POLL ... Is there some kind of RE-injury bug?

The raw odds of Burgess getting injured is 2 in 216, so once every 108 plate appearances.

I'm not a math wiz, but I'd love to know what the odds are for him to get injured 5 times in only 80 plate appearances???

What parts of the wiki are out of date?

The raw odds of Burgess getting injured is 2 in 216, so once every 108 plate appearances.

I'm not a math wiz, but I'd love to know what the odds are for him to get injured 5 times in only 80 plate appearances???

1 in a thousand 80 plate appearances.
Assumming 640 plate appearances per season Burgess should be injured 5 times in 80 plate appearances once every 125 seasons he is used. Had he been used every time in the 125,000 seasons the top 200 players had played this should have happened 1,000 times. This is really just a question of how often can a 3-1 or 2-11 roll show up in 80 at bats. Of course if Burgess is hurt then the other catcher backing him up if you only have 2 cannot be hurt. In a league of 12 catchers with a injury on the 3 or 11 this would happen to one of the catchers once in every 10 leagues and lead to posting the proof of an injury bug.

Roger Breshnahan has the same injury rating and but was once injured only once on a team I had what are the odds of that? 1 in 71 leagues, slightly less often than Burgess but I would surmise this would not be seen as a sign of bad programming.

Now strat could force it to get exactly one injury every 108 plate appearances and have 5-6 throughout the year so that everything is exactly as it should. But that would suck.

Now strat could force it to get exactly one injury every 108 plate appearances and have 5-6 throughout the year so that everything is exactly as it should. But that would suck.

"Of course if Burgess is hurt then the other catcher backing him up if you only have 2 cannot be hurt."



And what this shows is just another example of what wasn't spelled out *anywhere* by SOM, until the non Charlies among us, fleshed it out for ourselves.

My question was not answered as to what are the odds of a 1 in 108 event happening 5 times in 80 PA's. And who's to say how many more times he will get hurt this season.

And if you look closer, I think he was injured 3 times in probably a 20 PA stretch.

My answer is it isn't zero.

Charlie's answer was that it would happen once during a season about every 125 times Burgess was used on a team.

His counterpoint was something I alluded to as well .... being that we always remember the bad events because they sting--but there are events on the other tail of the distribution too--like the Bresnahan example he gave.

Do we get this upset when a guy with 20 hits on his card is hitting .400 over 30 games?
Maybe not as extreme, but I just had Jim O'Rourke hitting near .400 in about 120 at bats at 100M cap...Was it statistically probable? Heck no--remote chance at the tail end of the distribution of possible batting average he could most likely have after 100+ ABs. But did I question it? HECK no! And now he is at .320 after 150 ABs...so...

And to Nev's point--totally agree that the lack of transparency is ridiculous. There is a lot of it.

Do we get this upset when a guy with 20 hits on his card is hitting .400 over 30 games?
Maybe not as extreme, but I just had Jim O'Rourke hitting near .400 in about 120 at bats at 100M cap...Was it statistically probable? Heck no--remote chance at the tail end of the distribution of possible batting average he could most likely have after 100+ ABs. But did I question it? HECK no!

I agree with Frankie's rejoinder. It is the logical fallacy of "availability bias"--we focus on the thing that seems to effect us most, ignoring the other. Nobody notices, much less complains, when a player doesn't get hurt as much as he should. But if he gets hurt more, then.... So I tempt the injury gods regularly with my lineups, and I can't say that I have felt that my teams are unfairly punished for it. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. Without aggregate data, it is really impossible to say for certain that that injuries happen more/less than they should.

By way of example, I sometimes use Cal Ripkens 4 injury card. It is a great card even with the 4 injury risk. One league he only lost 28 days to injury (6 total injuries) which is amazing. He hit .397 with 42 home runs with 587 PAs. Talk about "dodging raindrops...

For me, when I talk about recurring injuries, it's to show it really could be a black box type of thing, not too complain that it happens...but the only way to show that it might be happening, is to post "Whoa is me" examples.

Sure, that makes sense. Really all this could be put to rest one way or the other if there were a live, mine-able, database that published the raw data.
It wouldn't be that difficult to publish but it would require a resource commitment that wouldn't be revenue positive.