MLB The Show 16 News Post

MLB The Show 16 OSFM HYBRID V1 Roster Available Now

08:06 PM - May 23, 2016 by Willard76

Alright, after many months of hard work, mostly by others not named me, we are very proud to announce the release of the 2016 OSFM HYBRID V1 - under psn - Crapinmyshoe

This year has been a special project as it was built around my son receiving his long awaited liver transplant and before I get into specifics about the roster, I would like to get thanks to our team, especially Waittilnextyear who engineered the majority of this year's edition, teeds who we also welcomed back into the fold and contributed many new faces as well as many quality control corrections, Cultbuscus who really got this thing back onto it's feet and basically gathered our team together this year, Totte who was our master of OD backdate as well as quality control, God of Nugget and Blobloblah who did a lot of the tedious work for us as well as the late Dr Illinios who managed to get himself banned from the site but still contributed.

If anyone is interested in making a donation towards the creation of this roster, I would appreciate donations made to Ronald McDonald House Toronto where I did the bulk of my work on the roster this year while my little guy recovered.

ROSTER DETAILS

This is a 40 man roster that contains the following edits;
Full roster rerate (no player untouched)
Pitch Edits from WTNY
OD roster for all MLB clubs and close for AAA and AA
No carry over stats for rookies except for Kyle Higashioka
New Faces and players added to the OSFM V1.5
Equipment edits where info was made available
Accurate Opening Day MLB lineups
Proper positioning according to Baseball Reference
So much more, you need to download and use it to believe

This roster is intended for 30 Team Control but can be played with Single Team.

You will not find another roster that plays as accurate to true life, I hate making claims like this but it is true.

Please rate the roster so non OS users will know it's worth, and most importantly enjoy it for what it is - a great baseball game roster.

WILLARD

Game: MLB The Show 16Reader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / PS4Votes for game: 23 - View All

MLB The Show 16 Videos

Member Comments

# 161 WaitTilNextYear @ 05/25/16 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PVarck31


	That's fair enough. I admit I don't know the ins and outs of how these guys make the rosters. And I very much appreciate the work they do so I am in no way putting them down. I just believe Lindor should be an A. I think a lot of people would agree. But like you said, whatever they use to determine that doesn't agree. And that's fine, I understand, and will still enjoy the rosters.

Fair point, but keep in mind that while a lot of people are loosely tossing "A" and "B" around, we're really talking about an 88 POT, which is a super high B. And I'd guess most who don't agree would consider Lindor a low A. So we're really one "stock is rising" email apart. It's really not that big of a difference.

I should also mention that we've made a conscious effort to be conservative with potentials to help the superstars really stand out.

# 162 PVarck31 @ 05/25/16 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WaitTilNextYear


	Fair point, but keep in mind that while a lot of people are loosely tossing "A" and "B" around, we're really talking about an 88 POT, which is a super high B. And I'd guess most who don't agree would consider Lindor a low A. So we're really one "stock is rising" email apart. It's really not that big of a difference. I should also mention that we've made a conscious effort to be conservative with potentials to help the superstars really stand out.

Thanks for the response. I would have liked your post if the function worked for me lol

# 163 Willard76 @ 05/25/16 03:45 PM

Ok. Enough bull**** tying up this thread about Francisco freaking Lindor and asking why certain players are rated a certain way.

We have explained it many times - projections (hard numbers converted solidly in ratings) were what decided ratings. Potentials are based on what the baseball community thinks of a player (again a hard number converted to make a rating number).

Unfortunately Overall numbers are weighted numbers - usually in a pitchers case it's pure stuff weighs more than /9 numbers.

We had no biased other than if something looked strange we did double check that player.

Francisco Lindor will probably become an A potential after season 1, but he currently just sits under that. If he started as an A there is much more chance he would eventually become a 99 player which now we would have complaints about him being too high.

At the end of the day - do you the roster user want something that has pretty numbers OR something that plays real to life.

Just to make a point using a questioned player Marco Estrada. I pitched with him last night and he was pure Marco- not pretty but damned near perfect. Gave up 2 runs through 8.

Let's keep this thread productive moving forward - and if u have no intention of using it, stay off the thread

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

# 164 PVarck31 @ 05/25/16 03:47 PM

Wow, take it easy Willard. We were just having a discussion. That type of post is not really something we look kindly on here.

And I do intend on using the roster. I wasn't aware I was not allowed to have an opinion on a certain player.

# 165 Willard76 @ 05/25/16 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PVarck31


	Wow, take it easy Willard. We were just having a discussion. That type of post is not really something we look kindly on here. And I do intend on using the roster. I wasn't aware I was not allowed to have an opinion on a certain player.

Opinion is fine but more than 1 post about a player is no longer constructive. It is browbeating us into changing something especially when we have said we did not control any numbers. We simply put them in (about 40 hours of work) after WTNY spend more than that finding a formula then creating the spreadsheet.

We have explained multiple times why Lindor got what he did and why Joe Blow minor leaguer got what he got.

We appreciate the interest in the roster by all, but people need to realize that there is no absolute perfection and constant bugging on the same topic for 5 yeArs gets very tiring to the point this roster almost did not happen to begin with.

It's not like we haven't been nice enough not answer. We keep giving the same answer because that is the answer

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

# 166 PVarck31 @ 05/25/16 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willard76


	Opinion is fine but more than 1 post about a player is no longer constructive. It is browbeating us into changing something especially when we have said we did not control any numbers. We simply put them in (about 40 hours of work) after WTNY spend more than that finding a formula then creating the spreadsheet. We have explained multiple times why Lindor got what he did and why Joe Blow minor leaguer got what he got. We appreciate the interest in the roster by all, but people need to realize that there is no absolute perfection and constant bugging on the same topic for 5 yeArs gets very tiring to the point this roster almost did not happen to begin with. It's not like we haven't been nice enough not answer. We keep giving the same answer because that is the answer Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you're referring to me about making more than one post about it I made one post and responded to another. Definitely not nonconstructive.

But you've made your point. Next time don't be telling people that its bull**** to post stuff. That is nonconstructive. And also don't be telling people to stay out of the thread. Everyone has a right to view and comment on this thread regardless if they download your rosters or not.

And just so you know, as I stated before I really appreciate the time and effort you guys have put into the rosters.

I am fine with Lindor's potential after more was explained to me.

So now it's time to move on.

# 167 AC @ 05/25/16 06:35 PM

If anyone has any questions about what Steamer does to calculate this stuff I have a fairly decent knowledge of how it works

# 168 grangdj77 @ 05/25/16 07:09 PM

Is anyone posting a version with transactions up-to-date?

# 169 Dynasty Legend 99 @ 05/25/16 09:26 PM

So.......

Budgets On or OFF?

Will teams be able to re-sign their guys and what not or am I better off turning it off?

# 170 WaitTilNextYear @ 05/25/16 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dynasty Legend 99


	So....... Budgets On or OFF? Will teams be able to re-sign their guys and what not or am I better off turning it off?

I addressed this in post #154 of this thread.

And in post #142.

# 171 Dynasty Legend 99 @ 05/25/16 09:48 PM

Apologies WTNY, Couldn't seem to find the Needle in a haystack of ratings comments.

All jokes aside,
Great Work Guys, really looking forward to setting up my Franchise.

# 172 Speedy @ 05/25/16 10:40 PM

There are and will be several users asking how "player x" got this rating/potential. In the same vein that PVarck was saying, asking people to bug off, don't download the roster if they don't like it or change it themselves is quite poor as most of these users are sincere in their inquiry as they try to figure out whether it's a viable roster. I used the roster last year and enjoyed it.

I'm curious myself how the ratings were derived though as I cannot recall. ZiPS projections? Steamer? I noticed Willard mentioned it was a weighted rating. Maybe it was covered already in the WIP thread or posted here and I overlooked it...

# 173 tonybologna @ 05/25/16 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Speedy


	There are and will be several users asking how "player x" got this rating/potential. In the same vein that PVarck was saying, asking people to bug off, don't download the roster if they don't like it or change it themselves is quite poor as most of these users are sincere in their inquiry as they try to figure out whether it's a viable roster. I used the roster last year and enjoyed it. I'm curious myself how the ratings were derived though as I cannot recall. ZiPS projections? Steamer? I noticed Willard mentioned it was a weighted rating. Maybe it was covered already in the WIP thread or posted here and I overlooked it...

They didn't use ZiPS. They switched to Steamer. Williard posted it somewhere in this thread I do believe. Edit: found his post here: http://www.operationsports.com/forum...8&postcount=69

# 174 Speedy @ 05/25/16 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tonybologna


	They didn't use ZiPS. They switched to Steamer. Williard posted it somewhere in this thread I do believe. Edit: found his post here: http://www.operationsports.com/forum...8&postcount=69

Thanks Tony...I somehow overlooked it.

# 175 WaitTilNextYear @ 05/25/16 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Speedy


	There are and will be several users asking how "player x" got this rating/potential. In the same vein that PVarck was saying, asking people to bug off, don't download the roster if they don't like it or change it themselves is quite poor as most of these users are sincere in their inquiry as they try to figure out whether it's a viable roster. I used the roster last year and enjoyed it. I'm curious myself how the ratings were derived though as I cannot recall. ZiPS projections? Steamer? I noticed Willard mentioned it was a weighted rating. Maybe it was covered already in the WIP thread or posted here and I overlooked it...

I agree totally. The issue is there are just enough trolls and ne'er-do-wells mixed in that sometimes a response is provoked to a post that isn't really deserved. It's more of a cumulative thing. I also think we are well within our rights to suggest that people use something else or make their own changes if they're hot and bothered over something and don't see eye to eye with our process. It's comical to think any roster will be one size fits all given all the fetishes that people have for their gameplay. Nobody is owed anything here, either, aside from a minimum of respect and civility. We could delete the roster at any time, no questions asked although I don't ever see that happening.

I think we can all agree that people could try to do a tad more research before asking questions since many of the popular questions (how did you rate the players? what about budgets? how do I do x, y, or z?) have been answered over, and over, and over, and over again, most of the time within the last page or 2 only. I think mods on OS would also do well to encourage users to research a bit (actually use the search feature, page back maybe 1 or 2 pages) and not let users become so dependent on someone else finding an answer for them and laying it out on a platter all of the time.

# 176 Mattchu12 @ 05/26/16 01:00 AM

Hey guys, I love the rosters as always, but had one question:

Some of the multi-position guys got their back-up positions changed quite a bit. For example, Dustin Ackley no long can play 1B, 2B, and the OF and is instead outfield only. Brock Holt is only a corner outfield guy, I think. Javier Baez is another guy that lost his outfield ability as well. Any reason why in particular that happened?

# 177 WaitTilNextYear @ 05/26/16 02:48 AM

To answer your question, below is an exchange from earlier in the thread (around posts 40-45).

As for Baez, he has played the outfield only twice in his MLB career and never before this year. As a Cubs fan, he has no long-term future in the OF with the Cubs. He really doesn't need OF eligibility.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattchu12


	Hey guys, I love the rosters as always, but had one question: Some of the multi-position guys got their back-up positions changed quite a bit. For example, Dustin Ackley no long can play 1B, 2B, and the OF and is instead outfield only. Brock Holt is only a corner outfield guy, I think. Javier Baez is another guy that lost his outfield ability as well. Any reason why in particular that happened?

Quote:

Originally Posted by keymax


	Thanks and I really appreciate the work that hss gone into this. As someone who dabbled with ZiPS projections for MLB the Show, I know how much effort this takes. One quick question, why were so many players secondary positions changed? Guys like Brock Holt, Leury Garcia and others who played numerous positions are now more limited.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WaitTilNextYear


	Unfortunately that happened in the editing process. Kike Hernandez was another *****ty. When a lot of people are making a lot of edits, mistakes can be made. It's not like scores and scores of players, either. It's just a few. Some of the secondaries are obsolete anyway and haven't been played by guys in many years. It's too bad that positional eligibility is still so fidgety. It should be more customize-able and the almost religious devotion required to keeping eligibilities intact and never being able to fix a mistake is on Sony quite frankly. If you are a Brock Holt user (he has LF/IF as his positions in this roster...yeah, not ideal but he hasn't played any other positions yet this* year) and it really bothers you, you can just change his primary position before any game you want to give him a start at say, RF or CF. In some ways this might be better, because secondary positions come along with attribute hits, so always listing a versatile guy like Holt with the primary he's going to be using probably makes him play more realistic anyway. The downside is you have to remember to edit the position from time to time.

# 178 Peji911 @ 05/26/16 09:14 AM

After reading (didn't finish everything) I am confused.

Are trades and whatnot also included? I see some guys like Paredes and what not still on old teams.

Thanks

# 179 Scott @ 05/26/16 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peji911


	After reading (didn't finish everything) I am confused. Are trades and whatnot also included? I see some guys like Paredes and what not still on old teams. Thanks

As stated, this is opening day.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

# 180 Willard76 @ 05/26/16 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peji911


	After reading (didn't finish everything) I am confused. Are trades and whatnot also included? I see some guys like Paredes and what not still on old teams. Thanks

It is an opening day roster so no transaction updates

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

« Previous 1 2…6 7 8910 11 12…15 16 Next »

More Links

MLB The Show 16 OSFM HYBRID V1 Roster Available Now