1964 Set oddities

Our historical single season sets

Moderator: Palmtana

  • Author
  • Message
Offline

ScumbyJr

  • Posts: 1938
  • Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:55 am

1964 Set oddities

PostWed Dec 28, 2022 3:19 pm

Along with RP pricing issue I'm not sure why 0-11 PH only Paul Dicken was included, but Joe Morgan (46 PAs) was left out.
Offline

djmacb

  • Posts: 318
  • Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:43 pm

Re: 1964 Set oddities

PostSat Dec 31, 2022 12:21 pm

The pricing is interesting. Seems that defense is highly valued (overpriced) and SLG is priced over OBP. Overall, I don’t think the set is as interesting as ‘77.
Offline

Radagast Brown

  • Posts: 2914
  • Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 7:25 pm

Re: 1964 Set oddities

PostMon Jan 02, 2023 12:18 am

ScumbyJr wrote:Along with RP pricing issue I'm not sure why 0-11 PH only Paul Dicken was included, but Joe Morgan (46 PAs) was left out.



That's what you call, an easily fixable mistake. I wish they would fix their mistakes once in a while.
Offline

tdkearns

  • Posts: 313
  • Joined: Sat May 03, 2014 4:49 pm

Re: 1964 Set oddities

PostMon Jan 02, 2023 10:40 am

djmacb wrote:The pricing is interesting. Seems that defense is highly valued (overpriced) and SLG is priced over OBP. Overall, I don’t think the set is as interesting as ‘77.


Not sure I’ve ever seen a card like Dicken’s. No defensive rating in a non-DH year and zero positive outcomes on his card. What’s the point?
Offline

goffchile

  • Posts: 196
  • Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2019 1:17 pm

Re: 1964 Set oddities

PostTue Jan 03, 2023 4:10 pm

and he costs .50 which is the same as Clay Carroll 1.77 ERA 0.89 WHIP
Offline

ScumbyJr

  • Posts: 1938
  • Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:55 am

Re: 1964 Set oddities

PostTue Jan 03, 2023 4:25 pm

There are also several cards with excessive triples (due to low at bats). Hard to use them without a DH though.
Offline

milleram

  • Posts: 1087
  • Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:40 am

Re: 1964 Set oddities

PostTue Jan 03, 2023 9:00 pm

I always liked this 64 set--actually it may be the best balanced set drafting teams without regard to pricing--the pricing of the set is horrible--pitching pricing is horrific, and even hitters are off (Callison 10M+ ?????)---obviously this was probably priced in the early days of on-line----I don't think they would make these obvious mistakes if it was priced a month or two ago.

It kind of sucks when you have to draft very underpriced guys early to have a shot in an 80M league.

That said--how hard would it have been to re-price the set before this re-release???
Offline

ScumbyJr

  • Posts: 1938
  • Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:55 am

Re: 1964 Set oddities

PostWed Jan 04, 2023 4:50 pm

milleram wrote:I always liked this 64 set--actually it may be the best balanced set drafting teams without regard to pricing--the pricing of the set is horrible--pitching pricing is horrific, and even hitters are off (Callison 10M+ ?????)---obviously this was probably priced in the early days of on-line----I don't think they would make these obvious mistakes if it was priced a month or two ago.

It kind of sucks when you have to draft very underpriced guys early to have a shot in an 80M league.

That said--how hard would it have been to re-price the set before this re-release???


Was Ken Hunt a real player or was the $4.65M card put in the set as a joke.
Last edited by ScumbyJr on Sat Jan 14, 2023 5:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

johnlaw1564

  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:45 pm

Re: 1964 Set oddities

PostThu Jan 12, 2023 4:23 pm

It seems there are some really good reliever cards for under $1 million. I just looked at Bill Henry ... how can this card be $0.8 million? I agree about Callison. Definitely need to use some interesting draft strategies to try and land some hitting.
Offline

ScumbyJr

  • Posts: 1938
  • Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:55 am

Re: 1964 Set oddities

PostMon Jan 30, 2023 7:27 pm

Gene Oliver's catcher rating shows up in a position search, but not listed on the card.
Next

Return to Strat-O-Matic Baseball: 1982, 1964, 1986, 1999

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests