***OFFICIAL*** FFA MLB Draft (2 Viewers)

[Winner]

Batters of the Month

April: Rogers Hornsby (bogart)

June: Rogers Hornsby (bogart)

August: Rogers Hornsby (bogart)

July: Barry Bonds (Harrier)

September: Barry Bonds (Harrier)

# TOP 10 AVG AVG

1 B. Hamilton (BOG) .414

# TOP 10 SLG SLG

1 B. Bonds (HAR) .807

2 R. Hornsby (BOG) .634

what a gap between 1st and 2nd

# TOP 10 OPS OPS

1 B. Bonds (HAR) 1.273

2 B. Hamilton (BOG) 1.080

again

# TOP 10 Runs Created RC

1 B. Bonds (HAR) 216.8

2 B. Hamilton (BOG) 177.1

again

# TOP 10 HR HR

1 B. Bonds (HAR) 73

2 B. Ruth (LAS) 50

3 S. Sosa (DB) 47

wow

# TOP 10 SB SB

1 B. Hamilton (BOG) 98

2 J. Mcgraw (PS) 93

impressive...I think Hamilton maybe is MVP

# TOP 10 Wins W

1 S. Koufax (PS) 31

2 P. Martinez (SPA) 30

# TOP 10 Losses L

1 A. Messersmith (PS) 30

# TOP 10 ERA ERA

1 J. Bunning (PS) 0.22

2 A. Messersmith (PS) 1.38

3 E. Cicotte (FUN) 2.97

holy ####ing ####. is jim bunning god? this is unreal.

# TOP 10 K's/9 IP K/9

1 P. Martinez (SPA) 11.47

2 D. Gooden (LAR) 10.95

3 C. Schilling (DB) 9.33

Things I found interesting... (this is the deadball era sim)

comments? I like how bunning turned out to be the lord jesus christ, and how messersmith had the second-lowest era and also 30 losses.

Messersmith should not be in my rotation. I use a four man rotation of Koufax, Ryan, Carlton, and Bunning. Although Ryan is leaving the door open for Messersmith to step in.

he had Moises Alou starting for me...Alou is like my 4 or 5 OF, so I think he was just guessing at starters and such...

FYI, I didn't choose anyone to start. The sim did, based on people's rating.s If someone was benched,it was because they would have performed worse in the sim than the guy that played--at least according to the sim itself.

 

[Funkley]

This is the most we've talked baseball in 200 pages.

 

[Winner]

I thought GWB said that OOTP was kind of useless because it does not equalize stats era to era?You can set the sim on different eras, but it will not equate Sam Crawfords 16 HR season (which was like 73 back in the day) to Bond's efforts. I recall something about having to load in "equalized" stats which were found on some webpage, but would take years to enter manually.not sure at all about this but that is what I heard.Either way, any more than 20 HRs in the deadball era is silly. Any more than 30 is stupid.

Any algorithm used to equalize players from era to era would be highly subjective. There would be much disagreement as to what players would do better and what players would do worse if they played in a different era. WIS is just as useless as OOTP, unless you think WIS has found a great way of equalizing the players. If you do, why?

I am just passing on what someone else mentioned about OOTP - something about them not having an algorithm for equalization. That you can take a players stats (take Eddie Murray in a 30 HR year) and run that in a deadball era (so maybe Eddie would have less HRs, theoretically) or in todays era (theoretically he should have more than 30, maybe 45) - however, Eddie Murray will always have more home runs than say Sam Crawford (one of the top HR hitters of the deadball era but never had more than 16 in a season) and always have less than todays modern players.Basically, there is no algorithm to equalize between different players from different eras.That was my understanding of what GWB asked. Because I asked him when we were doing the OOTP and he said it was useless because of this fact.Obviously a sim is only as good as its algorith. I dont think WIS is necessarily the greatest but it seems to have something behind the scenes working. I also believe WIS uses algorithms based on each individual season, for equalizations sake. So, if 1982 was an average year but 1983 had a bunch more HRs, those HR's in '83 would be weighted less than in '82.(again, just going off what I heard. I find it interesting to check out any sim)

I believe this is more or less correct. Whatif bases stats on only one season and how that player did within that season. It also tries to project that players stats across the whole year. So if Ruth was facing 1921 pitching he would put up his 1921 stats over the course of the year. So he should slow down at some point. Whatif is trying to simulate the hot and cold streaks players go on over the course of the year. BTW any stat program that sets a standard amount of HR for a league and then prorates that based on a 30 team league is FLAWED.

Perhaps. However I still like OOTP a lot. WIS charged over $300 for the one simulation we are running, and we are running into issue after issue. To do it again without all the issues we've run into it'll cost us another $300. For $19.95 I can run simulations, and tweak and run it again ad infinitum.

you just wanna be able to tweak it 'til you win... :rotflmao:

 

[Winner]

The problem with OOTP isn't necessarily with the engine itself, at least not the sim part of it. The problem with it is with the way it assigns ratings.You have to use a normalize DB to get the ratings right. Those ratings are what drive the stats in the sim. If you just used a regular DB with actual stats, a guy like Bonds will get a really high power rating (like 150 or so) and a guy like Sam Crawford will get a really low one (like 20 or less).If you were to use a normalized DB, you'd end up with Bonds with a 150 power rating and Crawford with a 90+. That's what should be done before running the sim.I suspect that you'd still see too many HR in the Deadball Era if Bonds 85 HR are an indication. It sounds like even with the normalized DB, guys like Crawford would end up with 30 or 40 HR.There is a normalized DB at www.ootpdownloadcenter.com - done by Ankit.

Te problem with the normalized DB is that it's entirely arbitrary. Who's to say what normalizations should be made? The changing of stats is an inevitably tainted exercise.

 

[Sammy3469]

Spock, since Crawford is on my team I know a bit about him.  He was one of the top 2 pre Ruth Home Run hitters.While his HR's should not be on par with Ruth/Bonds, they should not be one third, either.If you take Ruths 60 hrs, even give bonds credit and equalize his 73 down to 65, then a Crawford should hit at least 1/3 and really at least 2/3's of that figure... 40+.  Not 1/3 or 20 HRs.Obviously this is just one example and I only know it because I researched Crawford.  Same can be said for Gavvy Cravath I would assume, as well (the other great deadball power hitter)

This is completely subjective. This is why any normalization algorithm a simulation uses will produce people who disgree with the results.

Subjective based upon objective algorithms. GWB I think (maybe someone else) posted a link that equalized stats era to era. It was much like baseball-reference.com except it provided the stats equalized to modern day stats.That is where I am getting the number 45 from, and that number seems to fit into the purley subjective measures out there. The number 45 was objective based on that sites algorithm, it is not "what I think" he would do.

So you are saying that everyone should agree that Crawford should hit 40 homeruns in a simulated season where Bonds and Ruth hit 60?Don't you see that it is a subjective regardless of how "objective" the algorithm is?There is no algorithm that will produce results where everyone in the end would say, "OK, that's realistic".

The problem with the line your taking Spock is that normalization has to occur. It the reason we're using Whatif.

 

[Sammy3469]

Just to elaborate. If a 2004 hitter hit .275 in a league that hit on average .300 while a 1950 hitter hit .275 in a league that on average hit .250, the 1950 hitter will do better in any normalized sim since he was better than the league average. If the both faced the same pitcher who had a batting average against of .275 with a league average of .275, the 1950 hitter would hit something like .290-.310 while the 2004 hitter would bat around .250-.260.If you don't believe this normalization has to occur to get some some sense of who the better player is, there is no point in doing any sim.

 

[Politician Spock]

Spock, since Crawford is on my team I know a bit about him.  He was one of the top 2 pre Ruth Home Run hitters.

While his HR's should not be on par with Ruth/Bonds, they should not be one third, either.

If you take Ruths 60 hrs, even give bonds credit and equalize his 73 down to 65, then a Crawford should hit at least 1/3 and really at least 2/3's of that figure... 40+. 

Not 1/3 or 20 HRs.

Obviously this is just one example and I only know it because I researched Crawford.  Same can be said for Gavvy Cravath I would assume, as well (the other great deadball power hitter)

This is completely subjective. This is why any normalization algorithm a simulation uses will produce people who disgree with the results.

Read the whatif post above. The whatif normalization program is based on evaluating each player in that given year and then predicting an average outcome (keep in mind this is an averge outcome per at-bat). So if Ruth played a whole league of deaballers his stats would be normalized down while the pitchers would put up worse numbers. If your don't agree with the way they normalize that's one thing, but to not agree to any normalization at all seems a tad myopic.

BTW they are adjusting the program in March to allow more doubles and triples for some of the sluggers who had been getting singles (Mr. Ted Williams)

I completely understand how they do it. In fact, given the number of guys I have on my team from the deadball era, my team will benefit from their algorithim, where as a team like Capella's with the all the Willie's will be hurt by it. My only point is any normalization you use will result in disapointed people. For all the critism OOTP draws in the way it rates it's players, WIS shouldn't be put on a pedestal either. In fact, the thread you linked to explaining what they do says specifically that people will who drafted the big sluggers through out history will be DISAPPOINTED.

 

[Politician Spock]

Spock, since Crawford is on my team I know a bit about him.  He was one of the top 2 pre Ruth Home Run hitters.While his HR's should not be on par with Ruth/Bonds, they should not be one third, either.If you take Ruths 60 hrs, even give bonds credit and equalize his 73 down to 65, then a Crawford should hit at least 1/3 and really at least 2/3's of that figure... 40+.  Not 1/3 or 20 HRs.Obviously this is just one example and I only know it because I researched Crawford.  Same can be said for Gavvy Cravath I would assume, as well (the other great deadball power hitter)

This is completely subjective. This is why any normalization algorithm a simulation uses will produce people who disgree with the results.

Subjective based upon objective algorithms. GWB I think (maybe someone else) posted a link that equalized stats era to era. It was much like baseball-reference.com except it provided the stats equalized to modern day stats.That is where I am getting the number 45 from, and that number seems to fit into the purley subjective measures out there. The number 45 was objective based on that sites algorithm, it is not "what I think" he would do.

So you are saying that everyone should agree that Crawford should hit 40 homeruns in a simulated season where Bonds and Ruth hit 60?Don't you see that it is a subjective regardless of how "objective" the algorithm is?There is no algorithm that will produce results where everyone in the end would say, "OK, that's realistic".

The problem with the line your taking Spock is that normalization has to occur. It the reason we're using Whatif.

Unless you honestly think people won't be disappointed by the results produced by the WIS normalization, there is no problem with the line I am taking.

 

[Kraft...]

Just to elaborate. If a 2004 hitter hit .275 in a league that hit on average .300 while a 1950 hitter hit .275 in a league that on average hit .250, the 1950 hitter will do better in any normalized sim since he was better than the league average. If the both faced the same pitcher who had a batting average against of .275 with a league average of .275, the 1950 hitter would hit something like .290-.310 while the 2004 hitter would bat around .250-.260.If you don't believe this normalization has to occur to get some some sense of who the better player is, there is no point in doing any sim.

This is the way the normalization should occur. I think your example would best represent what we are trying to do here.

 

[Koya]

Spock, since Crawford is on my team I know a bit about him.  He was one of the top 2 pre Ruth Home Run hitters.While his HR's should not be on par with Ruth/Bonds, they should not be one third, either.If you take Ruths 60 hrs, even give bonds credit and equalize his 73 down to 65, then a Crawford should hit at least 1/3 and really at least 2/3's of that figure... 40+.  Not 1/3 or 20 HRs.Obviously this is just one example and I only know it because I researched Crawford.  Same can be said for Gavvy Cravath I would assume, as well (the other great deadball power hitter)

This is completely subjective. This is why any normalization algorithm a simulation uses will produce people who disgree with the results.

Subjective based upon objective algorithms. GWB I think (maybe someone else) posted a link that equalized stats era to era. It was much like baseball-reference.com except it provided the stats equalized to modern day stats.That is where I am getting the number 45 from, and that number seems to fit into the purley subjective measures out there. The number 45 was objective based on that sites algorithm, it is not "what I think" he would do.

So you are saying that everyone should agree that Crawford should hit 40 homeruns in a simulated season where Bonds and Ruth hit 60?Don't you see that it is a subjective regardless of how "objective" the algorithm is?There is no algorithm that will produce results where everyone in the end would say, "OK, that's realistic".

Yes, I am saying that from what I have read, a Sam Crawford (as the example being used, I would be fine using a different example but he and Cravath were the big deadball power hitters as I understand it) would be expected to hit 40+ HRs in a season where Ruth hit 60, and Bonds hit 65. This is based primarily on an objective algorithm that takes into account total numbers of home runs by the league along with countless other inputs. Gavvy Cravath would be up there as well. Subjective would be my opinion. This is not my opinion nearly so much as it is the result of stat based objective equalization.

 

[Sammy3469]

Spock, since Crawford is on my team I know a bit about him.  He was one of the top 2 pre Ruth Home Run hitters.

While his HR's should not be on par with Ruth/Bonds, they should not be one third, either.

If you take Ruths 60 hrs, even give bonds credit and equalize his 73 down to 65, then a Crawford should hit at least 1/3 and really at least 2/3's of that figure... 40+. 

Not 1/3 or 20 HRs.

Obviously this is just one example and I only know it because I researched Crawford.  Same can be said for Gavvy Cravath I would assume, as well (the other great deadball power hitter)

This is completely subjective. This is why any normalization algorithm a simulation uses will produce people who disgree with the results.

Read the whatif post above. The whatif normalization program is based on evaluating each player in that given year and then predicting an average outcome (keep in mind this is an averge outcome per at-bat). So if Ruth played a whole league of deaballers his stats would be normalized down while the pitchers would put up worse numbers. If your don't agree with the way they normalize that's one thing, but to not agree to any normalization at all seems a tad myopic.

BTW they are adjusting the program in March to allow more doubles and triples for some of the sluggers who had been getting singles (Mr. Ted Williams)

I completely understand how they do it. In fact, given the number of guys I have on my team from the deadball era, my team will benefit from their algorithim, where as a team like Capella's with the all the Willie's will be hurt by it. My only point is any normalization you use will result in disapointed people. For all the critism OOTP draws in the way it rates it's players, WIS shouldn't be put on a pedestal either. In fact, the thread you linked to explaining what they do says specifically that people will who drafted the big sluggers through out history will be DISAPPOINTED.

The problem is OOTP doesn't normalize anything. They figure out rankings without regard for league averages. Power hitters will only dissappoint when faced with pitchers who were good for their era. They will still relatively outperform the average hitter (which is an important point). Absolute numbers in any sim are meaningless. It's the realtive numbers that are important and that's why it's important to normalize.

 

[Politician Spock]

Spock, since Crawford is on my team I know a bit about him.  He was one of the top 2 pre Ruth Home Run hitters.

While his HR's should not be on par with Ruth/Bonds, they should not be one third, either.

If you take Ruths 60 hrs, even give bonds credit and equalize his 73 down to 65, then a Crawford should hit at least 1/3 and really at least 2/3's of that figure... 40+. 

Not 1/3 or 20 HRs.

Obviously this is just one example and I only know it because I researched Crawford.  Same can be said for Gavvy Cravath I would assume, as well (the other great deadball power hitter)

This is completely subjective. This is why any normalization algorithm a simulation uses will produce people who disgree with the results.

Read the whatif post above. The whatif normalization program is based on evaluating each player in that given year and then predicting an average outcome (keep in mind this is an averge outcome per at-bat). So if Ruth played a whole league of deaballers his stats would be normalized down while the pitchers would put up worse numbers. If your don't agree with the way they normalize that's one thing, but to not agree to any normalization at all seems a tad myopic.

BTW they are adjusting the program in March to allow more doubles and triples for some of the sluggers who had been getting singles (Mr. Ted Williams)

I completely understand how they do it. In fact, given the number of guys I have on my team from the deadball era, my team will benefit from their algorithim, where as a team like Capella's with the all the Willie's will be hurt by it. My only point is any normalization you use will result in disapointed people. For all the critism OOTP draws in the way it rates it's players, WIS shouldn't be put on a pedestal either. In fact, the thread you linked to explaining what they do says specifically that people will who drafted the big sluggers through out history will be DISAPPOINTED.

The problem is OOTP doesn't normalize anything. They figure out rankings without regard for league averages. Power hitters will only dissappoint when faced with pitchers who were good for their era. They will still relatively outperform the average hitter (which is an important point). Absolute numbers in any sim are meaningless. It's the realtive numbers that are important and that's why it's important to normalize.

While it is true that they don't normalize, it is not true that power hitters will struggle when faced with pitchers from their era. If you have one power hitter, and everyone else in the league are slap hitters, and you set the HR level of the league fairly high, that one power hitter may hit hundreds of homeruns that season. It's not a problem with how it ranks players and how they fair up against each other. It's that your league settings are inconsistant with the type of players you have in your league.

 

[Koya]

Spock, since Crawford is on my team I know a bit about him.  He was one of the top 2 pre Ruth Home Run hitters.While his HR's should not be on par with Ruth/Bonds, they should not be one third, either.If you take Ruths 60 hrs, even give bonds credit and equalize his 73 down to 65, then a Crawford should hit at least 1/3 and really at least 2/3's of that figure... 40+.  Not 1/3 or 20 HRs.Obviously this is just one example and I only know it because I researched Crawford.  Same can be said for Gavvy Cravath I would assume, as well (the other great deadball power hitter)

This is completely subjective. This is why any normalization algorithm a simulation uses will produce people who disgree with the results.

Subjective based upon objective algorithms. GWB I think (maybe someone else) posted a link that equalized stats era to era. It was much like baseball-reference.com except it provided the stats equalized to modern day stats.That is where I am getting the number 45 from, and that number seems to fit into the purley subjective measures out there. The number 45 was objective based on that sites algorithm, it is not "what I think" he would do.

So you are saying that everyone should agree that Crawford should hit 40 homeruns in a simulated season where Bonds and Ruth hit 60?Don't you see that it is a subjective regardless of how "objective" the algorithm is?There is no algorithm that will produce results where everyone in the end would say, "OK, that's realistic".

The problem with the line your taking Spock is that normalization has to occur. It the reason we're using Whatif.

Unless you honestly think people won't be disappointed by the results produced by the WIS normalization, there is no problem with the line I am taking.

No sim is perfect. No equalization is perfect.Some are better than others. There will be weaknesses in all which will lead to being disappointed. If you have no power in your lineup you want a sim to help that. If you have all power in your lineup, you want a sim to help that.Ideally, a sim helps both equally. If you hit 60 HRs today, that, simply put, is not the same as hitting 50 HRs in 1972. 50 in 1972 is a LOT more impressive and in an "equalized" season has to be higher than the 60 HRs from today.Why should power hitters be more affected by equalization (negatively) than anyone else, unless that is because someone wants to have a none power lineup gain an advantage. The one caveat I have is in regard to the better pitchers - perhaps better pitchers will have a stronger negative effect against power hitters who strike out more. That is possible. Then again, some great pitchers also gave up the long ball, so I really am just guessing here.Either way, a fair and good equalization should be fair to all.16 HRs in 1902 could very well = 45+ HRs today. that can be an objective measure - not perfect, but objective.

 

[Sammy3469]

The other problem with this whole discussion we're having is the Whatif normalizes the rate of occurance instead of absolute numbers. For a hitter that means, HR/AB, hit/AB, SLG/at, etc are adjust rather than the HR totals.So instead of thinking about 16 HRs gettign normalized to 45, we need to be thinking about a rate of say 3HR/100 at bats getting adjusted to 7HR/100 at bats, when the the average when the guy hit 3HR/100 at bats was 1.5HR/100 at bats.It's a rather technical point, but it is important to make the distinction.

 

[Politician Spock]

Spock, since Crawford is on my team I know a bit about him.  He was one of the top 2 pre Ruth Home Run hitters.While his HR's should not be on par with Ruth/Bonds, they should not be one third, either.If you take Ruths 60 hrs, even give bonds credit and equalize his 73 down to 65, then a Crawford should hit at least 1/3 and really at least 2/3's of that figure... 40+.  Not 1/3 or 20 HRs.Obviously this is just one example and I only know it because I researched Crawford.  Same can be said for Gavvy Cravath I would assume, as well (the other great deadball power hitter)

This is completely subjective. This is why any normalization algorithm a simulation uses will produce people who disgree with the results.

Subjective based upon objective algorithms. GWB I think (maybe someone else) posted a link that equalized stats era to era. It was much like baseball-reference.com except it provided the stats equalized to modern day stats.That is where I am getting the number 45 from, and that number seems to fit into the purley subjective measures out there. The number 45 was objective based on that sites algorithm, it is not "what I think" he would do.

So you are saying that everyone should agree that Crawford should hit 40 homeruns in a simulated season where Bonds and Ruth hit 60?Don't you see that it is a subjective regardless of how "objective" the algorithm is?There is no algorithm that will produce results where everyone in the end would say, "OK, that's realistic".

Yes, I am saying that from what I have read, a Sam Crawford (as the example being used, I would be fine using a different example but he and Cravath were the big deadball power hitters as I understand it) would be expected to hit 40+ HRs in a season where Ruth hit 60, and Bonds hit 65. This is based primarily on an objective algorithm that takes into account total numbers of home runs by the league along with countless other inputs. Gavvy Cravath would be up there as well. Subjective would be my opinion. This is not my opinion nearly so much as it is the result of stat based objective equalization.

And opinion is all I am talking about. Not everyone is going to agree that Crawford should hit that many homeruns if in fact he does. I would agree that the WIS algorithm did in fact do what it was designed to do.

 

[Politician Spock]

No sim is perfect. No equalization is perfect.Some are better than others.

Was that so hard?

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

And opinion is all I am talking about. Not everyone is going to agree that Crawford should hit that many homeruns if in fact he does. I would agree that the WIS algorithm did in fact do what it was designed to do.

Spock - how many homeruns do you think Crawford would hit if he played in this ERA? What is your opinion?

 

[Koya]

And opinion is all I am talking about. Not everyone is going to agree that Crawford should hit that many homeruns if in fact he does. I would agree that the WIS algorithm did in fact do what it was designed to do.

Spock - how many homeruns do you think Crawford would hit if he played in this ERA? What is your opinion?

If it helps you in determining, his nickname was Wahoo.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

And opinion is all I am talking about. Not everyone is going to agree that Crawford should hit that many homeruns if in fact he does. I would agree that the WIS algorithm did in fact do what it was designed to do.

Spock - how many homeruns do you think Crawford would hit if he played in this ERA? What is your opinion?

If it helps you in determining, his nickname was Wahoo.

Oh it helps alright.

 

[Bogart]

Total Power Rankings Across Modern and Deadball OOTP Sims

Harrier: 242

Bogart: 196

Funkley: 192

LarryBoy: 189

Spartans: 189

Pickles: 187

Spock: 187

pumpnick: 186

Sammy: 179

UCONN: 178

lastresort: 178

Koya: 172

Kraft: 169

Nipsey: 162

Doug B: 152

Capella: 125

I would like to go ahead and declare victory here, due to the comments made earlier in the post.Also, Hamilton is clearly the MVP as Winner has suggested.

Thanks to one and all who participated.

 

[Winner]

Total Power Rankings Across Modern and Deadball OOTP Sims

Harrier: 242

Bogart: 196

Funkley: 192

LarryBoy: 189

Spartans: 189

Pickles: 187

Spock: 187

pumpnick: 186

Sammy: 179

UCONN: 178

lastresort: 178

Koya: 172

Kraft: 169

Nipsey: 162

Doug B: 152

Capella: 125

I would like to go ahead and declare victory here, due to the comments made earlier in the post.Also, Hamilton is clearly the MVP as Winner has suggested.

Thanks to one and all who participated.

Why are you declaring victory? There's no fishing going on here. If you have something to say, say it.We've already been over the other point, by the way. I'm not mrharrier. I happen to care about clear Winners, hence the name, and don't bother with any of you fellas' political bull####.

 

[Funkley]

Total Power Rankings Across Modern and Deadball OOTP Sims

Harrier: 242

Bogart: 196

Funkley: 192

LarryBoy: 189

Spartans: 189

Pickles: 187

Spock: 187

pumpnick: 186

Sammy: 179

UCONN: 178

lastresort: 178

Koya: 172

Kraft: 169

Nipsey: 162

Doug B: 152

Capella: 125

I would like to go ahead and declare victory here, due to the comments made earlier in the post.Also, Hamilton is clearly the MVP as Winner has suggested.

Thanks to one and all who participated.

Why are you declaring victory? There's no fishing going on here. If you have something to say, say it.We've already been over the other point, by the way. I'm not mrharrier. I happen to care about clear Winners, hence the name, and don't bother with any of you fellas' political bull####.

 

[Bogart]

Total Power Rankings Across Modern and Deadball OOTP Sims

Harrier: 242

Bogart: 196

Funkley: 192

LarryBoy: 189

Spartans: 189

Pickles: 187

Spock: 187

pumpnick: 186

Sammy: 179

UCONN: 178

lastresort: 178

Koya: 172

Kraft: 169

Nipsey: 162

Doug B: 152

Capella: 125

I would like to go ahead and declare victory here, due to the comments made earlier in the post.Also, Hamilton is clearly the MVP as Winner has suggested.

Thanks to one and all who participated.

Why are you declaring victory? There's no fishing going on here. If you have something to say, say it.We've already been over the other point, by the way. I'm not mrharrier. I happen to care about clear Winners, hence the name, and don't bother with any of you fellas' political bull####.

I never said you were harrier. Chill.

 

[Politician Spock]

And opinion is all I am talking about. Not everyone is going to agree that Crawford should hit that many homeruns if in fact he does. I would agree that the WIS algorithm did in fact do what it was designed to do.

Spock - how many homeruns do you think Crawford would hit if he played in this ERA? What is your opinion?

Is his home ballpark Coors Field?Also, if he starts swinging for the fences, does his batting average drop and his strikeouts increase as well?

 

[Winner]

The stats being comparatively stratified don't affect the team comparisons.

..and yes, of course it does. you don't think bonds smoking 73 out of the 1700 total homers in the dead-ball era is helping harrier's team?come on now..

Not particularly. Number of HRs doesn't seem to correlate with division rank. Harrier and Pickles both hit 205 but ended up in very different places. You had the most HR in your division by far.Also, interestingly, though the sim estimated 1700 or so HR before the season started, for a deadball era league, the power of the hitters seems to have been so great that the leaguewide HR total was 2535--significantly higher.

Team HR, deadball era sim:

Division 1

Harrier 205

funkley 179

Larryboy 117

Doug B 149

Division 2

bogart 135

Spartans 117

Politician Spock 141

Pickles 205

Division 3

Sammy3469 170

lastresort 178

UCONN 181

Koya 195

Division 4

pumpnick 130

Kraft 112

Nipsey 144

Capella 177

Team records, deadball era sim:

Division 1

Harrier 95-67

funkley 79-83

Larryboy 78-84

Doug B 68-94

Division 2

bogart 92-70

Spartans 91-71

Politician Spock 85-77

Pickles 79-83

Division 3

Sammy3469 86-76

lastresort 81-81

UCONN 78-84

Koya 77-85

Division 4

pumpnick 90-72

Kraft 82-80

Nipsey 78-84

Capella 57-105

It would be nice if you could concede this point, Capella, since I went through the trouble of gathering the data for you.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

And opinion is all I am talking about. Not everyone is going to agree that Crawford should hit that many homeruns if in fact he does. I would agree that the WIS algorithm did in fact do what it was designed to do.

Spock - how many homeruns do you think Crawford would hit if he played in this ERA? What is your opinion?

BumpThis is either a long response from Spock or he's ignoring me.

Edit to add: Oops spoke too soon.

 

[Doug B]

Change of subject -- I believe there is an online sim that will use a player's career in total as the objective measure, not just a single season. Has anyone checked out Diamond Legends over at stats.com ?

Here's the home page of Diamond Legends.

 

[Politician Spock]

I thought GWB said that OOTP was kind of useless because it does not equalize stats era to era?You can set the sim on different eras, but it will not equate Sam Crawfords 16 HR season (which was like 73 back in the day) to Bond's efforts.  I recall something about having to load in "equalized" stats which were found on some webpage, but would take years to enter manually.not sure at all about this but that is what I heard.Either way, any more than 20 HRs in the deadball era is silly.  Any more than 30 is stupid.

Any algorithm used to equalize players from era to era would be highly subjective. There would be much disagreement as to what players would do better and what players would do worse if they played in a different era. WIS is just as useless as OOTP, unless you think WIS has found a great way of equalizing the players. If you do, why?

I am just passing on what someone else mentioned about OOTP - something about them not having an algorithm for equalization. That you can take a players stats (take Eddie Murray in a 30 HR year) and run that in a deadball era (so maybe Eddie would have less HRs, theoretically) or in todays era (theoretically he should have more than 30, maybe 45) - however, Eddie Murray will always have more home runs than say Sam Crawford (one of the top HR hitters of the deadball era but never had more than 16 in a season) and always have less than todays modern players.Basically, there is no algorithm to equalize between different players from different eras.That was my understanding of what GWB asked. Because I asked him when we were doing the OOTP and he said it was useless because of this fact.Obviously a sim is only as good as its algorith. I dont think WIS is necessarily the greatest but it seems to have something behind the scenes working. I also believe WIS uses algorithms based on each individual season, for equalizations sake. So, if 1982 was an average year but 1983 had a bunch more HRs, those HR's in '83 would be weighted less than in '82.(again, just going off what I heard. I find it interesting to check out any sim)

I believe this is more or less correct. Whatif bases stats on only one season and how that player did within that season. It also tries to project that players stats across the whole year. So if Ruth was facing 1921 pitching he would put up his 1921 stats over the course of the year. So he should slow down at some point. Whatif is trying to simulate the hot and cold streaks players go on over the course of the year. BTW any stat program that sets a standard amount of HR for a league and then prorates that based on a 30 team league is FLAWED.

Perhaps. However I still like OOTP a lot. WIS charged over $300 for the one simulation we are running, and we are running into issue after issue. To do it again without all the issues we've run into it'll cost us another $300. For $19.95 I can run simulations, and tweak and run it again ad infinitum.

you just wanna be able to tweak it 'til you win... :rotflmao:

For all we know, you are harrier, and you ran this thing a 100 times before harrier's team won.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

And opinion is all I am talking about. Not everyone is going to agree that Crawford should hit that many homeruns if in fact he does. I would agree that the WIS algorithm did in fact do what it was designed to do.

Spock - how many homeruns do you think Crawford would hit if he played in this ERA? What is your opinion?

Is his home ballpark Coors Field?Also, if he starts swinging for the fences, does his batting average drop and his strikeouts increase as well?

I think for this sim his home park is Ebbets field.Do you think he wasn't swinging for homeruns in his era? By the stats, it looks like he's one of the few guys who did.

OK - say his AVG decreases and his Ks increase, what' the number of homeruns?

 

[Winner]

I thought GWB said that OOTP was kind of useless because it does not equalize stats era to era?You can set the sim on different eras, but it will not equate Sam Crawfords 16 HR season (which was like 73 back in the day) to Bond's efforts. I recall something about having to load in "equalized" stats which were found on some webpage, but would take years to enter manually.not sure at all about this but that is what I heard.Either way, any more than 20 HRs in the deadball era is silly. Any more than 30 is stupid.

Any algorithm used to equalize players from era to era would be highly subjective. There would be much disagreement as to what players would do better and what players would do worse if they played in a different era. WIS is just as useless as OOTP, unless you think WIS has found a great way of equalizing the players. If you do, why?

I am just passing on what someone else mentioned about OOTP - something about them not having an algorithm for equalization. That you can take a players stats (take Eddie Murray in a 30 HR year) and run that in a deadball era (so maybe Eddie would have less HRs, theoretically) or in todays era (theoretically he should have more than 30, maybe 45) - however, Eddie Murray will always have more home runs than say Sam Crawford (one of the top HR hitters of the deadball era but never had more than 16 in a season) and always have less than todays modern players.Basically, there is no algorithm to equalize between different players from different eras.That was my understanding of what GWB asked. Because I asked him when we were doing the OOTP and he said it was useless because of this fact.Obviously a sim is only as good as its algorith. I dont think WIS is necessarily the greatest but it seems to have something behind the scenes working. I also believe WIS uses algorithms based on each individual season, for equalizations sake. So, if 1982 was an average year but 1983 had a bunch more HRs, those HR's in '83 would be weighted less than in '82.(again, just going off what I heard. I find it interesting to check out any sim)

I believe this is more or less correct. Whatif bases stats on only one season and how that player did within that season. It also tries to project that players stats across the whole year. So if Ruth was facing 1921 pitching he would put up his 1921 stats over the course of the year. So he should slow down at some point. Whatif is trying to simulate the hot and cold streaks players go on over the course of the year. BTW any stat program that sets a standard amount of HR for a league and then prorates that based on a 30 team league is FLAWED.

Perhaps. However I still like OOTP a lot. WIS charged over $300 for the one simulation we are running, and we are running into issue after issue. To do it again without all the issues we've run into it'll cost us another $300. For $19.95 I can run simulations, and tweak and run it again ad infinitum.

you just wanna be able to tweak it 'til you win... :rotflmao:

For all we know, you are harrier, and you ran this thing a 100 times before harrier's team won.

Interestingly, he has won 3 times I've run it, and pumpnick has won once. Bogart, funkley, and Larry are almost always at the top, and Nipsey and Cappy at the bottom.

 

[Koya]

And opinion is all I am talking about. Not everyone is going to agree that Crawford should hit that many homeruns if in fact he does. I would agree that the WIS algorithm did in fact do what it was designed to do.

Spock - how many homeruns do you think Crawford would hit if he played in this ERA? What is your opinion?

Is his home ballpark Coors Field?Also, if he starts swinging for the fences, does his batting average drop and his strikeouts increase as well?

Who is to say he wasnt swinging for the fences anyway... even if there were no fences. Now, his triples would surely go down, as would doubles. But it is general consensus that these old guys would hit the tar out of the ball - to the point of breaking the few (wood) fenches they would sometimes come accross.

I dont think k's would go up so much because they had to hit HARD line drives to get to the gaps to make triples. This is up for good debate, however.

 

[Funkley]

I thought GWB said that OOTP was kind of useless because it does not equalize stats era to era?

You can set the sim on different eras, but it will not equate Sam Crawfords 16 HR season (which was like 73 back in the day) to Bond's efforts.  I recall something about having to load in "equalized" stats which were found on some webpage, but would take years to enter manually.

not sure at all about this but that is what I heard.

Either way, any more than 20 HRs in the deadball era is silly.  Any more than 30 is stupid.

Any algorithm used to equalize players from era to era would be highly subjective. There would be much disagreement as to what players would do better and what players would do worse if they played in a different era. WIS is just as useless as OOTP, unless you think WIS has found a great way of equalizing the players. If you do, why?

I am just passing on what someone else mentioned about OOTP - something about them not having an algorithm for equalization. That you can take a players stats (take Eddie Murray in a 30 HR year) and run that in a deadball era (so maybe Eddie would have less HRs, theoretically) or in todays era (theoretically he should have more than 30, maybe 45) - however, Eddie Murray will always have more home runs than say Sam Crawford (one of the top HR hitters of the deadball era but never had more than 16 in a season) and always have less than todays modern players.Basically, there is no algorithm to equalize between different players from different eras.

That was my understanding of what GWB asked. Because I asked him when we were doing the OOTP and he said it was useless because of this fact.

Obviously a sim is only as good as its algorith. I dont think WIS is necessarily the greatest but it seems to have something behind the scenes working. I also believe WIS uses algorithms based on each individual season, for equalizations sake. So, if 1982 was an average year but 1983 had a bunch more HRs, those HR's in '83 would be weighted less than in '82.

(again, just going off what I heard. I find it interesting to check out any sim)

I believe this is more or less correct. Whatif bases stats on only one season and how that player did within that season. It also tries to project that players stats across the whole year. So if Ruth was facing 1921 pitching he would put up his 1921 stats over the course of the year.

So he should slow down at some point. Whatif is trying to simulate the hot and cold streaks players go on over the course of the year.

BTW any stat program that sets a standard amount of HR for a league and then prorates that based on a 30 team league is FLAWED.

Perhaps. However I still like OOTP a lot. WIS charged over $300 for the one simulation we are running, and we are running into issue after issue. To do it again without all the issues we've run into it'll cost us another $300. For $19.95 I can run simulations, and tweak and run it again ad infinitum.

you just wanna be able to tweak it 'til you win...:rotflmao:

For all we know, you are harrier, and you ran this thing a 100 times before harrier's team won.

Interestingly, he has won 3 times I've run it, and pumpnick has won once. Bogart, funkley, and Larry are almost always at the top, and Nipsey and Cappy at the bottom.

Good posting.

 

[Koya]

Change of subject -- I believe there is an online sim that will use a player's career in total as the objective measure, not just a single season. Has anyone checked out Diamond Legends over at stats.com ?Here's the home page of Diamond Legends.

I am in. More sims the more fun.

 

[Capella]

The stats being comparatively stratified don't affect the team comparisons.

..and yes, of course it does. you don't think bonds smoking 73 out of the 1700 total homers in the dead-ball era is helping harrier's team?come on now..

Not particularly. Number of HRs doesn't seem to correlate with division rank. Harrier and Pickles both hit 205 but ended up in very different places. You had the most HR in your division by far.Also, interestingly, though the sim estimated 1700 or so HR before the season started, for a deadball era league, the power of the hitters seems to have been so great that the leaguewide HR total was 2535--significantly higher.

Team HR, deadball era sim:

Division 1

Harrier 205

funkley 179

Larryboy 117

Doug B 149

Division 2

bogart 135

Spartans 117

Politician Spock 141

Pickles 205

Division 3

Sammy3469 170

lastresort 178

UCONN 181

Koya 195

Division 4

pumpnick 130

Kraft 112

Nipsey 144

Capella 177

Team records, deadball era sim:

Division 1

Harrier 95-67

funkley 79-83

Larryboy 78-84

Doug B 68-94

Division 2

bogart 92-70

Spartans 91-71

Politician Spock 85-77

Pickles 79-83

Division 3

Sammy3469 86-76

lastresort 81-81

UCONN 78-84

Koya 77-85

Division 4

pumpnick 90-72

Kraft 82-80

Nipsey 78-84

Capella 57-105

It would be nice if you could concede this point, Capella, since I went through the trouble of gathering the data for you.

well I did go to sleep. If you don't think Bonds hitting 73 homers significantly helped Harrier, while a team like mine (for example only, don't know who else had a lot of power hitters), built around power hitters only hit 100 more total, then I don't know what to tell you. Especially when you take into account the era the sim was played in.

The numbers are completely out of whack, but that's been talked about for the past few pages and I need a cup of coffee.

 

[Koya]

I thought GWB said that OOTP was kind of useless because it does not equalize stats era to era?

You can set the sim on different eras, but it will not equate Sam Crawfords 16 HR season (which was like 73 back in the day) to Bond's efforts.  I recall something about having to load in "equalized" stats which were found on some webpage, but would take years to enter manually.

not sure at all about this but that is what I heard.

Either way, any more than 20 HRs in the deadball era is silly.  Any more than 30 is stupid.

Any algorithm used to equalize players from era to era would be highly subjective. There would be much disagreement as to what players would do better and what players would do worse if they played in a different era. WIS is just as useless as OOTP, unless you think WIS has found a great way of equalizing the players. If you do, why?

I am just passing on what someone else mentioned about OOTP - something about them not having an algorithm for equalization. That you can take a players stats (take Eddie Murray in a 30 HR year) and run that in a deadball era (so maybe Eddie would have less HRs, theoretically) or in todays era (theoretically he should have more than 30, maybe 45) - however, Eddie Murray will always have more home runs than say Sam Crawford (one of the top HR hitters of the deadball era but never had more than 16 in a season) and always have less than todays modern players.Basically, there is no algorithm to equalize between different players from different eras.

That was my understanding of what GWB asked. Because I asked him when we were doing the OOTP and he said it was useless because of this fact.

Obviously a sim is only as good as its algorith. I dont think WIS is necessarily the greatest but it seems to have something behind the scenes working. I also believe WIS uses algorithms based on each individual season, for equalizations sake. So, if 1982 was an average year but 1983 had a bunch more HRs, those HR's in '83 would be weighted less than in '82.

(again, just going off what I heard. I find it interesting to check out any sim)

I believe this is more or less correct. Whatif bases stats on only one season and how that player did within that season. It also tries to project that players stats across the whole year. So if Ruth was facing 1921 pitching he would put up his 1921 stats over the course of the year.

So he should slow down at some point. Whatif is trying to simulate the hot and cold streaks players go on over the course of the year.

BTW any stat program that sets a standard amount of HR for a league and then prorates that based on a 30 team league is FLAWED.

Perhaps. However I still like OOTP a lot. WIS charged over $300 for the one simulation we are running, and we are running into issue after issue. To do it again without all the issues we've run into it'll cost us another $300. For $19.95 I can run simulations, and tweak and run it again ad infinitum.

you just wanna be able to tweak it 'til you win...:rotflmao:

For all we know, you are harrier, and you ran this thing a 100 times before harrier's team won.

Interestingly, he has won 3 times I've run it, and pumpnick has won once. Bogart, funkley, and Larry are almost always at the top, and Nipsey and Cappy at the bottom.

Good posting.

Well, that discredits that sim altogether.Next?

 

[aaronr28]

FYI: I really hate lame aliases

 

[Winner]

The stats being comparatively stratified don't affect the team comparisons.

..and yes, of course it does. you don't think bonds smoking 73 out of the 1700 total homers in the dead-ball era is helping harrier's team?come on now..

Not particularly. Number of HRs doesn't seem to correlate with division rank. Harrier and Pickles both hit 205 but ended up in very different places. You had the most HR in your division by far.Also, interestingly, though the sim estimated 1700 or so HR before the season started, for a deadball era league, the power of the hitters seems to have been so great that the leaguewide HR total was 2535--significantly higher.

Team HR, deadball era sim:

Division 1

Harrier 205

funkley 179

Larryboy 117

Doug B 149

Division 2

bogart 135

Spartans 117

Politician Spock 141

Pickles 205

Division 3

Sammy3469 170

lastresort 178

UCONN 181

Koya 195

Division 4

pumpnick 130

Kraft 112

Nipsey 144

Capella 177

Team records, deadball era sim:

Division 1

Harrier 95-67

funkley 79-83

Larryboy 78-84

Doug B 68-94

Division 2

bogart 92-70

Spartans 91-71

Politician Spock 85-77

Pickles 79-83

Division 3

Sammy3469 86-76

lastresort 81-81

UCONN 78-84

Koya 77-85

Division 4

pumpnick 90-72

Kraft 82-80

Nipsey 78-84

Capella 57-105

It would be nice if you could concede this point, Capella, since I went through the trouble of gathering the data for you.

well I did go to sleep. If you don't think Bonds hitting 73 homers significantly helped Harrier, while a team like mine (for example only, don't know who else had a lot of power hitters), built around power hitters only hit 100 more total, then I don't know what to tell you. Especially when you take into account the era the sim was played in.

The numbers are completely out of whack, but that's been talked about for the past few pages and I need a cup of coffee.

The point, as was made clear, is that it didn't help Harrier's team any more than anyone else's, as the team HR totals didn't correlate at all with the records. Witness Pickles also at 205, at the bottom of his division, among many other examples.

 

[Capella]

btw winner = harrierconfirmed

 

[SimFisher]

FYI: I really hate lame aliases

PS - I am NOT Harrier. My twin brother, however, is.

 

[larry_boy_44]

Change of subject -- I believe there is an online sim that will use a player's career in total as the objective measure, not just a single season. Has anyone checked out Diamond Legends over at stats.com ?Here's the home page of Diamond Legends.

I am in. More sims the more fun.

12 team max...

 

[Winner]

btw winner = harrierconfirmed

Sorry Cappy, close but no cigar on this one.

 

[Capella]

The stats being comparatively stratified don't affect the team comparisons.

..and yes, of course it does. you don't think bonds smoking 73 out of the 1700 total homers in the dead-ball era is helping harrier's team?come on now..

Not particularly. Number of HRs doesn't seem to correlate with division rank. Harrier and Pickles both hit 205 but ended up in very different places. You had the most HR in your division by far.Also, interestingly, though the sim estimated 1700 or so HR before the season started, for a deadball era league, the power of the hitters seems to have been so great that the leaguewide HR total was 2535--significantly higher.

Team HR, deadball era sim:

Division 1

Harrier 205

funkley 179

Larryboy 117

Doug B 149

Division 2

bogart 135

Spartans 117

Politician Spock 141

Pickles 205

Division 3

Sammy3469 170

lastresort 178

UCONN 181

Koya 195

Division 4

pumpnick 130

Kraft 112

Nipsey 144

Capella 177

Team records, deadball era sim:

Division 1

Harrier 95-67

funkley 79-83

Larryboy 78-84

Doug B 68-94

Division 2

bogart 92-70

Spartans 91-71

Politician Spock 85-77

Pickles 79-83

Division 3

Sammy3469 86-76

lastresort 81-81

UCONN 78-84

Koya 77-85

Division 4

pumpnick 90-72

Kraft 82-80

Nipsey 78-84

Capella 57-105

It would be nice if you could concede this point, Capella, since I went through the trouble of gathering the data for you.

well I did go to sleep. If you don't think Bonds hitting 73 homers significantly helped Harrier, while a team like mine (for example only, don't know who else had a lot of power hitters), built around power hitters only hit 100 more total, then I don't know what to tell you. Especially when you take into account the era the sim was played in.

The numbers are completely out of whack, but that's been talked about for the past few pages and I need a cup of coffee.

The point, as was made clear, is that it didn't help Harrier's team any more than anyone else's, as the team HR totals didn't correlate at all with the records. Witness Pickles also at 205, at the bottom of his division, among many other examples.

assuming there are 240 players in this thing (15 players * 16 teams) and like you said earlier, 2300 homers in this particular sim. that means the average homerun total per player was 9.58. bonds ended up with 73. how you think a player ending up with over 7 times more homers than the average player isn't going to significantly help is beyond me.

 

[Capella]

btw winner = harrierconfirmed

Sorry Cappy, close but no cigar on this one.

no, there really is.who do you think you're dealing with here?

 

[Politician Spock]

And opinion is all I am talking about. Not everyone is going to agree that Crawford should hit that many homeruns if in fact he does. I would agree that the WIS algorithm did in fact do what it was designed to do.

Spock - how many homeruns do you think Crawford would hit if he played in this ERA? What is your opinion?

Is his home ballpark Coors Field?Also, if he starts swinging for the fences, does his batting average drop and his strikeouts increase as well?

I think for this sim his home park is Ebbets field.Do you think he wasn't swinging for homeruns in his era? By the stats, it looks like he's one of the few guys who did.

OK - say his AVG decreases and his Ks increase, what' the number of homeruns?

15. My answer is subjective. As well as the opinion of anyone who agrees with me, as well as anyone who disagrees with me.

 

[Winner]

The stats being comparatively stratified don't affect the team comparisons.

..and yes, of course it does. you don't think bonds smoking 73 out of the 1700 total homers in the dead-ball era is helping harrier's team?come on now..

Not particularly. Number of HRs doesn't seem to correlate with division rank. Harrier and Pickles both hit 205 but ended up in very different places. You had the most HR in your division by far.Also, interestingly, though the sim estimated 1700 or so HR before the season started, for a deadball era league, the power of the hitters seems to have been so great that the leaguewide HR total was 2535--significantly higher.

Team HR, deadball era sim:

Division 1

Harrier 205

funkley 179

Larryboy 117

Doug B 149

Division 2

bogart 135

Spartans 117

Politician Spock 141

Pickles 205

Division 3

Sammy3469 170

lastresort 178

UCONN 181

Koya 195

Division 4

pumpnick 130

Kraft 112

Nipsey 144

Capella 177

Team records, deadball era sim:

Division 1

Harrier 95-67

funkley 79-83

Larryboy 78-84

Doug B 68-94

Division 2

bogart 92-70

Spartans 91-71

Politician Spock 85-77

Pickles 79-83

Division 3

Sammy3469 86-76

lastresort 81-81

UCONN 78-84

Koya 77-85

Division 4

pumpnick 90-72

Kraft 82-80

Nipsey 78-84

Capella 57-105

It would be nice if you could concede this point, Capella, since I went through the trouble of gathering the data for you.

well I did go to sleep. If you don't think Bonds hitting 73 homers significantly helped Harrier, while a team like mine (for example only, don't know who else had a lot of power hitters), built around power hitters only hit 100 more total, then I don't know what to tell you. Especially when you take into account the era the sim was played in.

The numbers are completely out of whack, but that's been talked about for the past few pages and I need a cup of coffee.

The point, as was made clear, is that it didn't help Harrier's team any more than anyone else's, as the team HR totals didn't correlate at all with the records. Witness Pickles also at 205, at the bottom of his division, among many other examples.

assuming there are 240 players in this thing (15 players * 16 teams) and like you said earlier, 2300 homers in this particular sim. that means the average homerun total per player was 9.58. bonds ended up with 73. how you think a player ending up with over 7 times more homers than the average player isn't going to significantly help is beyond me.

It did help--but it didn't help Bonds any more than it helped any other power hitter; Bonds was just a bigger power hitter than them already. The ratios didn't change at all, and the way HRs were apportioned throughout the league demonstrate that. I definitely would have thought you were smart enough to understand all this. It seems that your all-consuming anti-Harrier bias is getting in the way. Should I run another sim with his team removed, so that you can finish last to someone else?

 

[Capella]

The stats being comparatively stratified don't affect the team comparisons.

..and yes, of course it does. you don't think bonds smoking 73 out of the 1700 total homers in the dead-ball era is helping harrier's team?come on now..

Not particularly. Number of HRs doesn't seem to correlate with division rank. Harrier and Pickles both hit 205 but ended up in very different places. You had the most HR in your division by far.Also, interestingly, though the sim estimated 1700 or so HR before the season started, for a deadball era league, the power of the hitters seems to have been so great that the leaguewide HR total was 2535--significantly higher.

Team HR, deadball era sim:

Division 1

Harrier 205

funkley 179

Larryboy 117

Doug B 149

Division 2

bogart 135

Spartans 117

Politician Spock 141

Pickles 205

Division 3

Sammy3469 170

lastresort 178

UCONN 181

Koya 195

Division 4

pumpnick 130

Kraft 112

Nipsey 144

Capella 177

Team records, deadball era sim:

Division 1

Harrier 95-67

funkley 79-83

Larryboy 78-84

Doug B 68-94

Division 2

bogart 92-70

Spartans 91-71

Politician Spock 85-77

Pickles 79-83

Division 3

Sammy3469 86-76

lastresort 81-81

UCONN 78-84

Koya 77-85

Division 4

pumpnick 90-72

Kraft 82-80

Nipsey 78-84

Capella 57-105

It would be nice if you could concede this point, Capella, since I went through the trouble of gathering the data for you.

well I did go to sleep. If you don't think Bonds hitting 73 homers significantly helped Harrier, while a team like mine (for example only, don't know who else had a lot of power hitters), built around power hitters only hit 100 more total, then I don't know what to tell you. Especially when you take into account the era the sim was played in.

The numbers are completely out of whack, but that's been talked about for the past few pages and I need a cup of coffee.

The point, as was made clear, is that it didn't help Harrier's team any more than anyone else's, as the team HR totals didn't correlate at all with the records. Witness Pickles also at 205, at the bottom of his division, among many other examples.

assuming there are 240 players in this thing (15 players * 16 teams) and like you said earlier, 2300 homers in this particular sim. that means the average homerun total per player was 9.58. bonds ended up with 73. how you think a player ending up with over 7 times more homers than the average player isn't going to significantly help is beyond me.

It did help--but it didn't hel pBonds any more than it helped any other power hitter; Bonds was just a bigger power hitter than them already. The ratios didn't change at all, and the way HRs were apportioned throughout the league demoonstrate that. I definitely would have thought you were smart enough to understand all this. It seems that your all-consuming anti-Harrier bias is getting in the way. Should I run another sim with his team removed, so that you can finish last to someone else?

:rotflmao: ok

you're harrier.

confirmed by two non-fake mods.

btw, we can expect bonds to take in 7 times more homers on the average than all these great players

get over it.

 

[Notorious T.R.E.]

btw winner = harrierconfirmed

Sorry Cappy, close but no cigar on this one.

no, there really is.who do you think you're dealing with here?

Put me on the Harrier posing as Winner team as well.He, Badger and I are the only ones I know that downloaded OOTP and you can see who's here.12 Members: trefor3, Politician Spock, Capella, Winner, Bogart, Funkley, IndividuallyWrapedKraftSingles, Koya, Sammy3469, NOC, Doug B, Giant Wooden Badger

 

[Politician Spock]

This is up for good debate, however.

Exactly! How could it ever not be up for debate unless there was a PERFECT ALGORITHM.

 

[Funkley]

I don't understand how Ty Cobb keeps finishing outside the league leaders in hits?!?!?! I realize that not every great hitter will be on the leader board but I didn't see his name in there once and he isn't currently on the WIS leader board either.

 

[Koya]

The problem is Bonds is not THAT much better a power hitter than the rest. If is one of the best? Yes. On par with Ruth and the big boys? Maybe, maybe not - he is in a HUGE offensive era with awful pitching and tiny ballparks - not to get into "help" through chemistry. Bonds 73 are no more impressive than George Fosters 50 in the 1970's - and if there is a real and fair equalization, this would be taken into account.