Alternate Names/Accounts

"I'm not a statistician but I've managed to do a couple regressions in Excel (I have trouble with LINEST sometimes though, can't always get it to work). The one I can think of off the top of my head is I regressed how different parks affect the run environment. So I start with the average run environment for a given cap/DH, and then I'm able to tell it my park (and my average away park) and it adjusts the run environment up or down accordingly. Surprisingly BP singles have a slightly bigger coefficient than BP homers, which I never would've guessed. I then use that run environment to customize my run expectancy matrix and wOBA coefficients. Then I use those to get my WAR values. Identifying which players correspond to good teams would be an interesting regression experiment but I'm not sure it would be more precise than the values I get from just counting the cards using my version of Pelletier's system.

In truth there's a lot more I could be doing with the data. The main things I've used it for so far are determining run environments for different parks and caps, and determining popularity of players at each cap, i.e., what % of leagues is a player rostered in at a given cap. But the player card values are just derived from Diamond Dope."

Really interesting, I appreciate you sharing. Are the T-stat significant in your regressions? I would assume 500 is enough data for there to actually be a meaningful relationship.

I really like your concept of identifying which players at which caps have been used the most. That seems like a very simply and intuitive approach to narrowing down the player set. I suspect that would work on both the hitter and pitching side. I would think the next level would then be to maximize those players by the proper park. Again really interesting.

As I mentioned early, without delegating this to an analyst it will have to be my retirement project. Do you use Python to scrap or R or some other language. Curious if you like one better than another.

D

You're over my head with a lot of that, I'm a simple Excel jockey, don't know any coding beyond that and use Parsehub for the scraping. Identifying the popularity isn't for identifying the best players though, it's for helping me rank my draft lists. There are loads of popular players I have no interest in and at low caps I end up drafting a surprising amount of unpopular guys.

Thanks for your explanation, OT. I appreciate it. I certainly have run across troll behavior many times over the years and it is very annoying. I just like to be certain that it is as such. But certainly reasonable people can disagree on that assessment.

As I sit here reading MOST of these posts, I can only imagine just how much better the likes of Casey, Weaver, La Russa, Lasorda, McGraw Torre, McCarthy etc. etc. etc. would have been if they only had greater computer skills, and were able to gain an advantage over their competition, because of that proficiency.

My six cents worth. For What It's Worth, there's something happening here.

You're over my head with a lot of that, I'm a simple Excel jockey, don't know any coding beyond that and use Parsehub for the scraping. Identifying the popularity isn't for identifying the best players though, it's for helping me rank my draft lists. There are loads of popular players I have no interest in and at low caps I end up drafting a surprising amount of unpopular guys.

Makes a lot of sense Austin thanks for the conversation.

You're over my head with a lot of that, I'm a simple Excel jockey, don't know any coding beyond that and use Parsehub for the scraping. Identifying the popularity isn't for identifying the best players though, it's for helping me rank my draft lists. There are loads of popular players I have no interest in and at low caps I end up drafting a surprising amount of unpopular guys.

Makes a lot of sense Austin thanks for the conversation.

You bet. And just to go back to my original point (which this became a huge distraction from and I kind of wish I hadn't brought it up)...this database is really nice input to have, but if I didn't have it, I believe my teams at low caps would still be about as good as they have been. I'd be missing out on more players, but as long as I'm valuing the cards correctly, the difference between those players and their replacements is going to be minimal. And at high caps, everyone wants the same players, and almost all the players you put on your draft card are owned in 100% of leagues, so the database barely enters into the rankings at high caps. Instead they're ranked by card value (or more accurately, card value converted into a z-score by position). Which any new player can theoretically calculate just as well as any veteran. So the advantage veterans have in terms of filling out draft cards, while real, is probably overstated in terms of impact. What matters much more is accurate card evaluation. And card evaluation is something that players who are new to 365 may have lots of experience doing in other Strat contexts such as draft leagues. In conclusion, be nice to new players and if they're successful don't assume they are alts, maybe they just know Strat well from other formats, thank you for coming to my TED talk.

Austin-

No, this last point is incorrect.
No one is saying be mean to anyone...
Most of these folks are in fact vets playing under different names.
Im not sure how to stress this enough- its not one or two or three people that Im referring to here.

The majority of people that do play under new names have strong reluctance to say what names they previously played under. Shady? Forgetful? Embarrassed? Could be that or a bunch more reasons, but they do go to great lengths to "not say".
Maybe they have the right idea though, bc....I'd prefer us to play this game anonymously anyway.

The majority of people that do play under new names have strong reluctance to say what names they previously played under. Shady? Forgetful? Embarrassed? Could be that or a bunch more reasons, but they do go to great lengths to "not say".
Maybe they have the right idea though, bc....I'd prefer us to play this game anonymously anyway.

Yep-
There are people we've asked straight who say things like 'oh i forget' or 'i play under a bunch of different ones' - but refuse to actually say who they are.
one thing thats a constant in life though are relationships for good or bad;
sometimes I have to wonder if its better to just play the computer version if thats going to be the case-
bc if you cant have a real conversation with folks then whats the point?

Can't imagine being so vain that I'd create another identity just to improve my scores. They're bad enough as it is for one identity, let alone two.