Trust and SOM

If team normalization exists shouldn't we expect teams on pace to lose 100 games to have season ending win streaks?

Also, if it is on I would expect it to happen in every league that the best team would have a season ending losing streak. Should not be too hard to track and document that.

If team normalization exists shouldn't we expect teams on pace to lose 100 games to have season ending win streaks?

Also, if it is on I would expect it to happen in every league that the best team would have a season ending losing streak. Should not be too hard to track and document that.

That totally depends on the parameters of how normalization works.

If the normalization involves HR zapping should be able to obtain relatively reliable evidence by tracking several bomber teams for a pattern. Probably could not prove it without repeating a test similar to Treyomo.

If more broad team normalization exists that punishes teams on pace for 100+ wins that should be easier to produce objective proof. Just go back to all your 100+ win teams, or 95+ or whatever cutoff you think the normalization happens at. Compile records for all those teams for the first 141 games. Then compile the records for the remaining 21 games. Eliminate any leagues where you rested even one player to prevent pre-playoff injuries. Compare the records. If team normalization exists then you should always see a drop in winning percentage for those last 21 games. If you see a dropoff in some but not all then it is just luck and coincidence at work. If you see it in all then you have objective evidence to present to strato.

Or for those running a lot of teams at the 141 mark capture the misc stats showing the x rolls at the 141 game mark and again at the end of season. Compare the ratios for any difference.

Relatively easy spreadsheet formulas/comparisions to set up if you have the data captured in excel spreadsheets for either the misc pages comparing pitcher/hitter rolls or standings captures. Won loss records would be problematic for previously completed teams as you would have to analyze games from the schedule to get that last 21 game record. But going forward if anyone really believes normalization is in play they should start capturing that data and doing the spreadsheet comparisions.

I have been crabbing about this kind of stuff forever. No one will ever convince me that there isn't something going on behind the scenes that we aren't privy to.

Here's a recent example:
I have a team active right now that started out the season 20-10. The last 63 games they are 42-21. That's a combined 62-31 (.667 winning percentage).

But in between those two streaks they went on a 5-19 skid.

How does a team that plays .667 ball for 93 games go on a 5-19 skid (which included an 11 game losing streak)????

A month or two back, I went through and looked at all my "recent" teams and found that I had more teams win championships that had 87 or less wins than I did of my teams with 94 or more wins. The numbers of each were roughly equal and I'm talking about something like 43 playoff teams in total.

I'm sorry, but that simply makes NO SENSE.

I've had a good number of teams that finished with both the best record in their league and the best run differential in the league knocked out in the Semis by an inferior team that my team had owned in the regular season.

Best example of that was a recent team I had that won 104 games and had a run differential of +270 or so that got swept in the Semis by a 79-83 regular season team. Seriously???

How does a team that plays .667 ball for 93 games go on a 5-19 skid (which included an 11 game losing streak)????

Explain the 64 Phillies.
Explain the 2012 Rangers.
Explain the wild card Red Sox coming from 3 games down that year to beat the Yankees.
Explain that same wild card Red Sox beating a 105 win Cardinal team.
Explain 2005 when a 100 win Cardinal team failed to make the world series while an 89 win wild card Astro team did.
While you are at it explain how the 2006 Cardinals who barely won division with 83 wins managed to win the world series against the 95 win wild card Tigers.

You think MLB has normalization?

I love grassy knoll theories. They are extremely entertaining. But am I to believe your team got off to a .667 start and after 30 games the software decided you were too good and normalized your team and then once you got to a losing record denormalized your team and allowed you to go on an extended .667 streak. Statistical anomolies happen. I think there is a lot of paranoia floating around here. And I think most if not all of it is unjustified.

Could argue the first 21 games were within division. Maybe you matched up well. Then you went on a stretch where you played teams you did not match up well. Or maybe your team is in that schedule slot that has an extended road trip and an extended home stand.

Bottom line I do not buy in to all this hocus pocus normalization is the reason my team does not win a championship every league. To be honest a lot of this comes across like I am so much better than all of you weaklings and if I am not stomping you in to the ground there must be something crooked in the game.
Isn't it just possible there are more than just 2 or 3 people playing this game who know what they are doing?

Bottom line I do not buy in to all this hocus pocus normalization is the reason my team does not win a championship every league. To be honest a lot of this comes across like I am so much better than all of you weaklings and if I am not stomping you in to the ground there must be something crooked in the game.

Bingo!

Or maybe normalization kicks in only when winning percentage becomes .719 and games played = 121 and kicks out when the winning percentage drops below .615 and games played = 139. That would be easy to program and nobody would suspect any criminal activity. Sort of like the wife who poisons her husband slowly or the bookkeeper who embezzles in small amounts.


I dismiss no arguments from either side.

i think i'm sorta in the Bingo! camp.

Or maybe normalization kicks in only when winning percentage becomes .719 and games played = 121 and kicks out when the winning percentage drops below .615 and games played = 139. That would be easy to program and nobody would suspect any criminal activity. Sort of like the wife who poisons her husband slowly or the bookkeeper who embezzles in small amounts.


I dismiss no arguments from either side.

Paul- now that is an intelligent response- and one I totally agree with- we dont know 100% one way or the other.

What we DO know is that it has been on in the past- so for those dismissing it- gotta at least know your history here;
and at the very least pay attention to the people who were here when it happened.

For those saying its the stuff about stomping on opponents- they seem to forget that its a number of the better players here who are already winning quite a bit that are saying this- so maybe just maybe those same people have a handle on something.

But then again, some people don't like to listen to others in the first place.