what does this mean / imply?

Jimmer,

The links to your strategy settings send me to my own teams.

When it comes to those card sets, I have no idea what works and what doesn't.

You raise an interesting point, and this kinda sorta follows along with what strether is saying (I think, but who really knows?) All of our team building is shaped by our own personal experiences with the game. It's very hard to step away from what appears to be so obvious to us individually. But if you can, it often leads to insights and conclusions you may not previously have considered.

I made what I was saying very clear in my last posts. It is very possible for a manager to win and win a title with 3s up the middle/in the middle infield.

I'm pretty sure no one disputes that. Heck, even the occasional 4 sneaks in there from time to time. But what is possible and what is conventional are two entirely different things.

Jimmer,

The links to your strategy settings send me to my own teams.

When it comes to those card sets, I have no idea what works and what doesn't.

You raise an interesting point, and this kinda sorta follows along with what strether is saying (I think, but who really knows?) All of our team building is shaped by our own personal experiences with the game. It's very hard to step away from what appears to be so obvious to us individually. But if you can, it often leads to insights and conclusions you may not previously have considered.

Essentially my championship team was set at all normal settings, my worst team was set at Very Aggressive for running and base stealing, aggressive for bunting and hit and run. I've been more active in adjusting the hitter preferences than I did with that awful team, so that also could be a factor.

I'm pretty sure no one disputes that. Heck, even the occasional 4 sneaks in there from time to time. But what is possible and what is conventional are two entirely different things.

I didn't just show it was possible to win and win a title with 3's up the middle, I showed it was quite possible. I never denied that conventional wisdom is conventional. Conventional wisdom is just generally held belief; it is often flawed...like the one about 3's up the middle

I've never understood this one. I've been using 3's at all three middle position since I've started and done just fine. Four of my first 8 teams this year have made the finals with (3's) middle infielders:

Secondly, as I mentioned before, you were the first one who questioned that conventional wisdom, yourself.

Fun With Conventional Wisdom
4. Don't use 3s up the middle.
*Owings and Gennett vs RHP.

Finally, you never answered my question from my first post on the matter:

All my example shows is you can clearly make the finals with 3's in the middle infield. It's hardly enough of a sample size to show you can't win a title with them. Also, if you think it is, you must think there is a substantial difference between a team that makes the Finals and one that wins it. What exactly do you see that difference to be, and how much luck do you see involved in that separation?

I'm truly looking forward to your answer on this.

And here's my fourr(3's) championship teams you didn't address. That makes 8 teams to make the finals and four winners.

Here's my 2010 team the Black Fire that won the championship with Jeff Keppinger at 2b.
http://onlinegames.strat-o-matic.com/team/364479

My 2011 championship team the Seraphim with Jason Kipnis at 2b
http://onlinegames.strat-o-matic.com/team/386123

My 2013 championship team the Wicked Tengu with Hanley Ramirez at Ss
http://onlinegames.strat-o-matic.com/team/1128412

My 90's championship team the Sly Libertines with Jeff Kent at 2b
http://onlinegames.strat-o-matic.com/team/1386346

l.persona just can't grasp that his questions don't get answered because his opinion doesn't matter to most of us LOL

About time for this thread to get locked as well! It must be Friday, talk about a pattern being crystal clear.

Robert. I've actually been politely posting on this thread. You have just come on it and trolled by rudely calling me a childish name. This post will be just fine if people post about the topic like everyone else on this thread has done.

Have an excellent Friday.

With fairly equivalent offensive production, the preferred defense for SS and 2B is a 1 or 2, based on the charts, the number of chances in a game relative to other positions and the number of double plays that can really hold an opponent's scoring opportunities to a minimum. The goal is not to score the most runs - the goal is to outscore your opponent.

I am a relative newbie compared to most of the players in this game, but I just did a quick scan of my 154 completed teams - 25 World Series winners and 49 other teams that made the playoffs...48% of my completed teams have qualified for the playoffs in a wide variety of formats - open leagues, theme leagues, etc. and the majority of my teams featured a 1 or a 2 at the keystone positions...a couple of 3's and a sprinkling of 4's at 2B. (I don't even think there was a "1" SS in the entire 1969 catalog - I may be wrong on that - not sure).

Does that mean it is an absolute that you need a 1 or 2 ? Not in any way. This is indeed a small sample size, but it is just the type of defense up the middle that I am used to and prefer.

As J-Pav mentioned before, there are no absolutes in the SOM game. All types of teams can win (or lose) - keystone defense is one factor.

Feel free to question every sentence of my opinion.