Secret Formula 2006

[bomp helium]

just commenting on the 1-1-2 up-the-middle thing...

I've got a team that goes:

c: 3(+2)
1B: 4e12
2B: 3e17
SS: 4e10
3B: 3e24
CF: 3e5
LF: 4e12
RF: 3e3

maybe the worst range team ever assembled...plus, they're not exactly ripping the ball, hitting .249...

anyone care to guess the record this wretched collection of unwanted bumblers has assembled a little over halfway through the season?...

[J-Pav]

Cedeno's .315 obp is not helping, but I am surprised to see you at [b:a6b239d9e8]68-31[/b:a6b239d9e8]. The Three Stud Starter strategy (3.18 ERA, 1.18 WHIP) is going gangbusters (first in runs allowed by miles). In spite of the sacrifice at defense for more bat, you're still only 9th in runs scored. Frightening to think what your ERA and WHIP might be with just average defense.

While the experiment is working well in Petco, your Coors team with a conventional pitching set-up and the same defensive theory isn't fairing nearly as well (our other league). I think it takes some really strong pitching to overcome the lack of defense, so Petco is definitely the best way to go.

I just wish I could get HAL to love a team the way he loves yours. I've gotten no outliers to the upside at all this year.

Good luck the rest of the way!

[MARCPELLETIER]

J-Pav,

I built my Final Tour team based on my Secret Searching team, that you already know about (and which spent 37.65M on pitching (8.95-8.58-6.86-6.48-4.72-under 1M) and won 96 games) and on the following team, which spent 37.09M on pitching (11.28-8.95-6.48-4.49-1.42-1.20-1.18-under 1M) and has a potential chance to break the 100 wins mark:

http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/baseball/stratomatic/2006/team/team_other.html?user_id=14265

For the Final Tour season, I was on my way to duplicate this spending, but the highly skewed teams (3 teams have 7 or more left-handed hitters, 2 have 7 or more right-handed hitters) forced me to rely on cheaper platoons for my relief and my 4th SP spot. Henceforth the 34M.

[J-Pav]

[b:1b433d48c0]Marcus[/b:1b433d48c0]:

I think everyone knows it was more by accident than design that your team was the closest fit to what I've described in this thread. That's what makes it so funny.

It was interesting to see that only you and [b:1b433d48c0]qksilver[/b:1b433d48c0] spent above average on both top pitchers and top hitters, while the other teams were more one sided.

Do you think there's anything to the salary construction idea, or is it just an example of torturing the data until they confess?

[cummings2]

J,

Quick thought in re: to salary construction and being above or under the avg. league salary. Would it be telling, along with the offense chart you posted above to break down the + and - by position?

meaning:

Manager C 1B 2B 3B etc...
Mgr #1 ...+..+..-..-
Mgr #2 ...-..-..+..+
etc...

Not sure of it does make a difference, but thought of posting before I forget.

Thanks for all these posts, quite interesting.

[J-Pav]

I have in fact thought of breaking it down by position as well. I don't know that it would lead to any improved insights though, because it would basically give you the same result. What would likely be more telling is the amounts over and underspent, on average.

For instance, your top salary is $4 plus mil over the top salary average. Your next salary is $5 plus mil over. So the question becomes, are Lee and A-Rod and a one dollar pitcher worth Guerrero, Manny Ramirez and Pedro? This is what "salary construction" (as I'm trying to describe it) is all about.

I read somewhere in one of those baseball numbers books that the ideal lineup would consist of nine equally very good hitters, as opposed to three stars, three good and three poor. Whether everyone agrees this is true or not is open to debate. But bringing this idea into the strat world, let's say we try to build a nine man lineup of all $5 mil guys. I've found that when you do this, because there are only so many $5 mil guys, you start reaching some and conceding some, choosing among bargains, platoons, five tool stars, etc. When it's all said and done, you often end up with what looks a lot like this: $9, 8, 6, 5, 4.5, 4, 3, 2.5, 1.5. Is this the strat version of "an ideal lineup?"

[MARCPELLETIER]

[quote:0001aa4a5f]Do you think there's anything to the salary construction idea, or is it just an example of torturing the data until they confess?[/quote:0001aa4a5f]

Well, I think, and I am sure you will agree, that other variables, like fitting the stadium and exploiting your opponents' weaknesses (in particular, having an unbalanced offense when the opposite pitchers are indeed unbalanced) are more important variables.

That said, I do think that you are on something when tracking the salary contrusction of the teams.

It seems to me that the best bargains are to be found in the 1M-3M zone. Moreover, the pool of players in that frange is pretty big, so you can easily find one bargain that, in addition, fits best your stadium. So if you spend on Clemens and D.Lee, you can have full freedom to grab all the cheapie players that best fit your stadium, pitching and offense combined.

[JAYDINGESS1]

JPav,

Good to see you still fighting the good fight. This has been a futile year for me with regards to winning percentages, % of teams in the playoffs, etc. Even left for a few months to try to get strato out of my system and tried online holdem, strat is cheaper. I remember this thread from my first team in 2003 and stray away from it much too often. But this year especially, didn't go well. While I'll never be in the .550 range like a few of the great managers on here, I was in the .520 range with some rings and close to a 50% playoff % (which is my barometer). Let's see if a small number of my winning teams (very small to be sure) hold up to your theory.

http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/baseball/stratomatic/2006/team/team_other.html?user_id=5391

Pitching - 26.63 - (14.66 SP - 11.97 RP)
Hitting - 52.55

SS - 2 (Furcal)
2b - 3 (Kent)
CF - 1 (Edmonds)

http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/baseball/stratomatic/2006/team/team_other.html?user_id=8828

Pitching - 34.59 - (19.95 SP - 14.64 RP)
Hitting - 64.84 (100mil league)

SS - 2,2 (Crosby, Cabrera)
2b - 3 (Kent)
CF - 1 (Edmonds)

http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/baseball/stratomatic/2006/team/team_other.html?user_id=384

Pitching - 28.85 - (16.28 SP - 12.57 RP)
Hitting - 51.13

SS - 2 (Crosby)
2b - 1 (Castillo)
CF - 2 (Duffy)

The last team comes the closest to your formula. I truly believe in your idea however. The draft plays such a huge part in the game and the JPav's, Riggo's, PBTR's Wilby's of the world can take a bad draft and turn it around with alternates that only they know will work. That, in my humble opinion, is the key to winning consistently in this game. The players that have a plan e or f to fall back on in case of a bad draft, win. I will continue to use your outline as always (hopefully more consistently in 2007) and will see you in our next league together.

Jay

[JAYDINGESS1]

JPav,

Just picked a team that aligns with the formula you outlined as close as possible. Will post link as soon as it drafts. Interested in it greatly. If it does not work, please make check or cash to Jay...............


JK


Jay

[J-Pav]

[b:b7a6b530fe]Dingo[/b:b7a6b530fe]:

I'm in. Game on!