What Do You Make Of This...Injuries

In reality if this were a true occurrence you would be able to predict injuries in advance, what is happening is people looking at injury distributions, ignoring the normal looking ones and drawing conclusions based on what they see recurring on the more unusual combinations. This is similar to power ball - see the link powerball 29 has shown up 18 times in the power ball position in the last two years yet 4 numbers have shown up only 5 times or less. The odds of both 29 being picked 18 times and 31 only 3 times must be over a million to one and those damn government officials want us to believe they use a random system? Yet if this were true you would be able to profitably play 29 going forward and get rich, good luck and I hope you have a lot of money.

http://www.powerball.com/powerball/pb_frequency.asp

EVEN Further is the injury shown to the pitcher- sure the DH can be injured 4 times in one season- but what are the odds that it happens when hes At Bat with the VERY SAME pitcher each time- and no times with any other starter or reliever

Can you explain what you mean or show some examples? Its not clear to me what you are trying to say. The DH is injured off of his card. The pitcher is injured on a 6-12 roll (pitcher's card) when the other team's DH is at bat.

One of Nev's posted examples shows the SAME pitcher Dutch Leonard injured 3 times in 58 games-12 starts, and not a single other pitcher with an injury.
The point is that how would that same guy be the only one injured and not a single other pitcher?

Im dying here with the 'if the dice rolls 12 five times in a row the chances are still 1 in 11 that it will come up 12 again' explanations- c'mon guys, just because something is within the realm of a statistical possibility does not mean that all is well.

The pitcher is injured on a 6-12 roll (pitcher's card) when the other team's DH is at bat.

That is the rule. But logically a DH win an injury on 1-12 should get injured at the same rate as opposing pitchers.
Anyone run an analysis if that is the case.

This also points to what I consider an inherent weakness in the Strato injury model. In theory if I select a DH suitable for leadoff (Billy Hamilton) the statistical odds of an opposing pitcher getting injured is higher than if I have a more traditional power hitter buried at 6 or 7 in my batting order. Now I am not saying there is a lot to be gained via this strategy since pitchers rarely get injured at all. But who the DH is and where they bat in the lineup should not have any impact on whether a pitcher gets injured.

Personally, I would be a whole hell of a lot more concerned if every hitter in my starting lineup with one injury roll got hurt 3 times a season, and every hitter with two chances was injured 6 times.

Why?

Because that would mean they were dicking around with the dice roll generator to make every roll come up the expected number of times each season. And that would mean that it would be a winning strategy to trade guys off to hot starts for guys off to bad ones. And also to tinker with your lineup to put all the underachievers in the first half in critical spots in the lineup for the 2nd half.

So there's the "glass half full" perspective to this issue.

Think about it for a while.

So there's the "glass half full" perspective to this issue.

Think about it for a while.

How long?

MY glass has a hole in it.

Then there is that physics professor who says the glass is completely full yet not truly full.
Assume everyone knows that story by now.

To quote the good Professor Hellekalek of the University of Salsburg:

"Random Number Generators are like antibiotics, every type of generator has its un-wanted side effects. With random number generators, there are no guarantees, only predictions. This is not because the word ``randomness'' is involved but because the finitely many random numbers we produce and their transformed variates cannot fit every imaginable distribution well enough. Every generator has its regularities which, ocassionally, may become deficiencies. Hence, in a given application, even reliable generators may fail."

Very interesting quote from Prof Hellekalek.
Might add based on what I have studied as a programmer on producing "random" numbers I have often wondered how closely the strat generator follows the assumption that all numbers 1-6 will be equally likely in the dice roll simulation, or 1-20 in the split card simulation.

Reminded of the old Commodore 64 back in the 80s. Its random number generator was really a preloaded set of numbers. I tried running random numbers for some stupid game I was playing, and every time I shut down and started it up again, the exact same list of random numbers came up again and again in perfect order.

Awhile back there was an owner here who said "better" random number generators are very very expensive...knowing how tight as ship SOM runs I doubt they paid any big price, so it might be Hal asking his wife for a bunch of numbers each night. lol