Oddly enough, the guy right above me is advocating "b". 

And oddly enough it is the only right answer.

EDIT - What I said here is 100% completely wrong, I misread B.  My Bad (RIP Manute)

Posted by mitchrapp on 6/25/2010 10:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by schuyler101 on 6/25/2010 7:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/25/2010 4:27:00 PM (view original):

schuler, you posted your record a few days ago and said something like "I'll save you some time.  I'm not that good at this game."   Do you think that might have ANYTHING, anything at all, with your refusal to believe that stud #3 hitter might be better served hitting 6th if for no other reason than he's batting .211 with a slugging of .317?

Nope.  Quite the opposite, not benching or moving down my stud hitters gives me a significant advantage over those  that do.  I love seeing opposing owners bench a stud hitter in the playoffs because they aren't hitting.

I posted my record a few days ago and sarcastically said "I suck" to preempt you because posting someone's record is one of your favorite things to do. 

But let's stick to the debate and cut out the ad hominem attacks.

I never point out that you have 61 seasons completed and 2 titles.  Playing in a league with 32 teams that's about average.  With so much experience and such a familiarity with the forums and game we'd expect you to be better than average.  (Note - I know this point is a bit misleading, given the randomness in the short series playoffs, I'm just making a point about what Mike would do)

But what I just said is completely irrelevant to the debate.  Attack the logic, not the presenter, that's bush league.

You can't post, "I love when others .. so blah .. gives you a significant advantage" and then trot out a record that says the complete opposite. I don't normally bring up others records but if you think it gives you a significant advantage but the record doesn't show that, your argument holds no water.

Not helpful, attack the argument not the presenter.

What the whole debate all boils down to is this

You either believe the creators of the game when they tell you time and time again that streaks are not built into the game

Or you don't.  It really is that simple

I happen to believe them because I don't really see a reason for them to reiterate over and over that they are not a facet of the engine.  Many of you simply do not trust what they tell you.  That's fine and you manage your team with that belief and accounting for that.

I could be wrong and you may have good reason to doubt them, if that is the case then the way I manage my team is hurting my chances.  If there aren't streaks though I am at an advantage.  I haven't really seen "hot" or "cold" streaks beyond what you could reasonably expect from randomness though, so it leads me to think WIS is telling the truth.

I think where I see randomness many people see patterns (pattern seeking is a universal human trait, to the point where we see patterns when there aren't any) and this leads to the chasm between us. 

Carl Sagan said "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"  To claim WIS is intentionally lying about the presence of streaks in the game is the extraordinary claim, yet I haven't seen any extraordinary evidence to back it up.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/26/2010 12:37:00 PM (view original):
When the presenter says "Quite the opposite, not benching or moving down my stud hitters gives me a significant advantage over those  that do", the presenter personalizes the situation and leaves himself open to question.   If his record shows that he's a sub .500 owner, his claim is seemingly invalid.   Unless, of course, his definition of "significant advantage" is completely different than most of the world's definition.

Maybe I have an advantage in this regard and a disadvantage somewhere else that negates it

Maybe I just started doing this more recently, or have become more committed to it, and have seen vast improvement in my teams.

Maybe I run only 2 teams, both of which I took over with a pretty bare cupboard at the ML level and decided to tear them down and rebuild (MikeT likes to call this tanking, then again anyone who looks at a year beyond this one while running their team is tanking in his mind.)

The fact is you're oversimplifying this far too much.  This is why we attack the argument, not the presenter.  If I were completely inept at this game you'd have a case, but I'm not

The way I handle streaks could hurt me, or it could help me, but my overall record really doesn't tell you either way.  I almost never click on someone's record while in the forums here, and if I do it's only out of curiosity.  This is because I like to judge an argument based on it's own merit not the person giving it.

Posted by schuyler101 on 6/26/2010 12:30:00 PM (view original):
And oddly enough it is the only right answer

Did you seriously just tell people the Gambler's Fallacy isn't a fallacy?

WIS used to say ballpark effects were pureley cosmetics. they used to say the same about pitchers individual pitches. they said the same thing about power ratings about hitters. the only thing in life u cant argue with is results. so good luck to the Montreal Canadiens trading Jaroslav Halak who took u 3 rounds in the playoffs, made u an extra 12,000,000$ doing so and go with Carey Price whos mind lives on another planet.

  Wait... which Gambler?  Kenny Rogers... or Big and Rich?  I LOVE the Classics, so I vote Kenny... but there is just something about Deadwood Mountain that does it for me... 'I've been a rambler, all my life.  A bet it all GAMBLER, let it all ride!  Never been afraid of losing, there's been times I've lost it all.  But it won't really matter, some day when I'm gone."  You can bench me, when I hit .200.  Put me back in, about a week or two.  Or just bat me 8th, until my bat gets smoking.  Put me in the 8 Hole, when you bury me!

another good one from WIS; coaches have no ingame input.

Posted by brrexkl on 6/26/2010 1:37:00 PM (view original):
  Wait... which Gambler?  Kenny Rogers... or Big and Rich?  I LOVE the Classics, so I vote Kenny... but there is just something about Deadwood Mountain that does it for me... 'I've been a rambler, all my life.  A bet it all GAMBLER, let it all ride!  Never been afraid of losing, there's been times I've lost it all.  But it won't really matter, some day when I'm gone."  You can bench me, when I hit .200.  Put me back in, about a week or two.  Or just bat me 8th, until my bat gets smoking.  Put me in the 8 Hole, when you bury me!

Big and Rich are not country.

But then, I'm not sure Kenny has ever topped Just Dropped In (To See What Condition My Condition Was In).

My point was that you can't personalize it by saying "I have......." and then say "Whoa, wait a minute.  We're not discussing my results!!"

Or maybe schulyer was right when he said any advantage he has playing against people relying on stats is outweighed by a disadvantage somewhere else. 

At least with respect to lineup, I set mine more or less exclusively based on ratings. This is not the same as saying I use the same lineup every game, mind you; vs LH, vs RH, the opposing pitcher, catcher, park, etc. may all play a role in influencing me to change lineups, but the only time I think I've ever changed lineups based on stats is when I had a guy hitting into more DP than I though he should, so I put a speedster in front of him. As others have mentioned, changing the lineup in that instance probably didn't do much good (statistically speaking) but it made me feel better about *doing* something about what I perceived as a problem.

Over the long term, I do more closely evaluate players who don't perform up to my expectations, in order to learn about any potential mis-reading of ratings on my part. Over the short term, no performance over 20 games, 40 games, 80 games is going to make me change my lineup or bench a guy for someone with lesser hitting ratings behind him, unless he has something else to bring to the table (much better D, for example). 

In my opinion, the #1 mistake people make make in the game play of HBD (separate from the financial aspect of HBD, which people butcher all the time) is forgetting that it is all just math.