is all I can do--and I am not going to worry about the upsets in the playoffs, because that is out of my control.

Thanks Big A

[21C]

I kept on reading this thread and waited for someone to mention the 2001 Seattle Mariners. 116 wins and no World Series appearance to show for it.

I then did some research at baseball-reference.com and came up with the facts that, since 1988, there have been 13 teams that have won 100+ games and only one of them won the World Series - the 1998 NY Yankees.

At the same time I'll add, from 1984 to 1986 there were three teams that had 100+ wins and each won the World Series.

Baseball throws this sort of numbers at you all of the time. It would be nice to have the team that won 120 games win the World Series every time but it would also be so boring. There is no sure thing in a short series. It often comes down to a cr@pshoot in the postseason in Mogul - as well as in real life.

[Ranger Rick]

Richard,

You totally missed the point of my postings....uggghhh, what I was trying to show with my above examples was that the teams that had the most wins and lost before making the Series or after making it lost for a REASON. They were at least statistically close in certain areas or the teams that beat the 100+ win teams had some sort of advantage.

Let us look at your example of the 2001 Seattle Mariners, who lost to the Yankees in the ALCS. Yup, the Mariners outscored the Yankees 5.72 to 4.99 in the regular season and they only gave up 3.87 compared to 4.43 runs per game, much fewer than the Yankees. However, the Yankees hit 203 HR's compared to 169 for Seattle. This is an advantage in a potential statistical category that could explain a Mariners loss. The Yankees outhomered Seattle 7 to 5 in the ALCS. That is a small advantage, but it is enough to explain the difference in a short series. The Yankees won 95 games compared to Seattle's 116, but they were at least a credible squad. What I believe Khan and I are talking about (not together, but in separate comments) is when totally ABSURD teams win in the playoffs. A losing team has never even MADE THE BASEBALL playoffs in the history of MLB! A team with 80 wins should NOT be winning the World Series in Basebal Mogul under any circumstances, much less 3 times in a 20 year simulation! That is total ****.....yes, your 100 win stat is right, but those teams did NOT lose to losing teams, which is not possible, at least not in 100 years of MLB. What you have also not always noticed is that many 100 win teams have at least made the Series (The 1995 Indians, for example). Losing to an 80 game winner in the 1st ROUNS IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN IN REAL LIFE and it should not happen in Mogul multiple times to 120 win seasons. Again, you need to understand that real life teams generally are very close in important stats (runs scored, ERA, on base %, etc) or one team has a decided advantage that worked out in a short series. I cannot find ANY major advantage for the losing teams that have won the WS in my mogul sims with my league.....again, multiple losing teams with outrageous disadvantages to 120 win teams win every Series against the 120 game winner.....well that HAS NOT HAPPENED in real life, so prove that it should happen 3 times out of 20 in Mogul.

[misterblond]

First Rick, it's like five bucks a month for one team, and better deals on more teams. It's not cheap, but provides a greater challenge than the computer or just a few players could. I am currently in the 'GM Baseball League' which in it's 13th season and currently has 30 owners. However, now and again a team or two opens up, and people jump on board. (With the new farm system which gives better rookies to teams with poorer records [a system which I don't like, but that's a whole other issue] it is easy to turn around a team, so don't fear joining late.) I encourage you to join, and look forward to a challenge for my current back to back titles. :) I don't know how different the online game is than yours, but my playoff results have not shown the trend of which you speak. In nine consecutive seasons I have won in the first round of the playoffs, each time being the team with the better record. Looks good to me. Anyways, see you on the field.

[khkoenig]

Lancelot, you mentioned you had Livan Hernandez in a league with a 32-1 record. If thats the case he had at least 33 starts. Its pretty much known that if you overpitch someone during the regular season he'll get bombed in the playoffs. A regular season starter shouldn't have more than about 32 starts per season, and some of the top BBMO owners only play their starters about 28 games per season.

[Ranger Rick]

I am not going to let this issue die, I refuse to! You mean to tell me that, if I let my pitcher start more than 33 games that he is doomed to suck in the playoffs!? Arrghhhh! That is the dumbest thing that I have ever heard! That little quirk or well known fact of Baseball Mogul would mean that Randy Johnson's arm would suddenly fall off during the playoffs, which is simply not going to happen. I'm so glad that I did not buy Mogul 2000 or 2002 and so ashamed that I bought 2003 because the same **** is still going on. Inaccurate scouting, stupid playoff results (In a 30 year sim I lost the WS 5 times when I was ahead 3 games to 0! Wow, that is totally unrealistic!), medical spending that never gets me anything and patches that never seem to correct the problem. Someone please comment, it just can't be me and this happens when I play other people.

[malpits]

his not saying that but it can affect the health of your pitcher, some pitchers may be able to handle it but others will just not be able to go on and get blown out, I find that my best pitchers in the playoffs in normally my number 3 and I tend to over use my number one as well.

As for winning 120 and not winning the playoffs how well balanced is your team and also are you in a good league as other wise that could make you think you have a better team than you have.

If every league that I have been in and won more than 110 I have won the WS but I tend to make sure I have 2 big bats, the best pitching in the league and also a very good defence and in most cases this is what wins of loses games in the playoffs.

I think BBM have got it just right.