David Nied (1st pick in 1992 Expansion Draft) [Archive]

Mightyzug

01-26-2010, 06:32 AM

Okay, historically the Rockies took David Nied with the first pick in the 1992 Expansion Draft.

At least for one game (http://www.purplerow.com/2009/2/6/750984/rockies-retro-david-nied) Nied was the players the Rockies wanted.

Nied was an absolute pitching phenom, probably the closest thing in Rockies history being what Jeff Francis was supposed to have become (and would have have been if pitching at sea level in a high humidity environment), or what Ubaldo Jimenez really became.

This Purple Row piece (http://www.purplerow.com/2009/2/6/750984/rockies-retro-david-nied) got me thinking about Nied again, especially considering that I'm right in the middle of my 1993 inaugural season (May actually).

Nied was beyond effective in his six appearance and two starts (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/n/niedda01.shtml) with Atlanta in '92.

As the Purple Row retrospective details Nied's injuries in '93 and the significant one in the offseason leading up to the '05 shortened season, I got to thinking. My current sim had some riduckulous numbers for Nied in 1993:

Endurance: 96
Control: 53
Power: 100
Movement: 63

He jumped from being a prospect to being an Overall 90/95 guy. All of a sudden he was almost worth Kevin Brown (then with Texas) straight up in a trade. I had been having huge success with good ol' (and I mean old) Bryn Smith's effective sinker (Smith was leading the NL in ERA with the altitude friendly sinker), and Brownie had an even better sinker according to his Scouting Page. Well, I reflected on it for a couple of days, and decided to call Nied up to the bigs...

However, I positioned Nied in the rotation such that his first game would be a road game. I'm not stupid (entirely) and I didn't want to subject the young kid to the horrors of the launching pad that was Mile High stadium. So his first start comes around. He could strike guys out, sure, but he got just absolutely destroyed. I thought about trading him for Brown, throwing in another prospect to get the great sinkerballer I wanted, but then I thought better of it. I assumed the computer AI was overvaluing Nied based on the 100 rating for Power, when by my metrics, he was a crappy pitcher, who would get shelled every time out, but have very high strike out totals. Which is strange because when other teams roll out those flamethrower type pitchers against my Rockies lineup (EY, Bichette, Galarraga, Walker, Burks, Castilla, Girardi, Weiss, pitcher) they usually shut my offense down until we got into the 'pen.

I made the decision that I wasn't happy with Nied's ratings and opened him up in via Commissioner Mode, via the 'Edit Player' function in his Scouting Report (thanks for teaching me how to do this everybody!). So I entered his historical '93 data to update his predicted stats. Well, I was really disappointed with the outcome. You see the data I was using was '93 data that is a function of Nied having to pitch at altitude in an environment that produced scores more resembling a football game. His '93 historical data isn't really the pitching prospect he "was", but rather the result of where he was pitching. What I really needed to do was figure out who he "was" historically, and the nightmare of pitching half his games at Mile High, well Baseball Mogul would take care of that by itself.

So there I am...

Based on his '92 AAA stats and limited experience with Atlanta what should I enter into his predicted stats in his Scouting report to revert Nied into the prospect he was for the Rockies when they drafted him first overall in the expansion draft?

I suspect I'm going to need Clay's help here to get all these data points to enter into the player's Predicted Stats fields.

Has anyone 'cracked' the Predicted Stats fields well enough that you could use Nied's historical '92 AAA and MLB production to tell me what to enter to make Nied, once again, the prized prospect of that Expansion draft?

MichelleWie

01-26-2010, 02:05 PM

Mightyzug

01-26-2010, 11:51 PM

Just enter in his stats from '92. You could use just his big league stats or include his minors as well, however you want.. It will generate rtg's on its own based off the stats you enter. You can adjust his peak, his longevity, peak start etc also until he is up to your standards. I hope this helps somewhat.

The thing is that he really didn't pitch that much at the MLB level in '92, most of his amazing year was down at AAA for the Braves. I don't know how to convert the AAA numbers to MLB numbers to enter them in the predicted stats.

Certainly they are predictive, Ohlm's has shared that, but there has to be some conversion algorithm to project AAA numbers to MLB numbers, and there is no way that Clay or anyone else is going to share that (if its even linear, which I doubt).

So the question remains if I only enter the limited MLB data from the '92 season into predicted stats, what will Baseball Mogul do with that? Considering that its such a small sample?

etothep

01-27-2010, 12:33 AM

You enter and tell us man, it only takes a few seconds to do it

Rexington

01-27-2010, 03:17 AM

You enter and tell us man, it only takes a few seconds to do it

Agreed.

However, if you are still dazed/confused then you might want to put his major league career totals in for his predicted and then fiddle with his potential rating until you feel "realistic"

Mightyzug

01-27-2010, 07:28 AM

Okay, I started with his 'best' season as a member of the Rox. The problem with this is that he already had been hurt once, and by entering the 1994 totals with Colorado into his predicted stats his effective performance pitching in Colorado is going to get "double counted" on the bad side. Think about it, Baseball Mogul is going to take the data from any pitcher and subject it to the park effect and then the batter's data. A 4.80 ERA in Colorado wasn't bad, not by a long shot, but Baseball Mogul doesn't take park effects into consideration in the Predicted Stats screen. In a sense, Baseball Mogul assumes that anything entered on Predicted Stats is park adjusted, that is everything is normalized.

At any rate this is what Nied looks like after entering his 1994 data into Predicted Stats:

David Nied 71/77
Endurance 81
Control 69
Power 77
Movement 63

Fastball 88
Foshball 47
Curveball 77

Is that the first overall pick in the Expansion Draft in 1992? I don't think so...

So now I'm going to try and enter his data from his short callup with the Braves in 1992, where he just dominated:

David Nied 98/98
Endurance 46 (he only started 2 of his 6 games with the Braves)
Control 100
Power 95
Movement 100

Fastball 99
Foshball 99
Curveball 99

Ok, now that's just ridiculous. Kind of like the Mets discovery of Sidd Finch:

Sidd Finch (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/features/cover/news/2000/07/24/finch_flash/)

Apparently, David Nied was a little too good in his six game call up. I wanted a young franchise phenom, someone worthy of being the first pick in the expansion draft, but c'mon, I wanted a human not a monk who had "mastered the art of the pitch."

Then going back into Edit Player and entering his AAA stats into the AAA dropdown didn't change anything...

So then, I decided to get rid of all of the data by clearing the player and just entering his data from the 1992 AAA season into his AAA dropdown in Edit Player.

After doing this his numbers got weird:

David Nied 100/100
Endurance 24
Control 42
Power 45
Movement 25

Fastball 25
Foshball 25
Curveball 25

Clearly you can't delete everything and just enter AAA data because it somehow corrupted the player. For whatever reason after the 'Clear Player' function, and then using the dropdown to fill in the AAA numbers, the player doesn't refresh his Predicted or Peak. Strange.

Since I had saved, I'm just going to start over as this AAA only David Nied obviously has a problem with him...

Anyone know how to use the 'Clear Player' button and then enter AAA data and then somehow get the game to refresh the Peak and Predicted information for the player? Is this a bug that it doesn't after you use 'Clear' and then enter the AAA data?

Help!

free2131

01-27-2010, 09:01 AM

jonnymo

01-27-2010, 03:10 PM

Based on his '92 AAA stats and limited experience with Atlanta what should I enter into his predicted stats in his Scouting report to revert Nied into the prospect he was for the Rockies when they drafted him first overall in the expansion draft?
Nice Finch reference.

My recommendation is to use the "Neutralized Pitching" stats from Baseball Reference (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/n/niedda01-pitch.shtml) (down near the bottom, above "Appearances on Leader Boards." What happens if you enter those numbers (4-5/4.19) as his '93 predicted?

Mightyzug

01-27-2010, 07:12 PM

The only way a player's rating will be affected is if you enter his stats in the Predicted option on the drop down menu. When you cleared him out, and only edited the AAA stats, you effectively game him a zero in every predicted stat, causing him to turn into a bug (actually, if you pitched him everyday, he would throw perfect, 27 K games almost every game).

Like others have said, you just need to play around with the numbers to make what you want. Just make sure you make all your edits as predicted stats.

Any advice on how to convert Nied's AAA production into Predicted Stats? I don't want to just use the '92 MLB numbers because, as you can see, they made Nied 'too good in my opinion, but with too low of an Endurance (and Endurance doesn't react appropriately to usage in my opinion).

Obviously Baseball Mogul generates Predicted Stats based on a players minor league numbers (for players that have never played MLB). I'm trying to figure out how to force that Predicted Stats to refresh after entering minor league data (which we have for Nied).

All I want is David Nied as the prospect he was in '93...

That doesn't seem so unreasonable, and obviously BM used minor league data to generate Predicted Stats for every player coming up.

Any ideas on how to generate Predicted Stats from the minor league numbers as the program normally does?

Mightyzug

01-27-2010, 07:15 PM

Nice Finch reference.

My recommendation is to use the "Neutralized Pitching" stats from Baseball Reference (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/n/niedda01-pitch.shtml) (down near the bottom, above "Appearances on Leader Boards." What happens if you enter those numbers (4-5/4.19) as his '93 predicted?

The problem is that Nied had several injuries while with the Rockies. The most significant being the one before the '95 season.

His neutralized pitching numbers, even from '93 don't really capture who he was before getting hurt, and who he was when he was taken first overall as the 'golden boy' for the franchise.

I don't just want to 'fudge' the numbers until he's good. I really want to use the Baseball Mogul method of creating Predicted Stats. I don't really understand why I can't enter the AAA numbers and Last Seasons numbers and get Predicted Stats to refresh.

Is this a bug?

free2131

01-27-2010, 07:47 PM

Mightyzug

01-27-2010, 08:45 PM

There really is no way to measure how good a player MIGHT have been, other than to just play around with the predicted stats until you are satisfied.

Also, the only thing that is used to give players their ratings is the Predicted stats tab. Anything else is just cosmetic for his scouting card.

Well if you look at comments Ohlm's has made, the minor league stats of a player in Baseball Mogul generate the Predicted Stats for the player at the MLB level. So while the minor league numbers aren't acquired by a sim, they aren't just cosmetic either.

So clearly Baseball Mogul uses some algorithm to translate the minor league productivity which is stored in the Rookie tab, A tab, AA tab, and AAA tab which you can access via 'Edit Player' and uses those to produce the Predicted Stats.

What I can't figure out is why (at least within BM '09) you can't just edit those numbers and have the Predicited Stats update per whatever algorithm the program uses. Maybe its an orders of operation issue and I haven't figured out how to do what and in what order...

However, clearly Baseball Mogul has the means to determine 'how good a player might have been' because it produces predicted stats constantly for players based on their minor league numbers and the previous season's numbers (along with peak ratings, potential, and start peak, and peak end info).

Has anyone else ever tried to 'reset' a player?

David Nied was an amazing prospect for the Rockies after they acquired him, but he certainly wasn't a 100 Power with low Control and Movement kind of guy the way my sim had him...

His '92 AAA and MLB numbers should have resulted in him being a very high Control and Movement pitcher.

Anyone else had some efficacy pulling off a 'player edit' like this, to reset a player?

free2131

01-27-2010, 09:20 PM

Well if you look at comments Ohlm's has made, the minor league stats of a player in Baseball Mogul generate the Predicted Stats for the player at the MLB level. So while the minor league numbers aren't acquired by a sim, they aren't just cosmetic either.

You actually have it backwards, as a player's predicted stats will influence his minor and ML stats.

I don't mean to sound like a broken record, but you just need to fiddle around with his predicted stats until he is rated the way you want.

HoustonGM

01-27-2010, 09:49 PM

Free is right. The minor league stats in the game have nothing to do with setting predicted stats. They are generated BY the predicted stats.

Mightyzug

01-28-2010, 01:46 AM

Okay, apparently I was completely wrong on this one... :confused:

I found this corroborating what you guys are saying here from Ohms_law:

Minor League stats are predictive, as they are generated from Predicted Stats (http://www.sportsmogul.com/vbulletin2/showthread.php?t=180943)

However, obviously a player's 'path' changes as his production in the minors gets generated (not simmed). If a player's minor league stats outperform his predicted stats (or underperformed) do to that 'random' factor doesn't the game then calculate the next season's Predicted Stats based on what happened the prior season (that is the Minor League Stats become Last Season Stats which then become Predicted Stats).

Essentially, Predicted Stats -> output to Minor League Stats -> output to Last Year's Stats -> Predicted Stats (and over and over)...

Certainly a player's production changes his Predicted Stats year to year...

All I'm trying to do is get the Predicted Stats to populate from wherever it populates from.

In this thread Ohms_Law seems to be implying that you can adjust the Minor League stats in the .csv files in the Input Folder and the player's Predicted Stats will change. Am I reading that thread right?

Change Minor League Stats to change Predicted Stats (http://www.sportsmogul.com/vbulletin2/showthread.php?t=149647&highlight=minor+league+stats)

Or when Ohms_Law says "yea" is he acknowledging that you can not, in fact, generate 'new' Predicted Stats from changing the Minor League numbers?

HoustonGM

01-28-2010, 01:57 AM

No, the simulated stats do not then, in turn, affect predicted stats. The simulated minor league stats do not affect a player's progression.

All I'm trying to do is get the Predicted Stats to populate from wherever it populates from.
It populates them from what YOU INPUT INTO THEM. At the start, it populates them from whatever algorithms the game uses. Then, the game's player development engine takes over. If you want to change this for a particular player, you must edit the predicted stats yourself (although, of course, once simming starts, the predicted stats will change based on the many factors that go into that - player development, finances, injuries, etc.).

Or when Ohms_Law says "yea" is he acknowledging that you can not, in fact, generate 'new' Predicted Stats from changing the Minor League numbers?
Right.

Mightyzug

01-28-2010, 03:43 AM

I thought Ohms said that minor league games didn't sim, but rather that the minor league stats were generated with a random factor.

I understood that the Minor League stats were predictive, that even though they are generated from the Predicted Stats they are the player's production (as if the games had been simmed). If the random factor was negative, the player just wasn't going to 'max out' that sim.

Is that all wrong?

Mightyzug

01-28-2010, 03:54 AM

Okay, I need some input.

Since I can't figure out how to use Baseball Mogul to generate the Predicted Stats for Nied as a post '92 top pitching prospect I need some help making these numbers up.

Here is his 1992 AAA Braves affiliate stat line:

26GS 168.0IP 144H 44BB 159K 73R 53ER 1.119WHIP 7.7H/9IP 2.4BB/9IP 8.5K/9IP

Here is his production from a late season call-up in '92 as the Braves were on their way to the WS:

6G 2GS 23.0IP 10H 5BB 19K 3R 3ER 0.652WHIP 3.9H/9IP 2.0BB/9IP 7.4K/9IP

So what do you think Nied's Baseball Mogul numbers should look like?

I hate that Baseball Mogul keeps turning him into this ridiculous Power pitcher every time I try to restart a sim starting in '93. Nied was crafty, but he wasn't a fireballer. He was a typical Richmond prospect for the Braves along the lines of Avery and Glavine.

In a perfect world I'd make a Sinker his best pitch (so he can make a career out of pitching in Colorado), mix in a serviceable Curveball, a good Change, a mediocre Fastball (maybe a four-seamer), and be able to throw a reasonable Slider.

Does anyone have a copy of the James book that breaks down each pitchers repertoire? I'd like to know what Nied really threw, as well.

Throw out some numbers for Control, Power, Movement that you think matches up with those AAA and MLB numbers from '92.

Thanks for your time.

HoustonGM

01-28-2010, 09:41 AM

I thought Ohms said that minor league games didn't sim, but rather that the minor league stats were generated with a random factor.
That's right. "Simulated" in my post means "generated by the game."

Since I can't figure out how to use Baseball Mogul to generate the Predicted Stats for Nied as a post '92 top pitching prospect
Again, because, you can't.

BenFink

01-28-2010, 11:38 AM

You could always use his 1993 stats...
Mogul was not designed to base a guy off 23 real innings of work.

Rexington

01-28-2010, 03:40 PM

HoustonGM

01-28-2010, 06:21 PM

Why don't you work backwards and edit his peak instead. You said that he was supposed to be a Glavine or Avery, so pick the best season between the two and enter that in as his peak. I believe that will alter his predicted enough to get the results you want.
You can't directly edit the peak. You can only use the +/- buttons to raise or lower it. You have to first edit the predicted stats (you could enter one of those Glavine/Avery seasons as predicted, then use the +/- buttons there to lower him and then go to the peak screen and use the +/- to estimate a similar peak as the original stats).

Rexington

01-28-2010, 06:47 PM

You can't directly edit the peak. You can only use the +/- buttons to raise or lower it. You have to first edit the predicted stats (you could enter one of those Glavine/Avery seasons as predicted, then use the +/- buttons there to lower him and then go to the peak screen and use the +/- to estimate a similar peak as the original stats).

Thanks HGM. After I posted that I started fiddling with a pitcher and realized that myself.

Mightyzug

01-28-2010, 06:56 PM

You could always use his 1993 stats...
Mogul was not designed to base a guy off 23 real innings of work.

Ok.

Which begs the question, what does Baseball Mogul do in the game if I call a guy up for a six game callup at the end of the season, and he goes nuts putting up numbers similar to what Nied did in '92.

Doesn't Baseball Mogul look at actual production along with Predicted Stats when calculating the "new Predicted Stats" for the following season?

A player isn't "locked in" to be a certain "Predicted Stats" player from the day he was drafted. I'm assuming that at some point BM looks at production, and the "Predicted Stats" either increase/decrease based on production.

I'd have a hard time believing that the game is so simple that a player is going to charge head long toward his "Predicted Stats" numbers that exist at the time he was drafted, regardless of whether he's getting shelled or is a phenom in actuality. The game has to look at the actual production and adjust from there doesn't it?

HoustonGM

01-28-2010, 07:00 PM

Which begs the question, what does Baseball Mogul do in the game if I call a guy up for a six game callup at the end of the season, and he goes nuts putting up numbers similar to what Nied did in '92.
Nothing.

Doesn't Baseball Mogul look at actual production along with Predicted Stats when calculating the "new Predicted Stats" for the following season?

A player isn't "locked in" to be a certain "Predicted Stats" player from the day he was drafted. I'm assuming that at some point BM looks at production, and the "Predicted Stats" either increase/decrease based on production.

For the millionth time, any performance that the game generates does not then affect predicted stats.

I'd have a hard time believing that the game is so simple that a player is going to charge head long toward his "Predicted Stats" numbers that exist at the time he was drafted, regardless of whether he's getting shelled or is a phenom in actuality. The game has to look at the actual production and adjust from there doesn't it?
The predicted stats don't stay the same but they are not influenced by production (which COMES from the predicted stats). The predicted stats change based on the player development and aging engine, injuries, randomness, etc.

Mightyzug

01-28-2010, 07:03 PM

Why don't you work backwards and edit his peak instead. You said that he was supposed to be a Glavine or Avery, so pick the best season between the two and enter that in as his peak. I believe that will alter his predicted enough to get the results you want.

Here is something interesting on the Nied, Glavine, Avery projections...

Comparing David Nied to Glavine and Avery in 1992 (http://www.veteranpresence.com/FPOTM/nied.html)

Baseball Mogul already had Nied as a mid-nineties overall pitcher anyway.

However, if you look at the earlier posts I didn't "like" the kind of pitcher that BM had turned Nied into (a fireballer with low control and low movement).

Does anyone have memory of what David Nied was really throwing down in Richmond and in Atlanta in '92? Was he really just a pure high heat guy? I find that a little ridiculous to believe. My understanding was that he was a legitimate ace with a variety of effective pitches that projected well to pitching in Colorado (baseball had been played in Colorado before, Satchel Paige pulled his stunt having the outfield sit down/come in in Denver, of all places which makes it even more impressive!).

Anyone know where I can go to read about what Nied was throwing, what the velocity on his fastball was, and what pitches he was using to get all those punch-outs.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think the 'golden boy' was the kind of pitcher that BM turned him into (see stats in first posts).

Mightyzug

01-28-2010, 07:11 PM

For the millionth time, any performance that the game generates does not then affect predicted stats.

The predicted stats don't stay the same but they are not influenced by production (which COMES from the predicted stats). The predicted stats change based on the player development and aging engine, injuries, randomness, etc.

I'm not sure this is true...

Clearly BM allows for a player to 'get hot' and if that lasts long enough for a player to play well for a whole season, then the player's ceiling improves going forward. Isn't that correct?

If its not I'd like see Ohms or Clay confirm that, in fact, a player is 'locked in' on a development path and with 'Predicted Stats' that are essentially determined by draft day, and that will only change throughout his minor league career and MLB career based on a random factor, not on actual production.

That even if a guy gets shelled for consectuive seasons as a pitcher, and then even if I bring him to Colorado and he puts up high ERA seasons, he's still the same super prospect he was on draft day, and should always revert (except for the random changes to Predicted Stats) toward that...

Really?

I'd be astounded if the game didn't actually take in performance into account when calculating and updating a players "Predicted Stats."

Not to do so would really make the game pretty one dimensional.

Clay or Ohms, would you mind commenting on this?

HoustonGM

01-28-2010, 07:17 PM

Mightyzug

01-29-2010, 04:05 AM

Simulated stats COME FROM the predicted stats. It wouldn't make much sense to then edit the predicted stats based on the simulated stats they generated.

Players aren't "locked in" from draft day. I don't know where you're getting that from.

Well, if a players minor league numbers are only generated from Predicted Stats, and regardless of the random factor that is included in those, essentially a player would be "locked in" if nothing he did in the Minors (his stats) had any bearing on what kind of player he was going to be...

I think it may be true to say that currently the ability to use 'Edit Player' to change the minor league stats as a means to produce 'Predicted Stats' doesn't work. Certainly we know that Ohms has told us that minor league stats are a product of 'Predicted Stats' plus a random factor. However, I think it would be absurd if over a small sample, like a starting pitcher in the minor leagues, that was outperforming or underperforming, if that productivity had NOTHING to do with scouting the player, but was really just a product of the random factor.

So while it is true that we can't currently generate 'Predicted Stats' from R, A, AA, or AAA numbers it doesn't necessarily mean that the game doesn't "peek" at productivity while continuously updating 'Predicted Stats'. Although that may very well be the case.

You certainly are adamant about things you couldn't possibly know for sure...

I'd like to see Ohms or Clay comment on this one, especially considering that Ohms seemed to comment in another thread that you could change the minor league stats by making changes to the .csv files in the Input Folder. The context was the same, someone trying to force Baseball Mogul to generate 'Predicted Stats' (and ratings) based on changes in the minor league numbers.

Ohms final "yea" in that thread wasn't clear as to whether this was possible the way he was explaining it, or whether it was not, for the purposes it was being asked for (may only be cosmetic change w/o affecting 'Predicted Stats' or Ratings).

HoustonGM

01-29-2010, 09:40 AM

Well, if a players minor league numbers are only generated from Predicted Stats, and regardless of the random factor that is included in those, essentially a player would be "locked in" if nothing he did in the Minors (his stats) had any bearing on what kind of player he was going to be...
No. There are so many other factors that I've mentioned that are not at all locked in as of draft day.

I think it may be true to say that currently the ability to use 'Edit Player' to change the minor league stats as a means to produce 'Predicted Stats' doesn't work. Certainly we know that Ohms has told us that minor league stats are a product of 'Predicted Stats' plus a random factor. However, I think it would be absurd if over a small sample, like a starting pitcher in the minor leagues, that was outperforming or underperforming, if that productivity had NOTHING to do with scouting the player, but was really just a product of the random factor.
Using the generated minor league stats to change the predicted stats would make even less sense than using the major league simulated stats (http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showpost.php?p=1440950&postcount=14) to do the same, considering those minor league stats are simply generated and do not come from simulated games.

Predicted stats + randomness = minor league stats. What your essentially saying is that players should get an increase or decrease in production due to whatever that random factor is...but there IS already randomness built into the player development engine.

I'd like to see Ohms or Clay comment on this one, especially considering that Ohms seemed to comment in another thread that you could change the minor league stats by making changes to the .csv files in the Input Folder. The context was the same, someone trying to force Baseball Mogul to generate 'Predicted Stats' (and ratings) based on changes in the minor league numbers.
But it's an entirely different issue. The csv files are what the game uses at creation to generate a player's rating. That has nothing to do with what you're saying regarding the game-generated minor league stats having an effect on predicted stats.

Ohms final "yea" in that thread wasn't clear as to whether this was possible the way he was explaining it, or whether it was not, for the purposes it was being asked for (may only be cosmetic change w/o affecting 'Predicted Stats' or Ratings).
His final "yea" in that thread was a response to my post directly above his where I asked "Get what I'm saying?"

HoustonGM

01-29-2010, 09:55 AM

Think about it in terms of real life. Does a player's performance drive his talent level? No. His talent level drives his performance. When he does better or worse than his perceived talent level over an extended period of time, that doesn't that his talent level will then change based on that performance. It means that his talent level DID change and that caused his performance to increase or decrease. We then update our scouting reports and evaluations based on this once we get enough data to suggest that the increase or decrease was due to a talent level change. "Predicted stats" in the game are a proxy for "talent level." It'd make little sense to change a player's talent level based on his performance, just like it makes no sense in real life.

MichelleWie

01-29-2010, 12:08 PM

I don't think Ohms is active on the forums anymore..... Anyway this is not really that hard. I think your making it more complicated than it is. Basically just plug in stats until you get the Neid you like. Play with it a little bit...

danup

01-29-2010, 02:54 PM

These might help—here, from Dan Szymborski's translations of minor league stats (http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/oracle/discussion/3_decades_of_minor_league_translations/), is a neutral-environment, MLB-translated version of David Nied's minor league numbers—

1991: 7-3, 3.02 ERA, 15 GS, 86.1 IP, 81 H, 29 ER, 2 HR, 23 BB, 60 K
1992: 11-12, 4.06 ERA, 26 GS, 161.2 IP, 73 ER, 24 HR, 44 BB, 122 K

There's no way of getting this "perfect", because the perfect David Nied is the one who flamed out and sells car parts, or whatever, now. But if you add his MLB stats to his 1992 MLEs—you get 14-12, something like a 3.72 ERA—and make that his predicted stats for 1993 you won't be too far off.

I think you're overrating him, incidentally—the year he had in AAA is worse than what, say, Anthony Reyes was doing at the same age. Pitchers flame out, sometimes because of injury, sometimes because they just happened to peak in AAA. But you can set his peak however you'd like.

etothep

01-29-2010, 03:01 PM

I think you're overrating him, incidentally

Oh no, you're in for it now :eek:

BenFink

01-29-2010, 03:25 PM

etothep

01-29-2010, 03:26 PM

That's like looking just at the scoreless innings streak of Don Drysdale and putting them into predicted stats.

New dynasty idea here for anyone interested

danup

01-29-2010, 04:51 PM

Looking at a AAA season and 23 innings of work miiight be a terrible way to judge a player.

That's like looking just at the scoreless innings streak of Don Drysdale and putting them into predicted stats.

What do you propose as a better idea? Using a full season of minor league stats in MLE form—a technique with a long, well-researched history—is hardly worse than using a full MLB season, especially considering the minor league is AAA and the year is the one directly before he was considered MLB ready. It's nothing more than predicting that, having done a certain thing as a 22 year-old, he's likely to do something similar as a 23 year-old.

And it's nothing like using a scoreless innings streak, which as hyperbole goes is utterly without meaning. 180 or so innings, properly adjusted for league and environment, will certainly get you closer than Mogul manages on its own.

BenFink

01-29-2010, 05:04 PM

Zug obviously has more information than he'd like to use.

Mightyzug

01-31-2010, 10:13 PM

Zug obviously has more information than he'd like to use.

Well, in all fairness to anyone whose paying attention, I'm going to end up using adjusted numbers that are the product of those same SABR methodologies that I am critical of their methodologies. However, the fact is that the numbers a pitcher puts up in Colorado have little to do with anything, and certainly don't translate in any linear fashion to neutral MLB numbers, so I'm willing to take what I can get for the purposes of Nied.

The 4.00 ERA doesn't seem all that accurate to me, but we're talking about speculation to begin with...

Still Nied managed a 16 GS season with a 5.17 ERA and a 1.621 WHIP metric followed by a 22 GS season with a 4.80 ERA and a 1.508 WHIP metric, and both were in Colorado.

The skew of pitching in Colorado, to me, is much wider than eight tenths of an earned run over 9 innings. For crying out loud the average combined score for a Colorado game was 15 runs, and that held up for years. Great starters came to Colorado and gave up six to eight runs in a single game over short innings, the effect of pitching in Colorado was so significant.

So if I'm trying to find the "real" David Nied and the neutralized numbers suggest around a 4.00ERA, that's really not all that far off from what Nied accomplished in Colorado.

Maybe the truth about Nied is that even with the injuries, maybe early in Colorado's franchise we just know how to locate his production into any meaninful context, because there wasn't a comparable sample.

Looking back now his '93 and '94 seasons were actually very 'good' seasons for a starting Colorado pitcher. Heck, a sub-5.00 ERA over 22 starts is freakin' incredible, now that we have the sample.

Maybe we don't need to look for the "real" David Nied. Maybe we had him all along and just didn't understand that he actually was pitching effectively, for Colorado.

Still we don't have any neutral numbers I really trust. There is no way I believe that if Nied pulled off a 5.17 ERA and 4.80 ERA starting seasons, back to back, in Colorado, that he wouldn't have been easily a sub-4.00 starter elsewhere. I mean baseball in Colorado, in old Mile High, before the humidor, was just freakin' moonball. Whatever the real conversion is, I'm sure its more than .80 compared to pitching elsewhere. I mean starters who were having high 2.xx and low 3.xx ERA starting seasons would come to Colorado and just get shelled.

HoustonGM

01-31-2010, 10:19 PM

Nied's pitching in '93-'94 was almost exactly average given his run environment.

etothep

01-31-2010, 10:27 PM

If we all say that Nied was a future 500 game winner who was going to transcend the game of baseball & how we define the idea of 'great pitching' before being struck down by unfortunate circumstances that even Job couldn't overcome...if we all say that, will you start writing normal sized posts?

reflections

01-31-2010, 10:35 PM

BenFink

01-31-2010, 11:43 PM

Mightyzug

02-01-2010, 01:45 PM

So you want the game to turn a small sample of minor league stats into major league stats and account for (your version) of Coors effects. And then make him a little better.

I think what you really want is for us to green light you giving him ridiculous stats.

Nope...I just wish the game was a little more dynamic in terms of player development, rather than just so simple.

I'd just like an interface to enter the minor league numbers and have the 'Predicted Stats' update from that. Clearly lots of people manipulating the numbers have different ideas about how to skew minor league numbers to MLB numbers. I don't think its a linear function, and I don't believe that such a thing can be reasonably projected. However, I'd be satisfied with whatever arbitrary method as long as it was consistent, and a part of the game.

With Nied his numbers at Richmond were arguably better than that of Avery and Glavine, only he was older.

He was the first pick in the Expansion draft, not the Amateur draft so its not like he's the second coming of Satchel Paige or anything. I just was horribly disappointed with BM converting him into a flamethrower, low control, low movement guy.

His '92 AAA numbers and MLB production bely a very crafty pitcher with good stuff. Exactly the kinds of pitchers I like. I've got nothing against the Pedro Astacio type. Astacio won a lot of games for the Rockies, took his lumps when his heat met the barrel of the bat, and shrugged off the silly Coors Field madness. However, I just like the crafty type.

I mean look at the '99 and '00 seasons for Astacio (who from the historical context is the only Rockies starter similar to what BM did with Nied) and Bohanon.

I mean Bohanon's stuff was legendarily bad. Larry Walker had a great quote about the courage of Bohanon to take the mound with what he had. Astacio had better velocity, control, and command. You couldn't even compare the two pitchers intelligently if you ever saw them both pitch in '99 and '00. However, something funny happened on the way to the forum. While Bohanon was a Rockies savior in '99, a season where nine different guys were in the rotation, and only three managed to make more than twenty starts, as Bohanon and his rubber arm managed almost two hundred innings and thirty-three starts (second only to Astacio). Now these weren't quality starts, mind you, but any pitcher who could consistently take the mound and give you innings pre-humidor was a serviceable one, and one you could win with. While Bohanon had an ERA north of six runs and a WHIP metric of 1.662 in '99 he also managed to split his record twelve and twelve, and winning twelve games in Colorado as a starter is actually saying something, as is losing only twelve (Astacio won only five more, losing twelve as well).

Believe it or not in '00 the numbers bely that Bohanon was the better pitcher, and he was probably was. Not that he had better 'stuff', or could touch Astacio's slider on the gun with his fastball, but Bohanon was crafty. He had mastered being a pitcher, without being half the hurler that guys in the minors were. In '00 Astacio managed his usual near 200 IP and near 200 k season giving the Rockies a fighting chance every time out. In 32 GS he had a 12-9 record, a 5.27 ERA, and his WHIP metric was 1.497. Now Bohanon was yanked around between the 'pen and the rotation, and was only given 26 GS, but he arguably was the better starter with a 5.15 ERA, and a WHIP metric of 1.525.

I like the crafty type guy. Pure stuff guys put up fine numbers during a large sample, but with the bases juiced in a must have game or playoff context, who would you rather have taking the ball, a flamethrower, or a crafty type that leaves the hitter guessing and unable to sit on a single pitch?

I'll take the guy that can pitch over the guy that can throw.

Essentially, my interest in finding the 'real' Nied is having the Nied that could pitch, while BM just gave me a Nied that could throw...

Oh, and I'm about the last person that would ever curry validation from an outside source.

However, Nied's numbers were ridiculous in '92. His AAA production and his MLB call-up for a team on the way to the World Series was the real deal. Certainly Nied didn't have the opportunity to become that type of pitcher taking the mound in Denver at old Mile High, and after arm injuries, however he is perhaps the most touted prospect the Rockies have ever had...

Jeff Francis was a better pitcher than Nied, in terms of what they accomplished in the minors, but Francis was never really exposed to AAA in Colorado Springs out of fear of what the altitude there would do to his arm and confidence (Colorado Springs is higher in elevation than Denver). Nied put up a monster AAA season, while Francis never had the chance. However, Francis was pitching post-humidor and post-superhumidor, and his numbers his first two seasons definitely take a back seat to Nied's. Again, Nied was considered a monumental bust, but I'm making the argument that we didn't have context to properly locate his production into at the time (inaugural and early seasons).

I think both Francis and Nied were phenomenal young prospects (Francis from draft day onward and Nied after '92), and I really would like the chance to have the 'real' Nied instead of just the two-dimensional BM fireballer...

Who knows what Nied would have done in Colorado if he had the opportunity to throw a soggy ball. I mean when you look at what the superhumidor did for Rockies pitching starting with the 2006 season (poster boy is Jason Jennings, but you can see the skew looking at Francis' numbers as well) I get all school girl giddy thinking about what Nied could have done in that context.

Colorado pitchers weren't nearly as bad as they appeared prior to the 2002 season when the humidor went into use, and equally they haven't been as good as they appear since the 2006 season since the superhumidor settings were applied.

I think somewhere along the way the early season productivity of Colorado pitchers like Nied and Reynoso get lost as the sample of Colorado starting pitching gets normalized.

I would still love to hear some Power, Movement, and Control ratings for Nied as a '93 prospect, and what Predicted Stats you guys would use.

Mightyzug

02-01-2010, 02:03 PM

Maybe be selling car parts but this is his fiancee (per wikipedia)

http://pic3.picturetrail.com/VOL15/630347/5208526/66481469.jpg

He isn't selling car parts. His father actually owns the company he works for, they make cylinder heads amongst other things.

reflections

02-01-2010, 03:54 PM

He isn't selling car parts. His father actually owns the company he works for, they make cylinder heads amongst other things.

You must be the biggest David Nied fan ever. I think he still pulled a pretty nice fiancee.

LilBates

02-01-2010, 04:09 PM

You must be the biggest David Nied fan ever. I think he still pulled a pretty nice fiancee.

Or perhaps he IS David Nied...

BenFink

02-01-2010, 04:19 PM

I no longer can follow your statements.

David Nied's "monster AAA season" didn't come in Colorado Springs though. I thought you said that, but I could be wrong.

MichelleWie

02-01-2010, 04:25 PM

Or perhaps he IS David Nied...

That's what I was wondering.. Buy he's obviously a huge Rockies fan which is cool. But I too have become lost. Just put in whatever you think his numbers should be and go with it. It's your game, customize it however you want. I have no idea what Nied's numbers are or should be and to be honest I could care less. Now someone who's numbers should be fixed is Teddy Higuera. His ratings are terrilbe in the game and he was an elite pitcher for 3-4 years in the 80's unlike Mr. Neid who basically blew out his diaper every time out.. Also interesting fact if you search Dave Nied on wiki you get nothing...

etothep

02-01-2010, 05:55 PM

Just put in whatever you think his numbers should be and go with it. It's your game, customize it however you want. I have no idea what Nied's numbers are or should be and to be honest I could care less.

Couldn't agree more.

Also, for whatever it's worth, when I played a game w/ the late 70's Brew Crew Higuera did pretty well for me (but I may have simply lucked out)

MichelleWie

02-01-2010, 09:02 PM

Also, for whatever it's worth, when I played a game w/ the late 70's Brew Crew Higuera did pretty well for me (but I may have simply lucked out)

I actually never tried starting in the 70's. I forget that he would be on the team since the time he was 18. I like tostart in'87 which was a good your for them. He's like a 79/79 with power/movement in the low 70's! He was coming off a great year in '86, and in 87 he wasn't as good but still decent. Basically from 85-88 he was one of the top pitchers in the league. But his rtg's don't reflect it if you start in '86 or '87. I always figured players like Higuera screwed with the database because they were great for a short period and then flamed out due to injuries or other reasons.

Mightyzug

02-02-2010, 01:07 AM

I no longer can follow your statements.

David Nied's "monster AAA season" didn't come in Colorado Springs though. I thought you said that, but I could be wrong.

Nied's monster AAA season in '92 came while he was pitching for the Atlanta Braves at the Richmond team. Nied wasn't protected in the '92 expansion draft (the Braves had Avery and Glavine who were both three years younger in the system, and they were going to the World Series already that season).

Nied was the first pick in the Expansion draft. He started for Colorado in '93. He is a product of the Braves system, not Colorado's.

Mightyzug

02-02-2010, 01:14 AM

That's what I was wondering.. Buy he's obviously a huge Rockies fan which is cool. But I too have become lost. Just put in whatever you think his numbers should be and go with it. It's your game, customize it however you want. I have no idea what Nied's numbers are or should be and to be honest I could care less. Now someone who's numbers should be fixed is Teddy Higuera. His ratings are terrilbe in the game and he was an elite pitcher for 3-4 years in the 80's unlike Mr. Neid who basically blew out his diaper every time out.. Also interesting fact if you search Dave Nied on wiki you get nothing...

Couldn't agree more. Also, for whatever it's worth, when I played a game w/ the late 70's Brew Crew Higuera did pretty well for me (but I may have simply lucked out)

Umm... the whole point of this thread is talk about how frustrating it is that there isn't some kind of interface within Baseball Mogul to produce 'Predicted Stats' in some kind of consistent fashion, using whatever methodology the game uses anyway. The whole point is that I don't just want to arbitrarily produce made-up 'Predicted Stats' for Nied, but that I want to be able to use his actual minor league productivity to 'project' him to MLB based on his '92 production.

I understand that Baseball Mogul isn't a historical sim the way Diamond Mind is, and for which you're always playing with perfect information. However, Baseball Mogul shouldn't be taking players like Denny Stark and David Nied and just randomly dismissing them as 100 power low movement, low control guys. For crying out loud Denny Stark put up one of the greatest starting seasons in the history of Rockies pitching, a fireballer he wasn't.

I guess I'm at a loss to understand why if someone isn't interested in a thread, isn't interested in the relevant discussion of the thread, why they would comment and waste their times doing so?

BenFink

02-02-2010, 01:28 AM

It's consistent, just not in a way you want it to be.

Very roughly: Ks -> power, HRs -> Movement, BBs -> Control
And I mean VERY roughly

free2131

02-02-2010, 01:34 AM

All joking aside, I love your passion for your team, the game, and your need to have it played a certain way.

When you discuss this (and other things as well) though, you come off as arrogant and unwilling to take any advice that you don't like. I guarantee that if you change your approach to how you interact with people here, you'd get a lot less snarky comments. Most of the people on this board are big believers in advanced metrics and find it insulting when you make broad generalizations about those who use them. Some also don't buy into the claim that steroids were as big a factor as commonly believed, and that advanced metrics take into account park factors like the ones in Colorado. We can all agree and disagree, but we need to be respectful of those who have different opinions than we do (which I will say goes both ways in this thread).

Everyone here loves to help new members and player of BBM, but when we give you advice and you act as if you don't appreciate it or treat those who give it as though they are ignorant, it makes us a little mad. I personally haven't been offended by you, but I can see how others would be.

As for the topic at hand, there isn't a way for Mogul to do what you want. I suggest making a thread in the suggestion sub-forum if you like, and see what others think about it. In the mean time, one thing you could do is tell us in a concise and condensed way what type of pitcher you think Nied would have become. Maybe you thing he would have been a high control, good movement, and low power guy. We could then suggest (or if you are willing to post the MOG file here, maybe edit him ourselves) how to make him close to what you want.

There is no need to get defensive about other's opinions, and we should also respect you more than we have in this thread. After all, we all love Mogul and baseball, even if we love it differently. ;)

MichelleWie

02-02-2010, 11:39 AM

BenFink

02-02-2010, 02:33 PM

I thought this would have answered your question. Why not put in these stats and see what he comes out too...

babble babble Coors babble babble even a 7 ERA is amazing babble babble

MichelleWie

02-02-2010, 02:52 PM

babble babble Coors babble babble even a 7 ERA is amazing babble babble

Yeah thats pretty much it. Like free said. I like his passion and he is obviously very knowledgeable about Nied/Rockies , and people like to help. But he just dismisses every suggestion anyone makes as not good enough. So I guess there's nothing anyone can do....

etothep

02-02-2010, 03:16 PM

You 2 are asking for it now

Epic 4 page long post slamming you guys for your David Nied ignorance is on the way

Mightyzug

02-02-2010, 03:40 PM

I thought this would have answered your question. Why not put in these stats and see what he comes out too...

While I don't agree that you can project MLB numbers from AAA numbers, there is no linear correlation, that is exactly the kind of yardstick conversion I'm needing here. The problem is that I don't think those numbers are even in the ballpark, not even a ballpark with as expansive an outfield as old Mile High with just acres of green grass to drop a double or triple into...

David Nied's '92 production was outstanding. His AAA numbers in '92 and his six game callup, including two starts, for a playoff team headed to the World Series revealed a pitcher with command, control, and the ability to strike out batters at a high rate.

The problem with those numbers is that after whatever conversion factor they relied on they are only showing a 0.80 ERA variance from Nied's actual production while pitching at Mile High, and at altitude, and the projected numbers, and that's after an arm injury (one of primary reasons I want to 'reset' Nied). The historical sample clearly shows that it was almost impossible for a starting pitcher to put together the equivalent of two complete starting seasons in Colorado, in a player's career. We have the data to see that just about everyone who ever pitched in the place with any frequency of starts ended up having arm trouble, progressive ineffectiveness, and more commonly than not a serious arm problem that required major arm surgery. It was a nightmare trying to pitch in Colorado in those days. It wasn't a nightmare in terms of a small skew of the data from 4.00 to 4.80 runs (remember ERA is a 9 innings pitched metric), as you have to remember that the AVERAGE score for a ballgame in Colorado was fifteen runs.

Sure, in the context of a qualifying starter in Colorado the 4.80 would have stood out from the sample until the advent of the humidor in 2001, but the altitude factor has more of a an affect on a starter's numbers than just the variance between those projected numbers and what Nied actually put up.

Nied started 22 games in '94 and managed a 4.80 ERA with a 1.508 WHIP metric, while pitching in the most hitter friendly and arm abusive park in the history of MLB.

If we used those given numbers and we then corrected for park factor we'd end up with 'final' numbers that were actually worse than what Nied's actual production, at altitude, really was.

The whole point of this exercise is to determine who Nied would have been had he not had the arm injuries that were endemic to pitching in Colorado. It makes no sense to use data that projects his AAA productivity (which was very very good) to MLB numbers that are worse than he really produced (and this after multiple arm problems).

Do you really not see the problem with that?

If you look at the Neutralized Stats that Baseball Reference provides you'll see other obvious problems with such methodologies. The data gets removed from context, and the methodology appears to relocate it into a different context, for which there is no real correlation. The problem is that for pitchers like Shawn Chacon, who was the most unhittable Rockies starter in the historical starting sample to that point, a complete outlier compared to other pitcher's production, BR only acknowledges about 6/10 of a difference in Hits per 9 Innings pitched between actual historical data and Neutralized data adjusted for a standard run environment. The notion that pitching half your games in Colorado and the difference being just a teensy bit more than half a hit per nine innings is patently absurd. The record is replete from pitchers getting blown up before three innings were in the books, and having given up more than seven runs. The Rockies used to count on blowing up an opposing pitcher early in a series, to blow up the bullpen because a road team wouldn't nearly have enough relievers to make it through a three or four game trip through Colorado (the Rockies used to carry thirteen and fourteen pitchers).

Again, there is no linear regression of pitching in Colorado to pitching in MLB, but make no mistake, the variance isn't 0.80 ERA and 6/10 of a hit per 9 IP either...

We have just too much data from opposing All-Star starters having dominant seasons and getting absolutely shelled when making a start in Colorado. We also have plenty of data showing the effectiveness of Colorado pitchers once they leave Colorado (however arm trouble invariably follows).

Its just impossible to reasonably argue that a guy who put up 5.17 and 4.80 ERA season in Colorado in '93 and '94 would have ONLY put up a 4.00 ERA season elsewhere. We know that the park factor adjustment for pitching in Colorado exceeds that variance...

So while that type of SABR methodology is exactly the kind of nonsense I'm looking for here, clearly those projections have fundamental problems in their "accuracy".

200tang

02-02-2010, 03:59 PM

You guys are still trying to help this guy? He clearly has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to both BM & statistics.

Everyone here should get a gold star for actually trying to deal with this guy and reading his 100 page posts of 'logic'.

BenFink

02-02-2010, 04:45 PM

Its just impossible to reasonably argue that a guy who put up 5.17 and 4.80 ERA season in Colorado in '93 and '94 would have ONLY put up a 4.00 ERA season elsewhere. We know that the park factor adjustment for pitching in Colorado exceeds that variance...

How do you explain this:
David Nied's ERA from 1993-1994: 4.95
The entire Rockies pitching staff from 1993-1994: 5.33

Which basically says David Nied is woefully... average

etothep

02-02-2010, 04:57 PM

You darn kids and your new-fangled statistics like ERA. Back in my day, we based our decision on how good a pitcher was on the color of his hat & how tall he was and dammit, the game was better for it

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 05:16 PM

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 05:33 PM

It's simple - if you have such a problem with the statistical methods, you're not going to be any happier if Clay inputted an in-game method to do this, because he'd likely base it off those same methods you hate. Therefore, since you apparently know better, do it yourself.

Mightyzug

02-02-2010, 08:25 PM

How do you explain this:
David Nied's ERA from 1993-1994: 4.95
The entire Rockies pitching staff from 1993-1994: 5.33

Which basically says David Nied is woefully... average

First of all the sample of starting pitching in Colorado and pitching in relief are completely disparate and there is no linear correlation between them. Secondly, in the inaugural year, 1993, Armando Reynoso put up one of the greatest Rockies Starting seasons in franchise history (if not the greatest).

Reynoso was the only starter to manage 20 Games Started, he actually started 30. He managed a 4.00 ERA on 189.0 innings pitched. His WHIP metric was a very solid 1.423 while no other 'starter' was able to get below 1.600

Comparing starting pitching to relief pitching in Colorado, is like comparing pitching in Colorado to pitching in Los Angeles/San Francisco.

Again, and this seems to come up a lot with what passes for armchair 'analysis' on this forum, context is key. You have to compare numbers from a comparable context, this is why splits exist. Its either just fundamentally lazy, or plain disingenuous to continue to make an argument using samples that have no comparable context. Throwing out something like you did, that of the entire pitching staff's ERA has no real context to the conversation of the efficacy of Rockies starting pitching.

Reynoso dominates the sample of Rockies starting (and all) pitching in '93, as only two other pitchers manage over 100 innnings total, to Reynoso's 189.0 IP.

David Nied's number's as a starter in Colorado are anything but average, and that's after multiple arm injuries.

Have you even ever looked at the sample of Rockies starting pitching from '93 to '01 or are you just basing your judgements on the fact that you think you're a 'knowledgeable' baseball fan?

Look at the data, and only the data for starting pitching. Nied is by no means "average". He's not stellar, but he's not anything close to average for a Rockies starter. For crying out loud his career starting ERA is sub 5.00. That's incredible for a Rockies starter of that era (pre-2001/humidor starter), his Career WHIP metric is 1.536

For crying out loud look at the data before you make nonsensical posts that reveal you understand nothing about the subject at hand (Starting Pitching in Colorado). Woefully average...yeah whatever.

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 08:39 PM

200tang

02-02-2010, 08:40 PM

For crying out loud look at the data before you make nonsensical posts that reveal you understand nothing about the subject at hand (Starting Pitching in Colorado). Woefully average...yeah whatever.

http://imgur.com/kzjt6.jpg

Mightyzug

02-02-2010, 08:49 PM

So, let me get this straight, basically, he wants Baseball Mogul to generate neutralized predicted stats from inputted minor league performances...but believes that it's not possible to translate minor league performance to MLB performance and that it's not possible to accurately adjust for ballpark effects because apparently Coors Field inflates ERA's way more than statistics tell us (and the reasoning of "because I know this" is more accurate than actual statistical methods). Awesome.

Uh, so, you're asking Clay to input something into Baseball Mogul that you think is impossible.

Yay logic.

Are you an idiot, or just a troll?

Anyone who takes the time to actually read the thread and pays attention to the actual discussion here will realize not just how disingenuous you've been, but how deliberately duplicitous. So you made some egregious mistakes in what passes for 'logic' in your little corner of the world. Move on...

Your silly agenda is transparent to anyone unfortunate to continue to read your posts.

Clearly anyone reading this will remember that I acknowledge that there are no methodologies for projecting AAA number into a MLB context that have any real efficacy, as there is no linear correlation between AAA numbers and MLB production (something SABR analysis never seems to bother with, the lack of linear correlation when developing methodologies for converting/corrupting context). However, in addition to my acknowledging that there is no non-flawed method for doing this, I also acknowledge my need for some consistent process, be it flawed or not.

I don't play Baseball Mogul because I believe its simulations are historically accurate. My goodness, half my favorite pitchers in this game get dismissed as Power 100 low control, and low movement pitchers with only two listed pitches. The game is so simplistic that it can't possibly be taken any more seriously as a historical sim than a Nintendo console baseball game. However, that doesn't mean that its not fun as all get out. There are historical sims out there (Diamond Mind), but I don't see the enjoyment of driving forward looking in the rear view mirror. I want to see variance from the historical numbers, I just want to start with some historical relevance (for some of my favorite players).

Nied is not a player I have any emotional attachment to, one way or the other. He isn't really relevant to the Rockies sample, other than that he was the first overall pick in the expansion draft, and that I wondered what he could have been.

To anyone interested in running a league, or just simming out different historical possibilities the utility of a function to convert minor league productivity into BM 'Predicited Stats' is certainly going to be useful. Make no mistake the game makes those calculations all the time.

Its not, as you have posted so many times, so simple as that 'Predicted Stats' drive production, as there is a very real interaction between the production a player has (as derived from 'Predicted Stats') and an updating of those 'Predicted Stats' based on production. Your simplistic understanding that 'Predicted Stats' are carved in stone is evident from the umpteen other posts you've made to that effect.

Every stat used in 'Predicted Stats' by nature is already in a "neutralized" context. The fact that this continues to elude you would baffle me if not understood alongside some of the other serious gaffes you continue to post.

Along those lines inputting data that comes from pitching in Colorado has not relevancy to Baseball Mogul, as BM uses park factors to sim out games played in Colorado. That is it subjects 'Predicted Stats' to park outcomes to produce game results.

Inputting historical Colorado data into 'Predicted Stats' as has been suggested would lead to an instance of "double counting" the effect of pithing at altitude. The 'Predicted Stats' for a player, taken from a Colorado historical sample, would be skewed by altitude/park factors, and then BM would then subject that 'Predicted Stats' to altitude/park factors every time a game was played in Colorado.

Clearly, anyone with any intellectual integrity, and absent your axe to grind will realize, upon reading this ridiculous thread that you continually are attempting to piss all over, that while acknowledging the fundamental flaw of any methodology to project a player based on historical AAA (non-Colorado) and MLB numbers (again non-Colorado), clearly there is some use for such a means, as long as the method is consistent for all players. Baseball Mogul makes such projections constantly, in the way it projects 'productivity' from 'Predicted Stats' to R, A, AA, and AAA numbers.

The game already makes the "conversion" I'm looking for. I think something in 'Edit Player' never was properly developed. It makes no sense to have the means to change Minor League or Last Season productivity, if such changes have no bearing on anything but cosmetic production.

The fact that all of this continues to elude you, the fact that this is transparent to anyone reading this, and the silly petty agenda you're continuing to pursue, merely because you embarrassed yourself attempting to prove that Helton was better than Galarraga (using Helton's prime hitting seasons, and Galaragga's seasons in decline instead of a comparable context) is just plain' funny ol' stuff. By all means keep it up...

Oh, and one more thing. You play a freakin' video game. This festering anger because someone is validating you as a "serious" baseball fan is ridiculous. The only time I've ever interacted with you using your spurious and duplicitous attempt to use OPS+ data from different contexts to prove your agenda you clearly revealed your colors. You play a video game. Stop asking others to take you seriously while you're making a fool of yourself and continuing to have a tantrum all over this thread...

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 08:51 PM

200tang

02-02-2010, 08:53 PM

Mightyzug bringing the funny!

http://imgur.com/hqVRG.gif

Mightyzug

02-02-2010, 08:54 PM

Comparing David Nied only to the subset of Rockies starting pitchers is not the way to discern whether or not he was an above-average pitcher. Do not lecture other people on "context" when you use this type of garbage analysis.

The fact of the matter is that his performance, as measured by ERA, was equal to that of an average pitcher in Coors Field. Yes, it's true that starting pitchers have a slightly higher ERA than relief pitchers, but it's not some astronomical difference. In 1994, the the average starting pitcher leaguewide had a 4.23 ERA, while the average relief pitcher had a 4.19 ERA. In 1993, the difference was 4.08 to 3.98.

Maybe he was above-average if you compare him only to Rockies starting pitchers - but that would more than likely mean that the average Rockies starting pitcher was below league average.

What you're doing is akin to saying that Pablo Sandoval is the greatest hitter in the league because he's so far above the average Giants hitter.

Wow...you did it again.

In a discussion about the variance between Rockies starting pitching and rockies relief pitching, you think its appropriate to inject data from MLB starting pitching and MLB relief pitching to prove your point.

Sure, and we can tell that hitters in this era are better because NFL teams are passing more, too...

What happens leaguewide in MLB has no contextual relevance to Colorado pitching (starting or relieving) pre-2001. Had you any familiarity with the sample of Rockies starting or relief pitching you'd already know that.

200tang

02-02-2010, 08:55 PM

Wow...you did it again.

In a discussion about the variance between Rockies starting pitching and rockies relief pitching, you think its appropriate to inject data from MLB starting pitching and MLB relief pitching to prove your point.

Sure, and we can tell that hitters in this era are better because NFL teams are passing more, too...

What happens leaguewide in MLB has no contextual relevance to Colorado pitching (starting or relieving) pre-2001. Had you any familiarity with the sample of Rockies starting or relief pitching you'd already know that.

http://imgur.com/UESI0.gif

Am I cool yet guys?

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 08:55 PM

Its not, as you have posted so many times, so simple as that 'Predicted Stats' drive production, as there is a very real interaction between the production a player has (as derived from 'Predicted Stats') and an updating of those 'Predicted Stats' based on production. Your simplistic understanding that 'Predicted Stats' are carved in stone is evident from the umpteen other posts you've made to that effect.
Yes, I believe predicted stats are carved in stone, as evidenced by my multiple posts stating the exact opposite of that.

Every stat used in 'Predicted Stats' by nature is already in a "neutralized" context. The fact that this continues to elude you would baffle me if not understood alongside some of the other serious gaffes you continue to post.
That might be funny if I ever made such a "gaffe." I know full well that "Predicted Stats" are meant to be neutralized (and are by the game). It's not like I've been making rosters for 4 or 5 years now or anything.

200tang

02-02-2010, 08:57 PM

Yes, I believe predicted stats are carved in stone, as evidenced by my multiple posts stating the exact opposite of that.

That might be funny if I ever made such a "gaffe." I know full well that "Predicted Stats" are meant to be neutralized (and are by the game). It's not like I've been making rosters for 4 or 5 years now or anything.

You should stop taking this guy seriously. He clearly doesn't want any help and is just arguing for the sake of arguing.

'here let me help u bro'

'no, STOP YOU HAVE NO IDEA ABOUT THE ROCKIES OR THIS GAME! LET ME TELL U HOW TO DO IT, BUT HELP ME DO SOMETHING! IM JUST NOT SURE WHAT'

'I don't think it works like that - let me lay out why'

'DID U NOT HEAR ME!? HERE LET ME POST 100 PAGES WHY YOU'RE WRONG AND I HAVE NO POINT'

OregonDuck1989

02-02-2010, 08:57 PM

I like how he disregards the posts claiming he is acting arrogant and continues to act the same way.

I love this guy

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 08:58 PM

Wow...you did it again.

In a discussion about the variance between Rockies starting pitching and rockies relief pitching, you think its appropriate to inject data from MLB starting pitching and MLB relief pitching to prove your point.
Oh, okay.

Rockies starters, 1993: 5.49 ERA
Rockies relievers, 1993: 5.36 ERA
David Nied, 1993: 5.17 ERA

Rockies starters, 1994: 5.30
Rockies relievers, 1994: 4.94
David Nied, 1994: 4.80 ERA

Clearly, David Nied was superman.

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 09:02 PM

(Nevermind that comparing a player solely to the players on his team is quite possibly the worst type of analysis I've ever seen by anybody ever.)

OregonDuck1989

02-02-2010, 09:06 PM

Your silly agenda is transparent to anyone unfortunate to continue to read your posts.

This is my new motto to everyone on the forums

Mightyzug

02-02-2010, 09:08 PM

LOL.

Seriously. LOL.

It sure is embarrassing to state that Todd Helton is better than Andres Galarraga. I feel so embarrassed that I tried to argue such a crazy notion by looking at the entire careers of both players, as well as their peak seasons!

See, here you go again. It has been explained to you time and again how spurious your "analysis" was.

What you tried to do was use Helton's "best" seasons OPS+ wise and compare them to Galarraga's "best" seasons OPS+ wise. You concluded that since Helton's "best" seasons were in fact "better" Helton was the "better" hitter.

I'm sure it seemed that way to you. To anyone capable of making an intelligent argument, it was apparent that you in fact were taking data from Helton's 26-31 hitting seasons and comparing them to Galarraga's 32-36 hitting seasons. This was especially duplicitous because we actuall have Helton's 32-35 data. However, you didn't use it because you either have no concept of context (or shame in removing data from any meaningful context in your lame attempts at sophistry) or because it didn't fit your agenda.

When actually comparing Helton to Galarraga, over the same "age seasons" for which they were both hitters in Colorado do you remember what was revealed? That for EVERY single season of the common context Galarraga's "best" OPS+ seasons were better than EVERY one of Helton's "best" OPS+ seasons. In fact, Helton didn't even manage to make the top 85 in one of his seasons, getting outhit by the likes of Walt Weiss for crying out loud.

You can't look at their peak seasons in any meaningful comparable context because Galarraga's peak years are not skewed by hitting in Colorado and Helton's were. However, when we compare Helton to Larry Walker we reveal that Helton didn't outperform the other good hitter to play in Colorado thorugh his peak years (and 32-36 seasons as well). Again, its revealed that Helton merely enjoys being the ONLY player to have the luck to play out his career in Colorado. When comparing Helton to the sample of hitting seasons in Colorado (and retaining meaningful context) Helton is revealed to not even be better than the others who have played there. In the conversation of whether Helton is a Hall of Famer, unless you're willing to argue that Galarraga is a candidate for Cooperstown, and unless you're willing to argue that Walker is a shoe-in, then you can't consider Helton. He never even managed to hit as well as the others who hit there for comparable seasons.

You only managed to prove that not only did you not know what you were talking about, but that using your own methodology, and your own choice of comparable metrics, that you would do/say/post anything regardless of how absurd, manipulative, or abusive you were being in attempting to prove a position that your own data demonstrated was invalid.

You are succeeding in accomplishing nothing at this point but making a fool of yourself. While I admit there are those who frequent this forum who will not read this thread in its entirety, those that do will see you for the corrupt politician that you are, nothing more than someone so vain as to even after his own spurious and dubious methods have been proven to be corrupt, will still maintain the charade, the song and dance because your own egotistical self-image affords no other path...

If it were me, I'd just have said, "huh, I was wrong."

Your agenda and continuing abuse within this forum has gone far and beyond anything I've ever seen of someone in something so silly, and for which they were so clearly wrong.

Again, keep it up. So that future members of this community will have the appropriate lens to understand anything you post in this forum, that is with complete disregard.

200tang

02-02-2010, 09:10 PM

I keep thinking this guy is a regular poster with a lot of time on his hands. But I don't think someone would type that much trying to troll HGM.

OregonDuck1989

02-02-2010, 09:10 PM

You are succeeding in accomplishing nothing at this point but making a fool of yourself. While I admit there are those who frequent this forum who will not read this thread in its entirety, those that do will see you for the corrupt politician that you are, nothing more than someone so vain as to even after his own spurious and dubious methods have been proven to be corrupt, will still maintain the charade, the song and dance because your own egotistical self-image affords no other path...

I know who you are now.

You are John F. Kennedy.

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 09:13 PM

Oh, back to this braindead analysis that you can only compare players of the same age and "peak" refers specifically to an age range and not "when a player was at his highest level of performance"?

LOL. At first, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt and trying to be nice, but maybe you should open up your eyes and realize that you're the only person embarrassing yourself here.

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 09:14 PM

I keep thinking this guy is a regular poster with a lot of time on his hands. But I don't think someone would type that much trying to troll HGM.
It's funny, because I'm laughing at this so hard. I'm just playing along.

OregonDuck1989

02-02-2010, 09:18 PM

Careful. Another novel is coming up...

Mightyzug

02-02-2010, 09:18 PM

(Nevermind that comparing a player solely to the players on his team is quite possibly the worst type of analysis I've ever seen by anybody ever.)

Which is why, even being completely ignorant of the sample of Colorado pitching that you pollute us with your opinions regarding, when clearly you have no meaningful context for what constitutes "good", "mediocre", or even "bad" you decide to validate your sense of self by injecting your "knowledge", that you still don't understand to the point that you embarrass yourself.

The sample of Colorado starting pitching, and the sample of Colorado relief pitching, and the sample of Colorado hitting have no clear demonstrable correlation with MLB production.

A great pitcher in MLB does not necessarily make even a barely effective pitcher in Colorado. The greatest pitchers in the game have all failed epically in Colorado while visiting, and very very good pitchers acquired by Colorado have imploded with tragic results for the franchise. Respectively, pitchers that have been limited in their effectiveness in pitching outside Colorado, in a typical MLB environment, have had very good success pitching in Colorado. Its a different skill set. Its not just heat and movement. Brian Bohanon was one of the better Rockies starters in terms of keeping the club competitive in games, yet his "stuff" always took a back seat to whoever he was matched up against.

Again, Colorado is a unique island in terms of the sample of historical production for hitters and pitchers.

Its absurd to look at Todd Helton's numbers and say he's a great hitter because he hit for a high average. Galarraga was a superior hitter, by far, over their comparable sample (same age hitting seasons), as was Larry Walker.

Sure Helton looks better superficially when compared to someone hitting in a high humidity and low altitude environment (St. Louis, Los Angeles, San Francisco) but that kind of analysis is something only someone with the thinnest grasp of statistical analysis would attempt to make. The comparable sample that shares a comparable context is the first, last, and only place one can look and hope to retain anything meaningful from statistical analysis (something we haven't even begun to delve into). Anything else produces a corrupted sample of contrived data with no meangful context, no original context, and which was produced by spurious methods.

However, as this has been explained to you before, I have no aspirations that you will comprehend it this time around...

200tang

02-02-2010, 09:19 PM

Careful. Another novel is coming up...

Whatever his next post is, you should put the entire thing in your signature. See how many people complain about it being too long.

200tang

02-02-2010, 09:20 PM

Hey Mightyzug, where do you get your information? Sounds like a good source because your posts seem 100% logical and I totally agree with you that HGM is a fool and corrupt politician.

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 09:20 PM

I have seen the light, Mightyzug. Your flawless logic has shown me the way.

OregonDuck1989

02-02-2010, 09:21 PM

Whatever his next post is, you should put the entire thing in your signature. See how many people complain about it being too long.

MichelleWie won't. THAT IS FOR SURE

200tang

02-02-2010, 09:21 PM

I have seen the light, Mightyzug. Your flawless logic has shown me the way.

OH GAWD YOU JUST OPENED A CAN OF WORMS!!!!

/d

200tang

02-02-2010, 09:32 PM

I have a theory - Mightyzug = David Nied. Only reason why someone would whine this much over a mediocre pitcher with bad mechanics.

etothep

02-02-2010, 09:39 PM

Is there any way in hell that this guy isn't trolling everyone with his nonsense?

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 09:41 PM

Is there any way in hell that this guy isn't trolling everyone with his nonsense?
No. No way in hell. He is the master of logic and we should all be embarrassed and ashamed.

reflections

02-02-2010, 09:41 PM

I have a theory - Mightyzug = David Nied. Only reason why someone would whine this much over a mediocre pitcher with bad mechanics.

Don't forget he has a hot fiancee. lol

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 09:42 PM

Don't forget he has a hot fiancee. lol
And doesn't take kindly to being referred to as a used cars salesmen.

reflections

02-02-2010, 09:43 PM

And doesn't take kindly to being referred to as a used cars salesmen.

Oh yeah...I forgot about that one. He works for his dad selling cylinders. lol.

You know, I think Ellis Valentine is rated far too low in Mogul.

FloydtheBarber

02-02-2010, 09:47 PM

Zug, can you tell me more about Nied's personal life? I would like to give him more accurate ratings for if he had in fact lived my life, in my house, at my age. At his age in his home, which is at a higher altitude then mine, he was averaging a B+ in Chemistry. Imagine his mind at my altitude, compared to fellow people his age from his town, if he was set loose in a Chemistry class...

200tang

02-02-2010, 09:49 PM

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 09:49 PM

Well, as logic dictates, if you do something in Colorado then you can do it 1000x better at a lower altitude. A 5.00 ERA pitcher becomes a 1.00 HOF pitcher; therefore a 2.00 GPA student becomes a 4.00 GPA student & certified genius.
Except if you're a hitter, in which case, if you're a 140 OPS+ hitter, you're actually Andres Galaragga.

200tang

02-02-2010, 09:51 PM

Except if you're a hitter, in which case, if you're a 140 OPS+ hitter, you're actually Andres Galaragga.

Oh, right I forgot. Sorry. I think it has something to do with the moon phases & tide.

FloydtheBarber

02-02-2010, 10:00 PM

But you must remember that Colorado is not in the same context as the US! You can't live in Colorado and still be in the United States!

HoustonGM

02-02-2010, 10:02 PM

But you must remember that Colorado is not in the same context as the US! You can't live in Colorado and still be in the United States!
Your silly agenda is transparent to anyone unfortunate to continue to read your posts.

MichelleWie

02-03-2010, 12:44 AM

Wow. :eek:

OregonDuck1989

02-03-2010, 12:57 AM

Wow. :eek:

We were in the zone.

BenFink

02-03-2010, 01:05 AM

What did we learn?
-Coors field makes pitchers and hitters better at the same time
-Coors field makes pitchers and hitters worse at the same time
-You can't compare Colorado players, or the away stats of Colorado players to anyone else
-You can't compare starters to relievers
-You can't compare starters to starters
-You can't compare Colorado players to each other
-Your silly agenda is transparent to anyone unfortunate to continue to read your posts
-Even though David Nied had a team average ERA, he's the best
-Pitching in Colorado and surviving makes you a hall of famer
-Colorado has had the greatest pitchers of all time, but they all died
-SABR stats are horrible and they all have an agenda and are biased against Rockies

reflections

02-03-2010, 01:34 AM

200tang

02-03-2010, 01:38 AM

Yamiviet would be so proud.

OregonDuck1989

02-03-2010, 01:47 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Nied

All you need to know about David Nied.

Unfortunately, I do not have an account and therefore cannot edit in that he is a commonly known poster on the Sports Mogul forums.

metsguy234

02-03-2010, 07:01 AM

You can edit Wikipedia anonymously.

metsguy234

02-03-2010, 07:02 AM

The two saw each other again in January, but it wasn't until March that sparks flew. After a family dinner, Heather's granddad, whose wife had since passed away, approached Heather with a question: "Your Mimie and I would have been married 57 years to this day, and I know everything about this David guy. Have you called and talked to him yet?" She told him she hadn't because her friend liked him. "He said, 'If this is your Prince Charming, which your Mimie told me it was, make sure you call him,' " she recalls. On the way home from the restaurant, she made calls to find him.

200tang

02-03-2010, 07:06 AM

Hi Metsguy234.

metsguy234

02-03-2010, 07:15 AM

Hi Metsguy234.

Hi?

MichelleWie

02-03-2010, 01:47 PM

This is how good he would've been if AtL didn't keep him in the minors all those years & if his arm hadn't got ruined by the Colorado altitude. THIS IS HOW BM SHOULD HAVE NIED. HE IS SUPERMAN!!!

MichelleWie

02-03-2010, 01:49 PM

And look what he did hitting. He would've been amazing...

200tang

02-03-2010, 01:55 PM

This is how good he would've been if AtL didn't keep him in the minors all those years & if his arm hadn't got ruined by the Colorado altitude. THIS IS HOW BM SHOULD HAVE NIED. HE IS SUPERMAN!!!

I think you're grossly underrating his ability. Can nobody else on these forums understand how good Nied is? God, everyone who posted in this thread is idiotic. Except HGM - he's a corrupt politician.

200tang

02-03-2010, 02:02 PM

And look what he did hitting. He would've been amazing...

That's 100% Coors effect. Duh! If he would have been outside of Coors Field he would have put up a consistent 4.000 OPS.

MichelleWie

02-03-2010, 02:49 PM

Now, if ever their was reason to go ape $hit and start writing 4 page posts about bad player rtg's, it's my man Theodore here: He had an ERA+ of 156 in 86, an ERA+ of 120 in 87 and in 88 he had an ERA+ of 162 with a .999 WHIP!!!
Yet in BM he is basically junk. So maybe Jug can take up his case.

MichelleWie

02-03-2010, 02:53 PM

And for the record he doesn't even work at a junkyard with his daddy, he is on the coaching staff of the Mexican national team. And his fiance is hotter then Nied's.

reflections

02-03-2010, 03:50 PM

And for the record he doesn't even work at a junkyard with his daddy, he is on the coaching staff of the Mexican national team. And his fiance is hotter then Nied's.

Yeah but she is a Charger fan. (and I doubt Teddy could actually handle her...he is 51 allegedly)

actionjackson

02-05-2010, 12:22 AM

Wish I could've been around for the live feed of this thread. Pure. Gold. Better even than this thread (http://www.sportsmogul.com/vbulletin2/showthread.php?t=194762) when poster Cards tried to convince us of how great a hitter Yadier Molina was and how crappy Adam Dunn was among other things. It's about 70 or so posts in. As usual the corrupt politician was right in the middle of things (where else would a corrupt politician be? ;) ). Good times.

OregonDuck1989

02-06-2010, 11:45 PM

Cards was probably the best. I have never laughed harder then that thread.

haveacigar

02-07-2010, 07:13 AM

I just saw this thread. I was wondering what all that **** about David Nied was.

MightyZug is awesome.

I've seen plenty of people use tortured logic to justify preconceived notions.
I've seen people claim authority on the use of theories over others' authority while not actually using those theories correctly (usually declaring the other person wrong without any concrete evidence shortly thereafter).
I've seen writers distract their readers with enormous walls of text to hide flimsy conclusions and give the impression of diligence. Usually, diction is employed to this effect too.

Zug does all these things and with such flourish that it's almost legendary. He is like the Babe Ruth of intellectual dishonesty.

When you spend 3.5 years of undergrad doing nothing but reading arguments and then analyzing them, you get pretty good at separating the usable metal from the ore, so-to-speak. I've learned a couple things:

1: If you need to write that much to make your point, you either can't write, or you don't have a real point. Zug certainly knows a lot of words, but there's no "writing" there. I've read books on the health of the French welfare state that are more accessible and clear. Christ, the Basic Writings of Nietzsche make more ****ing sense. And that guy, for all his philosophical insights, could not write (mainly because he was going mad, and there's translation error, not entirely his fault).

2: If you say something and no one else agrees with you or supports you, it is possible that you are the only enlightened one in the room. It is far more likely that you are wrong and should re-examine your position.

3: Ad-hominem = failure. Your posts do not become right once you act like more of a douche.

4: You do not get to throw out entire academic disciplines because they don't support your conclusions, unless you have a damn good reason. If Zug ever posted one, I sure as hell couldn't find it. Then again, trying to find a point is like finding a needle in a haystack.