This Has My Attention: New Questions

Frankie,

Lots to unpack there, and I just saw your posts after I posted. My brain is still hurting, so I’m not ready to tackle that yet!

Pythag is ballpark in MLB because the teams are generally very close competitively. The average margin of talent is much less than a typical SOM league almost every time.

See I actually think there's more parity in ATG than in MLB because of the salary cap.

I'll let others take a crack at the rest of Frankie's prompt, I don't have the best mind for theory and always end up skipping steps.

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water…

https://baseballwithr.wordpress.com/201 ... n-theorem/

When your Strat buddy asks you what you’re working on:

https://youtu.be/ijuxsWcH_zI

Thanks for posting this site. I've enjoyed many articles (see the Aaron Judge HR predictor from August of last year). Jim Albert is a Stat professor (specializing in Bayesian Statistics and Inference), baseball fan, and R proponent (a programming language for statistics, predictive modeling, machine learning, etc.) I have his book (Analyzing Baseball with R), and while it is not good for teaching R, it did teach me about data sources, and how to pull and analyze data from sites like retrosheet and statcast.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKAnk2XVnDE

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water…

https://baseballwithr.wordpress.com/201 ... n-theorem/

See first a model is created that closely resembles actuals, then any deviations are called luck making the model good and the team performance not worthy of the actual skill level whether high or low, by this definition the math is always right and the actual game is wrong.

I think that’s three papers now which demonstrate luck follows skill, which of course makes logical sense. In each study, teams outperformed predictions at the top, and teams underperformed predictions at the bottom. Heck, it worked for the guy picking imaginary scores out of a hat! Why is it only in Strat365 that the exact opposite expectation consistently happens?

Great thread by comment numbers -- but does it need to keep going? –- and admittedly so confused about why this is such a big deal. We're really over-thinking everything here. Common sense tells us the Pythag is only one way to predictively measure wins-losses, and in simulation as opposed to real life, of course it may be different. 'Nuff said. Done!

Hey guys I will disengage. I don't want anyone to think I am disparaging them. To many of the assertions here...see they would be a question to noodle over while having a frosty beverage...(Munich Man? )

But as I am already on my last bit of funtastic-ness with this game and have been trying to bleed credits like a form of Zeno's paradox since I last purchased credits in 2020, I wanted to selfishly preserve whatever was left of that fun.

What I find is I don't think any of this can be resolved because satisfactory resolution is likely different for everyone.
So I will tip my cap to everyone that has posted here and I do wish you fun--over luck--as you move through SOM universe.

It really does show that trying to reduce this game to some always-accurate description of outcomes is not fun to me. Like someone (maybe Charlie) said, I don't want to have outcomes decided by past or assumed arbitrary model results... because then why play at all?
It is competing with the people that is fun. Because people are unpredictable. Some less than others.

With that, I will disegage in 3...2...1...
This is fitting and should have no ads...Shutting down HAL...cheers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrBkVL0i5lo