 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Sim Forums » Check This Out! » most overachieving team??????
ME
[url]http://www.simdynasty.com/rosterp.jsp?teamid=2604[/url]
they are 74-13 despite all pitchers being rated B- (except their setup/closer who is a B and was traded for)
ALL of their starting hitting and a few backups have power of A and most have contact of B, but they are weak at defense. They lead the NL in runs scored and runs allowed, leading the majors in runs as well.
are they just lucky or did we find out how to beat the simdynasty system!
Bad thing for me is they are in my game, but good thing for me is im in the AL and dont have to play them until the world series, and i have a nice lead in the AL.
most overachieving team??????
September 02, 2003 at 06:54AM View BBCode
Shortened-Season Jimy Williams League St. Louis Cardinals[url]http://www.simdynasty.com/rosterp.jsp?teamid=2604[/url]
they are 74-13 despite all pitchers being rated B- (except their setup/closer who is a B and was traded for)
ALL of their starting hitting and a few backups have power of A and most have contact of B, but they are weak at defense. They lead the NL in runs scored and runs allowed, leading the majors in runs as well.
are they just lucky or did we find out how to beat the simdynasty system!
Bad thing for me is they are in my game, but good thing for me is im in the AL and dont have to play them until the world series, and i have a nice lead in the AL.
Duff77
(Runs Scored)^1.83
---------------------------------------------------------
(Runs Scored)^1.83 + (Runs Allowed)^1.83
As bad as their pitching is, it may just be that they score SO MANY runs that you still can't beat them.
September 03, 2003 at 05:09AM View BBCode
You know, I don't think this is necessairly out of balance. I've never in my life seen a big league team with those kind of power and RBI numbers. The thing to do is computer a pythgorean win-loss for this team. It shows you what their winning percentage should be based on how many runs they've allowed and how many they've scored.(Runs Scored)^1.83
---------------------------------------------------------
(Runs Scored)^1.83 + (Runs Allowed)^1.83
As bad as their pitching is, it may just be that they score SO MANY runs that you still can't beat them.
Anonymous
runs allowed 487
they are now 77-14 (.856 w/l %)
i dont have a calucalator to put it to the power of 1.83 :(
September 03, 2003 at 02:25PM View BBCode
runs scored 779runs allowed 487
they are now 77-14 (.856 w/l %)
i dont have a calucalator to put it to the power of 1.83 :(
swerve
September 03, 2003 at 11:56PM View BBCode
I would say lucky. Not sure if I have every seen a WP like that and the only teams close have hitting and pitching. BTW, using the system their WP is only .615.
ME
September 04, 2003 at 12:09AM View BBCode
yes, they must be incredibly lucky, they are now 80-13, the second best record in the NL is 54 wins, second best overall is my team which has 62.
happy
September 04, 2003 at 02:35AM View BBCode
AND IM HATING IT! my team is great, and there is nothing i can do about it
Duff77
My math teacher always said to show my work, so...
(Runs Scored)^1.83
---------------------------------------------------
(Runs Scored)^1.83 + (Runs Allowed)^1.83
(779)^1.83=204018
(487)^1.83=82828
so...
204018
-------------------------------
204018+82828=286846
204018/286846=.711
September 04, 2003 at 06:03AM View BBCode
When I did the pythg. Winning PCT, I got .711. That should put them at about 64-21 (at the time of ME's last post). They're nearly 15 games ahead of where they should be. ME could be right. Power might be the secret of SD.My math teacher always said to show my work, so...
(Runs Scored)^1.83
---------------------------------------------------
(Runs Scored)^1.83 + (Runs Allowed)^1.83
(779)^1.83=204018
(487)^1.83=82828
so...
204018
-------------------------------
204018+82828=286846
204018/286846=.711
jigakoeochiro
September 16, 2003 at 04:24PM View BBCode
i also find that velocity seems to be more valuable as well. all my rotation to start the year had B+ or higher velocity and 4 had a- or higher 2 with A. i won the series with the best league era and a .254 ba but led the league with 240+ homers. a power game seems indeed to be the favored one.
farfetched
September 16, 2003 at 07:48PM View BBCode
Yes, power is the most important. But I'm 17 games under .500, with 5 pitchers B- velocity or above. The control was the problem... I had Cs and Ds, despite putting about 45-50 in my draft prefs for control. Until I started adding B and A control pitchers, despite D and F (yes, i have an F velocity pitcher with a winning record :P) velocity ratings, I was somewhere near 30 games below .500... Control, imo, has the sway in my pitching staff.
jigakoeochiro
September 16, 2003 at 08:02PM View BBCode
its the high velocity numbers like B+ and above. as i explained earlier i think my whole pitching staff had it.
Bob
September 16, 2003 at 08:05PM View BBCode
The general consensus is that control is more important in this game than velocity. In my experience a guy with C+ velocity and A control is more valuable than a guy with A velocity and C+ control.
Unclescam777
On the other hand i had a pitcher with a C- velocity and a A- in control and he did absolutely horrible. Still, in simdynasty control generally is a more important factor. I've had pitchers with a D in velocity who absolutely dominated.
September 17, 2003 at 03:23PM View BBCode
bob I wish I could agree with you but my closer has an A velocity and a C+ control and he does really good. In the one season where I actually conteded he won the fireman award, and in the next season where i began rebuilding and played 7 of my 8 players out of position he still only had a whip of around 1.20On the other hand i had a pitcher with a C- velocity and a A- in control and he did absolutely horrible. Still, in simdynasty control generally is a more important factor. I've had pitchers with a D in velocity who absolutely dominated.
Duff77
September 18, 2003 at 04:23AM View BBCode
Which, if you think about it, makes perfect sense. There are a few guys in the league who can throw it hard, and throw it anywhere, and get people out. It's rare, but it happens. More often, guys who throw really hard but can't find the plate will get shelled. In contrast, there are lots of guys who don't throw hard but get away with it because they have great command. Jamie Moyer, Greg Maddux...there are lots of guys like that. Lots of guys like that get shelled, too, but on balance I think control should matter more than velocity.
farfetched
September 18, 2003 at 04:44AM View BBCode
Duff, take a look at the Sturgeons' rotation... lmao :D
Duff77
September 18, 2003 at 05:40AM View BBCode
With a staff like that you'd better hope control is more important than velocity. :)
BonillaGuy
That being said, with all the single seasons Ive played and 4+ years in Dynasty, to me, in my experience (which is not much compared to a lot of vets on here) there seems to be a certain formula that works, but makes no sense. Like a pitcher with B+ Velocity and C Control will be great and a pitcher with A+ Velocity and C Control will be horrible. So, nothing is for sure. I dont know if that even begins to make sense, but it's something I seem to notice
September 23, 2003 at 01:37AM View BBCode
Im with the Control being #1 people. I had a pitcher in a single season league win 23 games with a 2.20 or so ERA with D+ Velocity! Now, he did have A+ control. But the season before, I had guys with I think D or so Velocity, with A, and A- control and they got rocked, so I guess there is a fine line between good and bad when you throw that soft, i.e. either A+ and no less is needed, or D+ is just high enough.That being said, with all the single seasons Ive played and 4+ years in Dynasty, to me, in my experience (which is not much compared to a lot of vets on here) there seems to be a certain formula that works, but makes no sense. Like a pitcher with B+ Velocity and C Control will be great and a pitcher with A+ Velocity and C Control will be horrible. So, nothing is for sure. I dont know if that even begins to make sense, but it's something I seem to notice
Pages: 1