2008 playoff run - should I shake things up?

[durantjerry]

A potential huge factor in making changes is that a player who wasn't available to you in preseason has been cut. Maybe you had to settle for something that was not optimal because of who was available and now you can get someone who is perfect for your situation and can add the player without losing too much somewhere else.

[fredpaii]

[quote:eac75e4988="edgecitytx"]Derfs, we're not debating whether to wait out 'slumps' or 'off years' here. These are cards with numbers and they don't have 'slumps' though the dice may grow cold. The answer, if you think they're 'slumping' is always to wait it out. That's what Coyote is saying, and he's right. I too am thrilled when I see managers in my division lose patience with a great card.

[b:eac75e4988]What Durantjerry and Tcochran and I are talking about is making adjustments to your opponents, division, whatever. And only when it gives you an edge you didn't have before or protects you against a weakness someone else is exploiting[/b:eac75e4988].[/quote:eac75e4988]


OK. Yeah, it's smart to at least see what's available at that point. My point was that when you opt to cut someone it's usually going to be some card(s) that you view as under-performing. Well, how and when do you give up on such a card? That was my point. I think it makes plenty of sense to see what's available. And as DurantJerry mentions, it's especially interesting/helpful if some ideal player card becomes available that wasn't before the season started. Of course that usually happens because the player card has been cold so there is some risk there too.

edgecity, will you typically jump on a good card (good match for your Park and team) that's been cut mid-season even if the Park the player was in was ideal? In other words, do you assume a good card will turn around at that point? I'm guessing it's best to assume that's the rule. Yes?

[edgecitytx]

Derfs, it isn't about a card 'turning around', it's about odds These are just numbers on a card, and there are a lot of mathematicians on here who can explain it much better than I, but the odds on that card are exactly the same whether the player has been 'underperforming' or not. "Underperforming" comes from the park you're in, the parks in your league, the types of pitchers you face, etc. But if you've determined it's a good card in spite of those variables, it's a good card.

[coyote303]

The second most satisfying championship team was when my team started poorly--and not just for a few series. However, I felt they were a good team, so I didn't panic. (Most satisfying was when I pulled off a key, late-season trade.)

If you can make an adjustment against me that's worth the 20 percent hit, good for you. However, for every "good" move, I would wager 30 moves get made that the manager would have been better off not making.

And one of the things I'm working on when I spend all those hours in preseason is balance. That way I don't have to make any adjustments, and it will be difficult to make any successful ones against me.

Here's an interesting statistic from a season that just ended for me--my first 100-win season. The pennant race started close, but I was printing playoff tickets less than a third of the way into the season. Why? Because every single team in my division was dump happy right from the start--even when they were winning.

Team.......W-L.........Salary at end of season
Team A...104-58......$80.00M
Team B....74-88.......$65.40M
Team C....69-93.......$60.92M
Team D....64-98.......$55.17M

[fredpaii]

[quote:39dbda0aa2="edgecitytx"]Derfs, it isn't about a card 'turning around', it's about odds These are just numbers on a card, and there are a lot of mathematicians on here who can explain it much better than I, but the odds on that card are exactly the same whether the player has been 'underperforming' or not. "Underperforming" comes from the park you're in, the parks in your league, the types of pitchers you face, etc. But if you've determined it's a good card in spite of those variables, it's a good card.[/quote:39dbda0aa2]


Edgecity, what I mean by turning around is simply the likelihood of a good hitting card getting more rolls on it's columns than the pitcher's. Maybe it's just me but it sure seems like results with good player cards can vary widely from league season to league season with most other things being equal. Park is the same. It makes me wonder just how much a range exists for HAL to "roll the dice", so to speak, in either the individual hitters card or the pitchers card throughout a season. I'm speaking of a percentage difference. How wide can that range get with six-hundred or so PA's for a hitter? Can it get up to 75% on the pitchers cards vs 25% on the hitter for that amount of PA's?

thanks

[edgecitytx]

You should post that question as a topic itself because I'm not the one to give you the math on that, but there are plenty of people who are. It's been discussed before, I just don't have a link to it, and I don't want to give you a half baked answer.