The Unwritten Book is Finally Written!
An in-depth analysis of: The sacrifice bunt, batter/pitcher matchups, the intentional base on balls, optimizing a batting lineup, hot and cold streaks, clutch performance, platooning strategies, and much more. Read Excerpts & Customer Reviews
Rex 12:
First, Obama doesn't have a "bill."
Second, Section 246 of the House Education and Labor bill (probably one of the more "liberal" versions of the legislation) reads in its entirety:
"Sec. 246. No Federal Payment for Undocumented Aliens.
"Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."
If the objectives are:
1) A counting, not a rate, stat;
2) Where outs = 0; and
3) that is relatively straightforward (i.e, uses only widely-available stats -- hence, no RBOE -- and minimizes number of calculations),why not:
2*(HBP+NIBB)+1.5*H+TB
If you also want to satisify objective (4): express as runs, then:
Multiply the above by .31 (or, more simply, approximate by dividing by 3).
Three options:
1) GPA, or (1.8*OBP+SLG)/4. Very easy to compute. Scaled to batting average, but I think that's a plus. (Note: (2*OBP+SLG)/4 would be even easier to compute, and it's not too bad.)
2) The simplified wOBA that was posted a few months ago: .36*(2*BB+1.5*H+TB)/(AB+BB)
3) Not a rate stat, but I still like Estimated Runs Produced
Another approach, which we followed in a league that I ran several years ago, was as follows:
The first two rounds were snake-ordered. Then, the third round picked in the same order as the second round. After that, it resumed snake-ordering.
It seemed to work pretty well.
What if you did the worst at each position? I wonder if the magnitude would be the same.
I also wonder if there is any difference between CF and the corner positions, and among the three (non-1B) infield positions.
I think the scoring system in tennis is not optimal. The vast majority of games are won by the server -- as a result, most points won by the player not serving are "wasted".
What if tennis followed the rules of table tennis? Each player would serve five times, then switch. You could play up to something like 31 points. That would be the equivalent of a set.
Then maybe have 4 out of 7 sets -- I think that would be pretty similar to a current match.
When folks first questioned the cards, the designer denied there was a problem. It may have been a natural, if unfortunate, reaction to being called out on an error. I understand that the problem has now been fixed (although I haven't verified this, and am not sure if the fix was made for all of the varieties of the game).
The episode did leave many with a bad taste in their mouths. Given that the game's promotional material seeks to show that it's better than Strat-o-Matic, the fact that it was (initially) much less accurate than Strat was a bit of a problem.
It sure made for a heated discussion though! Nothing seems to get the juices flowing like debates over which games are the best/worst!!
As a participant in the forum debate and a sometime poster here, I will summarize:
Baseball Classics is a "50-50" game; that is, half the results come from the batter's card and half from the pitcher's card (just like Strat-o-Matic). But, when it was originally released, the cards did not take this into account. To use a simple example, if the league average BA is .250 and you have a batter who hit .300, the results off his card should produce an average of .350 -- that way, when it's averaged with the pitchers, it will produce .300. Baseball Classics didn't do that -- the results off the batter's card yielded .300 -- thus, he'd be expected to hit only .275. The same was true for all results (HR rate, etc.)
Apparently that flaw (pretty basic) has been fixed now.
There are a lot of good tabletop games out there -- my personal favorite is Replay Baseball, which I cannot recommend highly enough in its balance between quick play and realism.
As a tabletop game player, I tend to think about many of the subjects discussed here in terms of how to "card" the player -- e.g., use actual or standard platoon splits? have pitchers control opponents' BABIP? etc.
Following up on mgl/289 and the excellent column in The Hardball Times, I have two simple questions:
1) Does it *ever* make sense to walk the bases loaded?
2) Is it the dumbest play in baseball?
My answers are "no" and "yes".
Rex 12: First, Obama doesn't have a "bill." Second, Section 246 of the House Education and Labor bill (probably one of the more "liberal" versions of the legislation) reads in its entirety: "Sec. 246. No Federal Payment for Undocumented Aliens. "Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."
Poz's Production (Craig S. Tyle) —
If the objectives are: 1) A counting, not a rate, stat; 2) Where outs = 0; and 3) that is relatively straightforward (i.e, uses only widely-available stats -- hence, no RBOE -- and minimizes number of calculations),why not: 2*(HBP+NIBB)+1.5*H+TB If you also want to satisify objective (4): express as runs, then: Multiply the above by .31 (or, more simply, approximate by dividing by 3).
The Poz challenge to simplicity (Craig S. Tyle) —
Three options: 1) GPA, or (1.8*OBP+SLG)/4. Very easy to compute. Scaled to batting average, but I think that's a plus. (Note: (2*OBP+SLG)/4 would be even easier to compute, and it's not too bad.) 2) The simplified wOBA that was posted a few months ago: .36*(2*BB+1.5*H+TB)/(AB+BB) 3) Not a rate stat, but I still like Estimated Runs Produced
Is the fantasy baseball snake-draft fair? (Craig S. Tyle) —
Another approach, which we followed in a league that I ran several years ago, was as follows: The first two rounds were snake-ordered. Then, the third round picked in the same order as the second round. After that, it resumed snake-ordering. It seemed to work pretty well.
How much is a great fielder worth? 25 runs. (Craig S. Tyle) —
What if you did the worst at each position? I wonder if the magnitude would be the same. I also wonder if there is any difference between CF and the corner positions, and among the three (non-1B) infield positions.
Federer v Nadal (Craig S. Tyle) —
I think the scoring system in tennis is not optimal. The vast majority of games are won by the server -- as a result, most points won by the player not serving are "wasted". What if tennis followed the rules of table tennis? Each player would serve five times, then switch. You could play up to something like 31 points. That would be the equivalent of a set. Then maybe have 4 out of 7 sets -- I think that would be pretty similar to a current match.
Baseball Board Games (Craig S. Tyle) —
When folks first questioned the cards, the designer denied there was a problem. It may have been a natural, if unfortunate, reaction to being called out on an error. I understand that the problem has now been fixed (although I haven't verified this, and am not sure if the fix was made for all of the varieties of the game). The episode did leave many with a bad taste in their mouths. Given that the game's promotional material seeks to show that it's better than Strat-o-Matic, the fact that it was (initially) much less accurate than Strat was a bit of a problem. It sure made for a heated discussion though! Nothing seems to get the juices flowing like debates over which games are the best/worst!!
Baseball Board Games (Craig S. Tyle) —
As a participant in the forum debate and a sometime poster here, I will summarize: Baseball Classics is a "50-50" game; that is, half the results come from the batter's card and half from the pitcher's card (just like Strat-o-Matic). But, when it was originally released, the cards did not take this into account. To use a simple example, if the league average BA is .250 and you have a batter who hit .300, the results off his card should produce an average of .350 -- that way, when it's averaged with the pitchers, it will produce .300. Baseball Classics didn't do that -- the results off the batter's card yielded .300 -- thus, he'd be expected to hit only .275. The same was true for all results (HR rate, etc.) Apparently that flaw (pretty basic) has been fixed now. There are a lot of good tabletop games out there -- my personal favorite is Replay Baseball, which I cannot recommend highly enough in its balance between quick play and realism. As a tabletop game player, I tend to think about many of the subjects discussed here in terms of how to "card" the player -- e.g., use actual or standard platoon splits? have pitchers control opponents' BABIP? etc.
Sabermetric Playoffs (Craig S. Tyle) —
Following up on mgl/289 and the excellent column in The Hardball Times, I have two simple questions: 1) Does it *ever* make sense to walk the bases loaded? 2) Is it the dumbest play in baseball? My answers are "no" and "yes".