That said, I believe dmurph said he's using league averages.     If Hamilton has 76/48 in negative/plus plays and Gleeman has 48/37 averages, it's still averages.

The ultimate question is: Does this really mean anything or are most leagues "similar"?  I decided to look at one of my higher rated leagues vs my lowest rated league (and invite readers to guess which is higher and which is lower)  vs the no1 league.  FYI My leagues have the same "private world rules"

Criteria: "1. Parity - Leagues were asigned a score based on the best and worst teams.For example, a league with 5 100+ win teams and 5 100+ loss teams, wouldnt fare well in my ranking system. The worse the bottom teams are, and the more dominant the top teams are, the more it affects the rankings." 
     season 21  Team B     100 wins  1        100 loses  2                             season 22    100 wins  3          100 loses 1
     season 21  Team A     100 wins  1        100 loses  4                             season 22     100 wins  3          100 loses 4
     season 21  Team C      100 wins  0        100 loses  0                             season 20     100 wins  2         100 loses 0

advantage team C

Criteria: "2. Fielding - Good owners dont play fielders out of position. I ranked worlds based on +/- fielding stats."
     season 21   Team B   plus plays 55     minus plays 32                          season 22    plus plays 55     minus plays 32
     season 21   Team A   plus plays 52     minus plays  44                         season 22    plus plays 52     minus plays 25
     season  21   Team C   plus plays 62    minus plays  28                        season 20    plus plays  62     minus plays 30

advantage team C

Criteria:  "3. Pitching - The best worlds generally have reasonable eras. Most worlds are bunched very closely in average era. The best worlds will gain a ranking advantage by having the lowest overall ERAs and the worlds with horrid eras are penalized"
     season 21   Team B    average era   4.25                                                season 22   average era  4.05
     season 21    Team A    average  era 3.70                                                season 22   average era  3.69
     season 21    Team C    average era  3.70                                                season 20   average era  4.01

Advantage team A

MY CONCLUSION:  THE MAJORITY OF LEAGUES ARE SIMILAR AND RANKINGS ONLY PERPETUATE STEREOTYPES. 

Cochrane at 155 is a joke.  It is the best world I have played in.  Great core group of owners, good commissioner, low turnover.  I guess we are being penalized by having a dominant Florida franchise but I've played in worlds ranked much higher and didn't enjoy them near as much as this world.

griv, I think the rankings do a pretty good job of defining "good" worlds.   And I define "good" as "competitive".    No matter what ranking system is used, and there have been 5-6 different ones, the same worlds show up at the top.   There's something to them.

RH, enjoyment doesn't really play a part.    Some people inflict pain upon themselves for enjoyment.   That doesn't mean it's a good thing to do.

Posted by Rodneyhuff on 4/15/2012 10:39:00 AM (view original):
Cochrane at 155 is a joke.  It is the best world I have played in.  Great core group of owners, good commissioner, low turnover.  I guess we are being penalized by having a dominant Florida franchise but I've played in worlds ranked much higher and didn't enjoy them near as much as this world.

You've got one team that's 117-37.  You've got another team that's 40-114 (run by an owner who has never won more than 67 games in 14 seasons in the world).  And a third team that's 49-105.

A little bit of imbalance there.

I'll try to explain it another way.  hbdgirl plays in 4 worlds(she used to be in my 5th one).   I'll use players she won't and she'll use players I won't.  So, when she first joins, we usually agree to a deal or two pretty quickly.    However, when she joined MG/Coop, we had a tougher time making a trade.    In multi-player deals, there's usually a "throw-in".    Someone who might be a 20th player on BL roster now or in the future.    In other worlds, I'm more likely to just say "Here" and be done with it.   Why?  Because I know, in a less competitive world, that I'll find that 20th player at the end of FA or on the WW at some point.  Giving one up is no big deal because the bottom of the world will leave them out there all day.   Simply because owners who lose a lot don't understand the value of non-stars.   Everyone knows that the 84 player is good.   Finding those 68s to fill out the roster is the key to the game.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/15/2012 10:52:00 AM (view original):
I'll try to explain it another way.  hbdgirl plays in 4 worlds(she used to be in my 5th one).   I'll use players she won't and she'll use players I won't.  So, when she first joins, we usually agree to a deal or two pretty quickly.    However, when she joined MG/Coop, we had a tougher time making a trade.    In multi-player deals, there's usually a "throw-in".    Someone who might be a 20th player on BL roster now or in the future.    In other worlds, I'm more likely to just say "Here" and be done with it.   Why?  Because I know, in a less competitive world, that I'll find that 20th player at the end of FA or on the WW at some point.  Giving one up is no big deal because the bottom of the world will leave them out there all day.   Simply because owners who lose a lot don't understand the value of non-stars.   Everyone knows that the 84 player is good.   Finding those 68s to fill out the roster is the key to the game.

AND knowing which 84s are All Stars, and which aren't

Posted by tecwrg on 4/15/2012 10:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Rodneyhuff on 4/15/2012 10:39:00 AM (view original):
Cochrane at 155 is a joke.  It is the best world I have played in.  Great core group of owners, good commissioner, low turnover.  I guess we are being penalized by having a dominant Florida franchise but I've played in worlds ranked much higher and didn't enjoy them near as much as this world.

You've got one team that's 117-37.  You've got another team that's 40-114 (run by an owner who has never won more than 67 games in 14 seasons in the world).  And a third team that's 49-105.

A little bit of imbalance there.

Just to put that in a little more perspective . . . the 40-114 owner had a stretch of 11 consecutive top-5 draft picks, and was still unable to field a team that lost less than 95 games.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/15/2012 10:46:00 AM (view original):
griv, I think the rankings do a pretty good job of defining "good" worlds.   And I define "good" as "competitive".    No matter what ranking system is used, and there have been 5-6 different ones, the same worlds show up at the top.   There's something to them.

RH, enjoyment doesn't really play a part.    Some people inflict pain upon themselves for enjoyment.   That doesn't mean it's a good thing to do.

or they are pertuating a stereotype -- I play in 8 worlds,  based on this ranking system: numbers 1, 8,12, 14, 18(new), 23, 32, 35, and 136!!!  world 136 and 14 have the same rules and until this season the same commish.  I do not think league 136 is substantively different from leagues 23 on up.  Yes the extremes may be different but the large mass of leagues in the middle I think are interchangable and on a whole competitive.

Here are couple of examples from BTP(49 in these rankings):
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Gookie Munro
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Jude Osterbrock

I got them both late and cheap in ST as FA.   Both have some warts.   However, in 400+ AB between them, I got 16 homers and an OPS around .845.  For 2.2m.   My team won the most games in it's 15 season history and made the playoffs after a 6 season layoff.     That seldom happens in the worlds at the top of the list.  You just can't find value like that.

If it's any consolation, griv, these ranking threads only mean something to those who want them to mean something.    I'm not leaving BTP because it's 49th.   I think it's a pretty good world and there was only one "incident" that annoyed me(The ol' "There's nothing I can do" plea when pitchers were zeroed out.   It's your job to be able to do something).    I doubt anyone who enjoys your 136th world is going to bail because of the rankings. 

they do not bail, but it does make it harder to recruit and therefore my concern about Perpetuating a Stereotype.  Particularly when you, or the commish, are trying to replace an owner of a team with a bad record.  I finally resorted to "bribing" someone to take an abused team (3 owners in 5 years) in Regulars, if they are willing to stay and "fix" the issues.  And Regulars is ranked in the 30's.

Imagine how hard it is for a league ranked 160's (as example).

FYI from the Cooperstown FA dregs (you can tell by the salary)  http://whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx?pid=2946027 

bargain players have been available in every league I have ever been in

Chico Romero (L)

29

1B

100

565

16

77

0

.273

.329

.393

.999

10.47

$2.0M

Chico is a dreg.  He's a LF/1B wit and OPS of .720 and no speed.    You can find those guys in your minors.    Paying 2m for him is kind of funny.

FA dreg I signed late in the same season in the same world:  Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Damian Daneker

Almost identical stats for 1.1m.