Invitational league: Weinberg vs Petrosian

[bkeat23]

Damn, my popcorn went stale overnight. :D

[The Last Druid]

Salt: Delusions aren't really the same as lying. And I'm not quite sure which is the more likely explanation of Mr. Weinberg and his most interesting claims. Either way, we appear to be dealing with an absolutely magnificent piece of work here. :roll:

[The Last Druid]

So Weinberg, are you in or out?

[PotKettleBlack]

[quote:3ac6baf286="Mr. Baseball World"]I would guess hitters are priced based on how their card would play if set to start full time. Hence the number of plate appearances and at bats would be full time minus whatever time they would be expected to miss based on where their injury rolls are located.


Did I get in the league? :lol:[/quote:3ac6baf286]

Some quick math/logic (courtesy of DeanTSC) tweaked to the ATG game (hitters get more PA as ATG hitters are generally better quality than 200x hitters)

700 PA
*.5 (hitter card vs pitcher card/X-roll)
350 PA

If I were pricing Gates Brown (or anyone else), you'd start with 350 total PA priced on the card. You'd reduce that by injury (so ~4.3 PA/G*15 games = 65 missed PA / 2 = 32,) so 318 PA for Gates Brown.
318*.75 for the vsR side of his card: ~240 PA
318*.25 for the vsL side of his card: ~80 PA (aware that rounding has made this exceed the 318... we are on the back of the envelope, right?)

I will quickly price Brown vs L: $.25 (Theoretical minimum price).
I will gladly let Bbrool explain the pricing on the other 240 PA.

If I were under the impression that the Gates Brown (or Ken Smith) cards were massively broken at their price points, one idea would be to move their injury chances up their cards, to say a 2 or a 3.

Speaking of lack of realism: Why don't pitchers hurt their rotator cuffs or hurt their ulnar collateral ligament? If Matthewson or Walsh were to throw 330+ IP in the modern style, they would undoubtedly hurt their UCL and get Tommy John surgery. That is simply not in play and not realistic.

[cristano1]

gates brown: 700 plate appearances x 67% righty starters x 85% injury reduction x 13 walks out of 108 chances = 375 ab

R3 vs R4: R3 and R4 (and also R5) are priced at the same ip. R1 at 120 R2 at 140 R3 & R4 & R5 at 165, by my calculations. [b:ec9472254f]again, i dont have access to the pricing model, i am simply backing into the calculations.[/b:ec9472254f] but when you are given over 2200 batters and 1500 pitchers, backing into the prices is not a challenging exercise. this is why R1 and R2 are worth a lot less in ATG6. they use the same assumptions as the 200x sets, but the pricing model assumes that the super reliever issue has been fixed, and hence R3 R4 R5 are not priced at their abused, gamed, and what i call cheat level IP.

again, i have no issue with the super reliever usage, as long as it stays in a random auto league. that keeps team themes fresh and it is fun. so yes, i have a couple murray teams and a few gossage teams and even one sutter team. same as i have a team with all 0.5m starters. same as i have a team with the 4 biggest non stars all on F0. same as i have a team with 8 platoon SP. same as i have a team with gossage at 360ip with a sub 2.50 era. if i used gossage like that in a barnstormers event would i consider it cheating? absolutely. in the barnstormers team you are referencing, sutter pitched 185 ip for me. do i consider that cheating since he was only priced at 165 ip? 185 vs 165 is legit. so, of course not. would i consider it cheating if i made him pitch 300 or 350 ip. of course. 250? yes. 200. eh, probably not. anything above 200? it starts to game the system, so yes. the point is, if it gets questionable, men should have the respect to behave like men and correct it on their own.

do i consider this team cheating, where you had babe adams only relieve and pitch 227 ip? http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/stratomatic/team/team_other.html?user_id=359451 DEFINITELY NOT. why? because babe is priced as a starter. do i consider it cheating if gates brown bats 700 times in a season just because there happens to be all righty SP and he luckily never gets injured? absolutely not, that is just good luck. what i do consider cheating is when someone purposely games the system. for those of you who cant see the difference between gates brown and a super reliever, i mean, i dont know what to say. its clear as day.

if you want to compete, like men would, then you build a legit team, like a man would. i admit, i do trash talk a lot, because trash talking keeps the game fresh. however, any time i go head to head, i do it in an upstanding way. when my teams win, i want it to because i built the best team, not because i found some cheap loophole to exploit.

am i out of this league? i offer three options: 1) petro acts like a man, drops murray, repicks, and builds a mans team to go head to head with the other 11 mens teams. if he wins, then so be it. he won like a man, and he deserves to be congratulated like a man. 2) i draft a super reliever and put him at 300ip. i am not giving petro a 6-7m cap advantage in an 80m league. pedro is the best steal in the set and hes only worth 3.5m. the problem i have with option 2, is that then i am also cheating, and it puts the other 10 of you at a disadvantage. some of you will say "i dont care, its no disadvantage". but mathematically, it is a 6-7m advantage in an 80m league. which is bullsh1t. i can respect that ghdkka wants to beat petro straight up even without super relieving. but whether he does or doesnt, he is starting at an almost 10% cap disadvantage. at 80m cap, that is significant. 3) i dont draft a super reliever, start in a 6-7m hole, and roll the dice. i will probably still end up beating petro anyway. but then this league is pointless, because if he beats me, he did it by gaming the system, but if i beat him, or anyone else beats him, then they are just plain nasty. i dont see why petro would want any option but #1, since him winning by exploiting a super reliever is meaningless. petro goes 100-62? congrats, you found a loophole in the game. you challenged me, and i challenged you. do it like a man! just do it like a man.

however, lesson learned. i am going right to the barnstormers finals, and explaining the issue. in advance. if the consensus is the same as it is here (that its legit) and as long as everyone agrees that this type of game engine manipulation is okay, in advance, then i have no issue using the super reliever. again, the barnstormers board has toyed with implementing the 200ip rp penalty many a time. for that reason, i felt that this type of manipulation was frowned upon. i would have had no issue here, if things were stated in advance. my blood just boils when i call someone out for being off his game, and he is scared enough of me that his first pick is a super reliever in an attempt to beat me by gaming the system rather than drafting a legit team and being me like a man. thats not what men do. thats not what men ever have done. and thats not what men ever will do. a man plays like a man. a man dominates like a man. and a man loses like a man. ill be the first to say that if petro beat me like a man, id have paid my 100 and offered him my respect. just do it like a man. this is a mans game, and i have no patience for a mary.

[Mr Baseball World]

Strat geeks in an internet fight talking about how real men settle things...... :lol:

[Salty]

[quote:515434d6e1="weinberg"]gates brown: 700 plate appearances x 67% righty starters x 85% injury reduction x 13 walks out of 108 chances = 375 ab

R3 vs R4: R3 and R4 (and also R5) are priced at the same ip. R1 at 120 R2 at 140 R3 & R4 & R5 at 165, by my calculations. [b:515434d6e1]again, i dont have access to the pricing model, i am simply backing into the calculations.[/b:515434d6e1] but when you are given over 2200 batters and 1500 pitchers, backing into the prices is not a challenging exercise. this is why R1 and R2 are worth a lot less in ATG6. they use the same assumptions as the 200x sets, but the pricing model assumes that the super reliever issue has been fixed, and hence R3 R4 R5 are not priced at their abused, gamed, and what i call cheat level IP.
.[/quote:515434d6e1]

Sir,

You continue to astound me...
but you do not confound me.
I didnt know you at all before this league- but I begin to see the problem people are having with you.
You are rabidly defending a poorly thought out position based on your backed into 'assumptions'...

In fact you go so far as to assume that you are correct, and therefor the game must be played based on your model.
A few hundered years ago, people believed the universe revolved around them...guess some things dont change.

[PotKettleBlack]

Note: I have no dog in this fight. I just like rationalism to triumph. If that makes me Petro's lapdog, so be it. I suppose it doesn't matter that I think Petro (and nearly everyone else) should disengage from Weinberg as he is clearly a troll and one should not feed trolls. I am fully aware that I am in violation of that rule with what follows.

[quote:7062dd0ada="weinberg"]gates brown: 700 plate appearances x 67% righty starters x 85% injury reduction x 13 walks out of 108 chances = 375 ab [/quote:7062dd0ada]

Reduce by the portion of his AB that do not come from his card, but from pitcher cards. 85% injury reduction assumes that he will be injured for a 24 game injury.

[quote:7062dd0ada="weinberg"]R3 vs R4: R3 and R4 (and also R5) are priced at the same ip. R1 at 120 R2 at 140 R3 & R4 & R5 at 165, by my calculations. [b:7062dd0ada]again, i dont have access to the pricing model, i am simply backing into the calculations.[/b:7062dd0ada] but when you are given over 2200 batters and 1500 pitchers, backing into the prices is not a challenging exercise. this is why R1 and R2 are worth a lot less in ATG6. they use the same assumptions as the 200x sets, but the pricing model assumes that the super reliever issue has been fixed, and hence R3 R4 R5 are not priced at their abused, gamed, and what i call cheat level IP. [/quote:7062dd0ada]

For a R1 to get into 120 innings, he would either have to pitch in 120 games (not possible as HAL will not use him in three consecutive games). Or he would have to pitch 1.2 innings per game in 72 games. Sustainable, but not without pitching fatigued, thereby f-ing up his stats. I'd think 80 would be a better assumption for R1, as that is closer to actual closer utilization. For a not-challenging exercise, you are not meeting the challenge all that well.

[quote:7062dd0ada="weinberg"]again, i have no issue with the super reliever usage, as long as it stays in a random auto league. that keeps team themes fresh and it is fun. so yes, i have a couple murray teams and a few gossage teams and even one sutter team. same as i have a team with all 0.5m starters. same as i have a team with the 4 biggest non stars all on F0. same as i have a team with 8 platoon SP. same as i have a team with gossage at 360ip with a sub 2.50 era. if i used gossage like that in a barnstormers event would i consider it cheating? absolutely. in the barnstormers team you are referencing, sutter pitched 185 ip for me. do i consider that cheating since he was only priced at 165 ip? 185 vs 165 is legit. so, of course not. would i consider it cheating if i made him pitch 300 or 350 ip. of course. 250? yes. 200. eh, probably not. anything above 200? it starts to game the system, so yes. the point is, if it gets questionable, men should have the respect to behave like men and correct it on their own. [/quote:7062dd0ada]

So, it's okay to cheat when it's merely 1-2 teams on the line, but with actual baseball tickets and a subscription to The (printed) Sporting News, then cheating is out? What you are basically saying when you opine that it's okay to use Super R in any old league but not in Barnstormers is that the stakes of the competition define the rules. Aside from the obvious lack of "Super R" rules in Barnstormers, the absurdity of stakes defining rules is astounding.

[quote:7062dd0ada="weinberg"]if you want to compete, like men would, then you build a legit team, like a man would. i admit, i do trash talk a lot, because trash talking keeps the game fresh. however, any time i go head to head, i do it in an upstanding way. when my teams win, i want it to because i built the best team, not because i found some cheap loophole to exploit. [/quote:7062dd0ada]

If by "talking trash" you mean torturing the data until it fits your agenda, then yes, you have talked a lot of trash.

[cristano1]

salt: which assumptions are incorrect? i have spent a lot of time creating a correct pricing model, so am always willing to discuss key assumptions.

for example: if i sort RP based on era (as calculated by me, but any similar metric is fine, runs per season is fine too), you can see that the current pricing model makes little to no correction for anything above R3. which, in and of its self, is fine. since R3 vs R4 vs R5 makes little difference in ATG since it is very hard to get a SP pulled before the 6th unless he is getting mauled. so in my opinion, that is a valid assumption.

where the model falls apart is that an R3/R4/R5 is expected to pitch 165 ip. again, i am fine with that assumption also, since unless you game the system, rp will stay under 200 ip. and i say "falls apart" because it rests on the assumption that the game engine wont be manipulated.

as for gates brown, do you have issue with how i say he is being priced. clearly the pricing model must adjust for him being a 9R (as in, no one would ever use him versus lefty starters). and because his price point is 5.02m, i think that validates the assumptions that i have made. i think we can all agree that gates brown isnt being priced at 5.02m and expected to only bat 92 times in a season.

again, ever since danny graves could go 330 in the 2005 set, people have complained and complained about RP abuse. i thought it was clearly a cheat that upstanding managers didnt participate in. now, i am not sure what to think. on the one hand, most of you support it. but on that same hand, most of you are buddy buddy with petro. i feel like tour events, and challenge leagues such as this one, there is no place for that.

about rabidly defending an argument... please, give me a break. ever since 2005 it has been the clear opinion of the general public that super relievers are at best gaming the system, and at worst, outright cheating. friend of petro or not, youve been around far too long to not know this as well.

finally, the super reliever issue has nothing to do with the 142 complete games that mr bbw noted. that is almost how starters are priced anyway. if you are getting 360 ip out of a S9* that is priced assuming 330 ip, that is the equivalent of getting 180 ip out of a super reliever (360 / 330 x 165). not 300 ip.

[cristano1]

potkettle: you are right with the gates injury. it should be a 92% rather than 85%. I was quoting from memory and thought he was a 2 injury not a 1 injury. So Gates is priced at 400 ab not 375. but i still dont see the issue with gates. he is clearly not priced at the 92 real life AB, so what would it matter if someone used him for more than 92 AB?