Question for the veterans

[coyote303]

Perhaps a better way to put it is every pitcher has the same number of chances for each position. For example, one pitcher might have a 7 - 2BX and another a 4 - 2BX and a 10 - 2BX. However, they both have 6/216 of getting a 2BX result.

[MARCPELLETIER]

[quote:2ccc23cac7]I don't understand when it's "OK" to have less than great middle defense.


Thoughts?[/quote:2ccc23cac7]

Actually, when you have a great pitching staff, and you're playing in a stadium with low single ratings, I believe you better spend your doughs on hitting and feel safe with 3s in the defense.

A Petco team.
Kinsler and Ramirez in middle infield (both:3)
ERA=3.31
http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/stratomatic/team/team_other.html?user_id=227372

Actually, you don't necessary need a great pitching staff, if you play in a no DH league.
A McAfee team (single 1-3). No DH.
Kinsler/Furcal (3/2)
ERA = 3.66 (hard to do better with a 20M pitching staff)
http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/stratomatic/team/team_other.html?user_id=222090

[Knerrpool]

Marcus,

That's good information - those are two good teams. Can you explain how you have the managerial settings for those teams and can you explain your reasons behind your choices? Also, can you explain a little bit about how you decided to select the players you did for those particular parks (especially Petco). I know you mentioned you were not concerned about middle defense and looked for offense.

Thanks.

[Knerrpool]

Also,

I'm curious why you would need less middle defense if the BP singles rating is low. Is it simply because there would be less singles and thus less double play chances? Because, otherwise, a BP single is either a single or a lineout - defense doesn't come in to play there, does it?

Thanks for all of the help.

[AeroDave10]

[quote:7632e3d20f="Aray0113"]There is a total of 30 X-chances on each side of every pitcher's card:

SS - 7 chances
2B - 6 chances
3B, CF, C - 3 chances each
1B, LF, RF, P - 2 chances each

It's the same exact number for every card, from Mariano Rivera's to Homer Bailey's ...[/quote:7632e3d20f]

[quote:7632e3d20f="scorehouse"]
wanna bet?
[/quote:7632e3d20f]


Umm, yeah!! Let's make that bet. What do you want to lose?

[AeroDave10]

Marcus,

The only problem with boasting the low ERAs with poor middle defense is that unearned runs "created" by the defense don't count against ERA. Not only are Hanley Ramirez and Ian Kinsler 3s, but they expect to commit 20-25 errors. I still think that you're right and you can get away with subpar defense in a pitcher park if the guys can hit, but just know that a few extra unearned runs will score, too.

[MARCPELLETIER]

Knerrpool,

The challenge in TSN-SOM with capped salary is to get the most of your money.

When you buy for a player with a SS-1 rating, there is a important amount of that player's salary that is devoted to defense. For the sake of the argument, let's say that 2.5M of Rollins's salary is spent for defense, whereas 0.5M of H. Ramirez's is spent for defense (only 0.5M because H. Ramirez is barely better than your replacement-level ss).

The difference, 2M, does not come out of the blue. It is the precise value that TSN has assigned based on their assumptions of Rollin's defense contribution.

I don't know what are TSN's assumption, but let us assume that they evaluated that Rollins, on a typical team, will prevent your team from allowing 60 singles/errors, and will produce 40 double-plays. Let's further assume that TSN is right: 60 fewer singles/errors and 40 dps (in a typical environment) are really worth 2M.

But like you mention, my teams are not typical teams. My Petco team, for example, has very strong pitching, and plays in a low hitting-environment. One consequence, which you mention, is that the number of double-plays will be reduced, because fewer players will get on-base. So instead of turning 40 dps, Rollins will perhaps turn only 30.

But the pitching and stadium also affects the number of at-bats that, overall, will be played during the season, precisely because there will be fewer players getting on-base. Outs come faster. Instead of coming at-bat 5 times per game, players from visiting teams might have only 4 turns. The difference is not negligeable. My team's whip is 1.13 (and don't forget that I play with for infield defense). League's whip is 1.33. Thus, on a course of a season, there will be roughly 800 fewer at-bats...800 fewer dice rolls. So Rollins, over the course of the season, will not prevent 60 singles/errors...but rather something like 52 singles/errors. And he will turn perhaps only 27 more double plays than Ramirez.

Of course, Petco also affects offensive cards, and so will redce the gap on the offense side between Ramirez and Rollins. But I have control on on-base. If I can full my team of on-base players, I can manage to reduce the impact on the ''offensive whip''.

So for the 2M devoted on defense, you might only buy 52 singles/errors and 27 double-plays instead of the usual 60 singles/errors-40 double plays. Not a good deal.

Now there is another twist to think about. The value of a single differs according to the environment you play. In a typical stadium, in modern baseball, a single is worth roughly 0.47 runs. This means that, all things being equal, if a player hits a single, chances are that the team will score 0.47 additional runs.

In a very low whip environment, like the one I set up with my pitching staff at Petco, the value of a single is closer to 0.40 runs.

(In case you wonder, the value of homeruns remain relatively even at 1.40 runs across realistic contexts).

In typical environment, 60 single/errors and 40 double-plays translates to roughly 39 runs.

In my Petco environment, 52 singles/errors and 27 double-plays translates perhaps only to 27 runs.

If 39 runs are worth 2M, 27 runs are only worth 1.3M. But you're still paying 2M for that. Not a very good buy.

All the numbers are made up here, but I put numbers so you understand the logic. I have no clue what is the overall impact, but I am confident that the logic is sound.

[MARCPELLETIER]

AeroDave,

Point taken. But bear in mind that the intrinsic value of those errors is less in Petco than in other stadiums due to the low whip environment.

[MARCPELLETIER]

Knerrpool,

I said that the challenge in TSN-SOM with capped salary is to get the most of your money.

This logic also implies a few things on offense, with regards to Petco.

The value that is most affected by Petco is Ballpark homeruns. So you should avoid these players. But I mentioned in the earlier post that the intrinsic value of homeruns remains high in Petco.

Thus,

#1 avoid players with BP homeruns. Go instead for low-power high-whip players
#2 avoid mostly left-haded hitters with lots of BP homeruns
#3 if you are to select one with BP homeruns, go with the one with a lot of direct homeruns.

Speed is one value that is not reduced by Petco, but generally, don't overestimate the impact of speed either. But it is certainly a tie-breaking if you are hesitating between 2 players.

And there are intangibles, which are good for any stadium.

#4 Go with high-injury prone players. They are underrated in TSN's 2008 edition.
#5 Find the little things that TSN hasn't probably estimated correctly.

Most of my players fit one of those principles.

Pagan/Dillon #1, #4
Markakis #1, #2.
Ramirez: vs rhp: #3. 6.2 chances of direct homeruns. vs lhp, fits #1
Chipper: #4. Goes against #2, but only vs rhp. Fits #1 vs lhp.
Kinsler: #5. Both direct doubles vs rhp are in the left-field, where you usually fin bad arms. I'm pretty sure this increases substantially the number of rbis Kinsler is able to produce.
Suzuki #5 The (-5) at cf is a run-killer.

[scorehouse]

anything you want. if their are 30 X rolls on each side of a pitchers card, that only leaves 6 for strikeouts, walks and hits? what are you smoking?