Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365

That's pretty precise!

I'm not going to be satisfied until we come up with a lineup that everyone agrees CANNOT win 62 games...

Come on people! Make my lineup worse!!

C - Weiters 2.58
1B - Napoli 5.66
2B - Pedroia 8.11
SS - Simmons 5.15
3B - Longoria 8.77
LF - McLouth 3.20
CF - Gardner 5.25
RF - Bruce 6.71

45.43

C- Russell Martin
1B- Anthony Rizzo
2B- Brian Dozier
SS- Andrelton Simmons
3B- Kyle Seager
LF- Starling Marte
CF- Michael Saunders
RF- Alex Rios
DH- Alex Gordon

$45.83

C- Ryan Lavarnway $2.81
1B- Billy Butler $3.78
2B- Brandon Phillips $4.80
SS- Didi Gregorius $3.80
3B- Donnie Murphy $6.23
LF- Shin-Soo Choo $8.74
CF- Peter Bourjos $3.06
RF- Giancarlo Stanton $6.85
DH- Christian Yelich $5.42

$45.49

Spider 67 wrote:C- Ryan Lavarnway $2.81
1B- Billy Butler $3.78
2B- Brandon Phillips $4.80
SS- Didi Gregorius $3.80
3B- Donnie Murphy $6.23
LF- Shin-Soo Choo $8.74
CF- Peter Bourjos $3.06
RF- Giancarlo Stanton $6.85
DH- Christian Yelich $5.42

$45.49

This group isn't too bad to me.

Isn't is strange how ugly is in the eye of the beholder??

I'm thinking the exact same thing as LM about all the lineups...I really like some of these guys and a lot of times you find that it only takes two or three guys to make it all go. I think a good pitching plan could make any of these lineups compete!

In related but currently off-topic news, I ran a quick scan of my last 10 completed leagues for best/worst records and drops. The 10 best teams averaged 95-67 records and averaged three drops (five of the teams had zero drops), while the 10 worst teams averaged 69-93 records and averaged 14 drops per team (although the range was very wide). I know the fun is in fighting the conventional wisdom, however, you have to be kidding me and yourself if you think that in the long run you make your team better by shedding salary.

While I have no doubt there are Championship teams to be found with a dozen or more drops, the battlefield is absolutely littered with 100 loss teams for every one of those you can find.

Who's on the left side of the bell curve?

1. Newbs
2. Salary dumpers
3. Wacky experiments gone wrong

According to baseball-reference a replacement player is worth a .320 winning percentage.
So could it follow that a replacement manager is worth the same?

Is it possible to be worse than .500 without TRYING to be?

I would saty s. Unless you are among the most talented gifted managers ever.

A .500 percentage is exactly average. However, if you are an average manager playing against mostly above average managers your winning percentage should be below .500 no matter how hard you try.

I might even argue that many below average managers only play occasional teams while the better managers play a lot of teams. You are therefore more likely to get in a league with more above average managers than below average. If you are an average manager then your record will be below .500.

The more I stare at our guaranteed loser lineups, the more I can't help think that one handful of $45 mil guys is more or less the same as any other handful of $45 mil guys. Makes you wonder...

Is anybody else seeing it that way too?

Valen wrote:According to baseball-reference a replacement player is worth a .320 winning percentage.
So could it follow that a replacement manager is worth the same?

Is it possible to be worse than .500 without TRYING to be?

I would say yes. Unless you are among the most talented gifted managers ever.

A .500 percentage is exactly average. However, if you are an average manager playing against mostly above average managers your winning percentage should be below .500 no matter how hard you try.

I might even argue that many below average managers only play occasional teams while the better managers play a lot of teams. You are therefore more likely to get in a league with more above average managers than below average. If you are an average manager then your record will be below .500.

I think this is absolutely spot on.