STEVENSTEFFANNI wrote:it was 30 seasons! where are you getting 7 games from? I wouldn't call having the best record and winning the title only 27% of the time in 30 seasons a small sample that's why I asked if anyone else had similar results
Steve was talking about the 7 games of a playoff series. If you were more thoughtful about it, you would have realized that. But you're into voodoo. Steve isn't--which is why he is so successful and a fun opponent too.
Once you get to the playoffs in a 12 team league, you expect a base 25% chance to win--regardless of the record.
Because in a short series where it is first to 4 wins, any team can have a streak, especially accounting for badly timed injuries.
8 of 30 is actually higher than expectation. And Badjam showed another set of data that shows an opposite example from what you had.
So what?
Additionally, the topic regarding the performance of a league's highest performing regular season teams has been well-worn here for years.
They typically have at least one of two characteristics:
1. Performed very well against their division--which means they were tuned to those parks/opponents.
2. Got a lot of wins against a very weak opponent or two.
Here is a great example:
https://365.strat-o-matic.com/league/455170Best record in league but in the weakest division. Lost semis. Had the best RunDiff too. Best division record.
Happened to me many times. And I always tip my cap to the opposing manager. That's better than sulking like a child.
This team qualifies under your "metric"--but there's no "explanation" needed--when you look at this team under your metric, the answer would be so what?
I also have many examples as the best record and winning it all.
I still don't understand why it is hard to understand.
But even more, I don't understand the argument that someone is pulling strings at SOM to facilitate some kinds of outcomes. Especially when the outcomes are about as expected by chance.
Tiring. Not sure what your holy grail is, but it doesn't exist.