2021 Strat-O-Matic

I think this is a great announcement from Strat-O-Matic. Everyone is free to choose one set or another (2020 traditional and 2020 imagined), assuming both versions will be available here for our online leagues. Personally, I look forward to playing both card sets.

Imagined should stay imaginary

Interesting reactions to the imagined set. Either the real 60 game set or the imagined set to me is an aberation although I'll end up playing either (or both) sets that SOM puts into the online game.

If MLB played a full 162 game schedule last year and SOM announced that they would offer that set as well as a set based on games 40 thru 100 (random 60 consecutive games in the middle of the season) people would be outraged about the set based on only 60 games. What if Jose Abreu had knocked in 60 runs during that stretch people would say that he would never end up with 162 RBI but that is what his "actual" card will be based on in the shortened 2020 set. People would say DJ Lemahieu would never hit .364 over 162 games and that he only happened to be hot between games 40-100 so that shortened set is bogus.

The 2020 60 game set or a possible 162 imagined set is just a new set of cards. Either way would be interesting because the card set is different from the 2019 set which we have been using all year. I don't think too many of us use the cards to attempt to recreate the exact stats that were produced by that player. We pick stadiums that would hopefully maximize that card and other player cards to produce even better results if possible. The fun of this game is bringing together a combination of player cards that end up being better than the combination of player cards 11 other mangers have created no matter if some of your players are based on 112 AB from a 162 game schedule, 650 AB from a 162 game schedule or from a player that only appeared in 60 games in a season or anything in between.

I must admit---I don't like the concept of an imaginary set for online--that basically is the Daily game--we already have an "imaginary set" now--I guess they may print an imaginary set this year for the physical game and that is OK for those that want it--I want the "normal set".

I know 60 games will result in more outlier cards--but it really is no different than the low use players we employ now (and use a lot)--it will just be more of them.

Like the strike seasons--in the 80's and 90s--we just extrapolate stats to 162 games--it will be a multiple of 2.7 for 2020--so multiply AB, 2B, HR etc by 2.7 for the expected totals in 162--of course % stats will be the same (BA,SLG, OPS etc)

As long as we have the ability to play a full season, I don't mind the outliers of a 60 game season. Having said that I'd be fine using the other set for a keeper season.

Interesting reactions to the imagined set. Either the real 60 game set or the imagined set to me is an aberation although I'll end up playing either (or both) sets that SOM puts into the online game.

If MLB played a full 162 game schedule last year and SOM announced that they would offer that set as well as a set based on games 40 thru 100 (random 60 consecutive games in the middle of the season) people would be outraged about the set based on only 60 games. What if Jose Abreu had knocked in 60 runs during that stretch people would say that he would never end up with 162 RBI but that is what his "actual" card will be based on in the shortened 2020 set. People would say DJ Lemahieu would never hit .364 over 162 games and that he only happened to be hot between games 40-100 so that shortened set is bogus.

The 2020 60 game set or a possible 162 imagined set is just a new set of cards. Either way would be interesting because the card set is different from the 2019 set which we have been using all year. I don't think too many of us use the cards to attempt to recreate the exact stats that were produced by that player. We pick stadiums that would hopefully maximize that card and other player cards to produce even better results if possible. The fun of this game is bringing together a combination of player cards that end up being better than the combination of player cards 11 other mangers have created no matter if some of your players are based on 112 AB from a 162 game schedule, 650 AB from a 162 game schedule or from a player that only appeared in 60 games in a season or anything in between.

That's not the same thing. The 60 games is the season, whether anyone likes it or not. A proper anology would be what is they took the regular season and based 2 more complete seasons off of that one. Would that be ok? Instead of imagined let's base 2020 season on 2019 plus what they did this season, is that ok?

What about those players that have great cards as Sep call ups? Those should be normalized going forward?

Your reasoning is fallacious.

I don't get why anyone is complaining here. Strat is creating the imagined set in addition to the traditional set, not instead of the traditional set. You can play with either. You can play both.

I don't get why anyone is complaining here. Strat is creating the imagined set in addition to the traditional set, not instead of the traditional set. You can play with either. You can play both.

It's the precedent they are setting which is not good given their history.

They don't like outliers. Remember the normalization of HR way back when? Why even take the time to normalized card data. Unless they want to normalize other card data going forward.
The Sept call ups now normalized for a 162 game season? Think why they even started this exercise to normalize stats and look at their history and it's a slope I don't want them taking.

I don't get why anyone is complaining here. Strat is creating the imagined set in addition to the traditional set, not instead of the traditional set. You can play with either. You can play both.

It's the precedent they are setting which is not good given their history.

They don't like outliers. Remember the normalization of HR way back when? Why even take the time to normalized card data. Unless they want to normalize other card data going forward.
The Sept call ups now normalized for a 162 game season? Think why they even started this exercise to normalize stats and look at their history and it's a slope I don't want them taking.

Well according to the survey's they sent out, there was a demand for the product. The short answer is to make money.

Both sets are legitimate. The 60 games season is the season- so that set should definitely be in play- and it is.

The 162 imagined (terrible name)- it gives the impression that numbers are just "imagined." The way I understand it (could be mistaken) is that they take the 60 game season stats and project the next 102 games as if it were the most accurate projection of the probable stats for that player, then take the real 60 game stats plus the projected 102 stats and get a 162 game stat. The problem is, for keepers, I've already drafted in supplemental drafts, for example, players who had a really good season for 60 games.

I guess each keeper league could vote something like this:

1. Play only the 60 game season
2. Play only the projected season
3. Turtle's suggestion ( play one season of each- I really like this idea)