i am in awe of the depth of thought and analysis which goes into this game! i eyeball the cards and buy an off the shelf database to prioritize players.
wish i had the time to apply quantum physics!
great start, let's see if anyone can break away from the pack.
jh
Let's get the Champions League Off the Ground-check in here
by UTBill » Tue Feb 14, 2006 3:20 pm
I agree with Woods. I wouldn't even know how to begin to analyze the cards the way some people are able to do it on here. It is impressive, but I'm hoping my simpleton methods will carry me to success.
I think the level of competition in this league is great. I'll be impressed if anyone pulls out too far in front.
I think the level of competition in this league is great. I'll be impressed if anyone pulls out too far in front.
- UTBill
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by MARCPELLETIER » Tue Feb 14, 2006 6:27 pm
As I said mesquiton, whoever composes the line-up, if they are major league starters, then it will be very difficult to make up for the loss of value set by placing Beltran third instead of first.
Not impossible, but very difficult.
Like, if you plan to use Izturis first to have Beltran, then yes, you are better off with Beltran first.
That being said, Beltran being two, like you seem to do, is pretty neat, especially in front of Abreu. Actually, there are even simulations showing that the best line-up compositions are made with the best hitter put #2, not put #3 (although the difference makes up for up for less than 5 runs/season).
Not impossible, but very difficult.
Like, if you plan to use Izturis first to have Beltran, then yes, you are better off with Beltran first.
That being said, Beltran being two, like you seem to do, is pretty neat, especially in front of Abreu. Actually, there are even simulations showing that the best line-up compositions are made with the best hitter put #2, not put #3 (although the difference makes up for up for less than 5 runs/season).
- MARCPELLETIER
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by mesquiton » Tue Feb 14, 2006 9:18 pm
Marcus, much as I enjoy (and usually agree with) your deep analyses, I suspect you might agree that at the level of competition of this league, everybody has mastered this simple game sufficiently to have a roughly equal shot at the title, regardless of whether they are "eyeballers" or "sabremetricians".
I'm mainly an eyeballer myself, although I might force myself to count card chances on occasion.
Your results speak for themselves, but I bet they'd not be significantly worse if you relied on eyeballing alone...except perhaps over very large samples, e.g., dozens or hundreds of leagues.
For a small sample like this one league, the most sophisticated number crunching, even if valid for large samples, will have a marginal effect if at all. Anybody here is obviously a good manager, and great manager is a great manager, regardless of method, no?
The most significant, well documented and least appreciated statistic, IMHO, even if I do repeat myself: Over a sample of 10 leagues, the same team using the same lineups and settings against the same competition, eliminating all variables but luck, will typically have 15-20 more wins during its best of the 10 seasons versus the worst, due to dice rolls alone.
In this game, a little luck with the dice can wipe out a whole lot of deep thinking in a hurry!
So take heart, simpletons (I include myself)...we might not be able to match the luckyman's razor-sharp analytical methods, but we can still beat his sorry arse! :P
I'm mainly an eyeballer myself, although I might force myself to count card chances on occasion.
Your results speak for themselves, but I bet they'd not be significantly worse if you relied on eyeballing alone...except perhaps over very large samples, e.g., dozens or hundreds of leagues.
For a small sample like this one league, the most sophisticated number crunching, even if valid for large samples, will have a marginal effect if at all. Anybody here is obviously a good manager, and great manager is a great manager, regardless of method, no?
The most significant, well documented and least appreciated statistic, IMHO, even if I do repeat myself: Over a sample of 10 leagues, the same team using the same lineups and settings against the same competition, eliminating all variables but luck, will typically have 15-20 more wins during its best of the 10 seasons versus the worst, due to dice rolls alone.
In this game, a little luck with the dice can wipe out a whole lot of deep thinking in a hurry!
So take heart, simpletons (I include myself)...we might not be able to match the luckyman's razor-sharp analytical methods, but we can still beat his sorry arse! :P
- mesquiton
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by MARCPELLETIER » Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:32 pm
Actually, I would go further than you go.
Not only can "eyeballers" be as good as "number crushers", they can actually be better. "Number crushers" are particularly vulnerable to introduce bias in their analysis without noticing it. Numbers have an "aura" of objectivity, but they are the results of "subjective decisions" which make them no less subjective than educated opinions.
Just consider this: I've seen several rating systems in my Strat career, well actually, I have not seen their formulas, but I have seen the end products. Ratings such like Dell, Lamanna, Joe the jet, somworld, TSN (to the extent that the price tags represent the value of a player) and of course my very own---not counting folks in here who have their own way to look at the cards (cristano1, jaserd, riggo). Overall, of course, they all agree that Abreu is a better dh than Durham, but which "eyeballer" wouldn't agree? But beyond that, the rating systems are very very different.
Joe the jet has Pujols better than Bonds. TSN has Bonds 3M better than Pujols. In my ratings, I have Bonds approximately 5M better than Pujols.
Joe the jet top 3 offensive players (defense included) in this year's set are (in order) Pujols-Bonds-Helton. TSN has Bonds-Pujols-Edmonds. In my ratings, I have Bonds-Edmonds-Rolen.
These are not small differences, and the discrepancies are probably not different than the ones you would observe if you'd asked 3 "eyeballers" to give their educated opinion on their own "top 3".
Of course, I would like to think that my ratings is the best one. For my record, I observe that the best Strat players in the country have selected on average Bonds-Edmonds-Rolen as the 3 best offensive cards. 8) 8)
Not only can "eyeballers" be as good as "number crushers", they can actually be better. "Number crushers" are particularly vulnerable to introduce bias in their analysis without noticing it. Numbers have an "aura" of objectivity, but they are the results of "subjective decisions" which make them no less subjective than educated opinions.
Just consider this: I've seen several rating systems in my Strat career, well actually, I have not seen their formulas, but I have seen the end products. Ratings such like Dell, Lamanna, Joe the jet, somworld, TSN (to the extent that the price tags represent the value of a player) and of course my very own---not counting folks in here who have their own way to look at the cards (cristano1, jaserd, riggo). Overall, of course, they all agree that Abreu is a better dh than Durham, but which "eyeballer" wouldn't agree? But beyond that, the rating systems are very very different.
Joe the jet has Pujols better than Bonds. TSN has Bonds 3M better than Pujols. In my ratings, I have Bonds approximately 5M better than Pujols.
Joe the jet top 3 offensive players (defense included) in this year's set are (in order) Pujols-Bonds-Helton. TSN has Bonds-Pujols-Edmonds. In my ratings, I have Bonds-Edmonds-Rolen.
These are not small differences, and the discrepancies are probably not different than the ones you would observe if you'd asked 3 "eyeballers" to give their educated opinion on their own "top 3".
Of course, I would like to think that my ratings is the best one. For my record, I observe that the best Strat players in the country have selected on average Bonds-Edmonds-Rolen as the 3 best offensive cards. 8) 8)
Last edited by MARCPELLETIER on Wed Feb 15, 2006 10:26 am, edited 2 times in total.
- MARCPELLETIER
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by MARCPELLETIER » Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:51 pm
yeah, LOL...let me rephrase:
Of course, I would like to think that my ratings is the best one. For my record, I observe that the [b:74590b1d30] Strat players fool enough to play for a 5000$ tournament in LasVegas [/b:74590b1d30] have selected on average Bonds-Edmonds-Rolen as the 3 best offensive cards.
Of course, I would like to think that my ratings is the best one. For my record, I observe that the [b:74590b1d30] Strat players fool enough to play for a 5000$ tournament in LasVegas [/b:74590b1d30] have selected on average Bonds-Edmonds-Rolen as the 3 best offensive cards.
- MARCPELLETIER
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by spicki17 » Wed Feb 15, 2006 10:06 am
[quote:c7b2773202]hey spicki - i wuz gonna ask your brother, but I hear yer younger and even prettier...will you be my valentine??? [/quote:c7b2773202]
d8mn mesquiton, i wish i had read this last night, cuz i settled for a date with the manager of a wrigley-driven autoleague team...
d8mn, what a downgrade...
:D :D :D
d8mn mesquiton, i wish i had read this last night, cuz i settled for a date with the manager of a wrigley-driven autoleague team...
d8mn, what a downgrade...
:D :D :D
- spicki17
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
Return to --- Player's Championship
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 39 guests