The Secret Formula is more "tongue in cheek" rather than there being a actual secret formula.
What you say is pretty much what JPav has stated.
I guess for arguements sake, it's more tips and a guideline rather than a "Secret Formula".
visick
The Secret Formula 2011
by elpasopesos » Mon Dec 19, 2011 6:50 pm
[quote:ab91715ac9="socalchiro"]The Secret Formula is more "tongue in cheek" rather than there being a actual secret formula.
What you say is pretty much what JPav has stated.
I guess for arguements sake, it's more tips and a guideline rather than a "Secret Formula".
visick[/quote:ab91715ac9]
Actually what I said is nothing like what his "secret formula" suggests. He suggests that a certain salary tier is what brings success spending as close to a certain amount as possible on pitching and hitting. I outright reject this concept and frankly question the validity of hisresearch. What is missing is the value of the stardard deviation which would tell you as mush as the averages. Also 20 teams is much too small of a sample to give a positive result. It would be interesting to examine the salary distribution of the most losing teams; I would suggest that the averages would not be that different.Even more beginning players who buy into this nonsense will stiffle their own creativity and ingenuity in favor of adding up salaries to see if their draft jives with the so called "secret formula". Just have fun and find your own road to success.
What you say is pretty much what JPav has stated.
I guess for arguements sake, it's more tips and a guideline rather than a "Secret Formula".
visick[/quote:ab91715ac9]
Actually what I said is nothing like what his "secret formula" suggests. He suggests that a certain salary tier is what brings success spending as close to a certain amount as possible on pitching and hitting. I outright reject this concept and frankly question the validity of hisresearch. What is missing is the value of the stardard deviation which would tell you as mush as the averages. Also 20 teams is much too small of a sample to give a positive result. It would be interesting to examine the salary distribution of the most losing teams; I would suggest that the averages would not be that different.Even more beginning players who buy into this nonsense will stiffle their own creativity and ingenuity in favor of adding up salaries to see if their draft jives with the so called "secret formula". Just have fun and find your own road to success.
Last edited by elpasopesos on Mon Dec 19, 2011 6:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- elpasopesos
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by elpasopesos » Mon Dec 19, 2011 6:53 pm
[quote:2a1503e7b6="Knerrpool"]Well, I think we just scared off all 3 of the females that had been playing TSN. But, it definitely makes for a nice desktop background.[/quote:2a1503e7b6]
Please don't assume that everyone here is a male heterosexual.
Please don't assume that everyone here is a male heterosexual.
- elpasopesos
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by Jerlins » Mon Dec 19, 2011 7:58 pm
J-Pav has always invited others to share their philosophy on building a winning team from their experiences with their winning teams. It always makes for an interesting read and I've used many combinations from all those who've participated. If it sounds logical and backed up with statistics and positive results, I'll use some of the ideas of others and mix it up with my preferences.
For example, a few years back the general thought was pitching, speed and defense for a Petco-like team, until someone shared a link of their power-laden, pitching be damned team. I recall Bonds being an integral part of such a team. A few adjustments here and there and I fielded a few "petco" teams with great success back a few years.
We need more J-Pavs on these boards. Thanks for sharing each and every year.
For example, a few years back the general thought was pitching, speed and defense for a Petco-like team, until someone shared a link of their power-laden, pitching be damned team. I recall Bonds being an integral part of such a team. A few adjustments here and there and I fielded a few "petco" teams with great success back a few years.
We need more J-Pavs on these boards. Thanks for sharing each and every year.
- Jerlins
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by apolivka » Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:22 pm
[quote:3d22aa744a]The only discernible difference I found was the starting rotation going deeper into the game: Champs teams on average had 43 complete games and 9 shutouts to 26 complete games and 4 shutouts for the average team. Those pitcher settings just might be a touch more important than you originally thought.
[/quote:3d22aa744a]
Wow, you must be only talking DH leagues. Here's my two 2010 teams:
88 wins and the champs:
http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/stratomatic/team/team_other.html?user_id=295088
11 complete games and 3rd best staff in the league
89 wins, but lost in the finals:
http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/stratomatic/team/team_other.html?user_id=315548
10 complete games and also 3rd best staff in the league
This team also featured some pretty horrible infield defense by HanRam, Dangerous Donnie Murphy, the Roberts Brothers (Ryan and Brian), Mitch granite hands Moreland, and Maicer Izturis (who was my only decent defender when he wasn't on the DL, which seemed like most of the time)
No-DH is way more fun, in my opinion. Your bench actually plays and the bottom of you bullpen pitches quite a bit more because of late game pinch hitting for the pitcher.
[/quote:3d22aa744a]
Wow, you must be only talking DH leagues. Here's my two 2010 teams:
88 wins and the champs:
http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/stratomatic/team/team_other.html?user_id=295088
11 complete games and 3rd best staff in the league
89 wins, but lost in the finals:
http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/stratomatic/team/team_other.html?user_id=315548
10 complete games and also 3rd best staff in the league
This team also featured some pretty horrible infield defense by HanRam, Dangerous Donnie Murphy, the Roberts Brothers (Ryan and Brian), Mitch granite hands Moreland, and Maicer Izturis (who was my only decent defender when he wasn't on the DL, which seemed like most of the time)
No-DH is way more fun, in my opinion. Your bench actually plays and the bottom of you bullpen pitches quite a bit more because of late game pinch hitting for the pitcher.
- apolivka
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
by Palmtana » Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:22 pm
[quote:ccdf27a14d="elpasopesos"]....... It would be interesting to examine the salary distribution of the most losing teams; I would suggest that the averages would not be that different.......[/quote:ccdf27a14d]
Salary Construction was first introduced to the Secret Formula in 2006. That year J-Pav also looked at 8 teams with the worst records in their leagues. The Readers Digest version of the results is [b:ccdf27a14d]Losers Waste $[/b:ccdf27a14d]. Here's the novella.
[quote:ccdf27a14d="J-Pav"]
:idea: [b:ccdf27a14d]ANOTHER NEW INSIGHT[/b:ccdf27a14d]
We've already looked at what we SHOULD be doing, let's look at what we should NOT be doing.
Pitching:
[b:ccdf27a14d]1. $7.23
2. $5.18
3. $3.82
4. $3.08[/b:ccdf27a14d]
5. $2.73
6. $2.13
7. $1.89
8. $1.43
9. $1.00
10. $0.73
11. $0.61
Offense:
1. $8.70
[b:ccdf27a14d]2. $5.71
3. $5.27
4. $4.75
5. $4.04
6. $3.31[/b:ccdf27a14d]
7. $2.83
8. $2.22
9. $1.72
10. $1.40
11. $1.03
12. $0.78
13. $0.68
14. $0.50
This is the salary structure of the eight teams with the [u:ccdf27a14d]worst records[/u:ccdf27a14d] (in the same leagues as the teams above). What do we notice? In pitching, they are spending $29.83 million on pitchers, but spending 16% less than the winning teams on their [i:ccdf27a14d]four highest priced pitchers[/i:ccdf27a14d], i.e. the ones who should be racking up the most innings pitched (regardless of SP or RP). Want to handcuff your staff? Watch Wagner pitch 55 innings over a season eating up "ace level" salary, while Arroyo is pitching 225 innings as a starter.
In short, the guys with win pct. problems are spending money [i:ccdf27a14d]where it doesn't matter.[/i:ccdf27a14d] STOP DOING THAT!
If they're underspending on pitching than they must be going yard with their Big Bats right? Wrong. (As an aside, three of these eight losing teams chose Ameriquest as home field, not that there's anything inherently wrong with that...)
Notice numbers 2-6, in boldface. After choosing their Hammer, they're UNDERSPENDING on salary slots 2-6 by you guessed it, 16% (there must be a DaVinci Code golden mean formula to apply here, but I'm running out of gas now). On defense, they're averaging [b:ccdf27a14d]2.9[/b:ccdf27a14d] at 2B, [b:ccdf27a14d]2.6[/b:ccdf27a14d] at SS and [b:ccdf27a14d]2.3[/b:ccdf27a14d] in CF. It doesn't look like much, but that's a [b:ccdf27a14d]30%[/b:ccdf27a14d] difference, folks. What do you think this is doing to their ERAs and WHIPs and runs allowed stats???
What is going on? If you must lose, then the best way is to SPEND MONEY IN PLACES WHERE IT DOESN"T MATTER (i.e. pitching slots 5 through 11, and offense slots 7 through 14). Lousy platoons, underutilized back-ups, overrated utilitymen, unnecessary RPs. It's out there because MANAGERS ARE ACTUALLY ALREADY DOING THIS FOR YOU.[/quote:ccdf27a14d]
Salary Construction was first introduced to the Secret Formula in 2006. That year J-Pav also looked at 8 teams with the worst records in their leagues. The Readers Digest version of the results is [b:ccdf27a14d]Losers Waste $[/b:ccdf27a14d]. Here's the novella.
[quote:ccdf27a14d="J-Pav"]
:idea: [b:ccdf27a14d]ANOTHER NEW INSIGHT[/b:ccdf27a14d]
We've already looked at what we SHOULD be doing, let's look at what we should NOT be doing.
Pitching:
[b:ccdf27a14d]1. $7.23
2. $5.18
3. $3.82
4. $3.08[/b:ccdf27a14d]
5. $2.73
6. $2.13
7. $1.89
8. $1.43
9. $1.00
10. $0.73
11. $0.61
Offense:
1. $8.70
[b:ccdf27a14d]2. $5.71
3. $5.27
4. $4.75
5. $4.04
6. $3.31[/b:ccdf27a14d]
7. $2.83
8. $2.22
9. $1.72
10. $1.40
11. $1.03
12. $0.78
13. $0.68
14. $0.50
This is the salary structure of the eight teams with the [u:ccdf27a14d]worst records[/u:ccdf27a14d] (in the same leagues as the teams above). What do we notice? In pitching, they are spending $29.83 million on pitchers, but spending 16% less than the winning teams on their [i:ccdf27a14d]four highest priced pitchers[/i:ccdf27a14d], i.e. the ones who should be racking up the most innings pitched (regardless of SP or RP). Want to handcuff your staff? Watch Wagner pitch 55 innings over a season eating up "ace level" salary, while Arroyo is pitching 225 innings as a starter.
In short, the guys with win pct. problems are spending money [i:ccdf27a14d]where it doesn't matter.[/i:ccdf27a14d] STOP DOING THAT!
If they're underspending on pitching than they must be going yard with their Big Bats right? Wrong. (As an aside, three of these eight losing teams chose Ameriquest as home field, not that there's anything inherently wrong with that...)
Notice numbers 2-6, in boldface. After choosing their Hammer, they're UNDERSPENDING on salary slots 2-6 by you guessed it, 16% (there must be a DaVinci Code golden mean formula to apply here, but I'm running out of gas now). On defense, they're averaging [b:ccdf27a14d]2.9[/b:ccdf27a14d] at 2B, [b:ccdf27a14d]2.6[/b:ccdf27a14d] at SS and [b:ccdf27a14d]2.3[/b:ccdf27a14d] in CF. It doesn't look like much, but that's a [b:ccdf27a14d]30%[/b:ccdf27a14d] difference, folks. What do you think this is doing to their ERAs and WHIPs and runs allowed stats???
What is going on? If you must lose, then the best way is to SPEND MONEY IN PLACES WHERE IT DOESN"T MATTER (i.e. pitching slots 5 through 11, and offense slots 7 through 14). Lousy platoons, underutilized back-ups, overrated utilitymen, unnecessary RPs. It's out there because MANAGERS ARE ACTUALLY ALREADY DOING THIS FOR YOU.[/quote:ccdf27a14d]
- Palmtana
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:34 pm
Return to Strat-O-Matic Baseball Online 20xx
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests