Disclaimer: I'm not ********. I've had my share of success so I can accept some failure.

However, I have a franchise this season that has just tanked. It will likely go from 100+ wins to 100+ losses with minimal change to the roster.

There are holes to be sure, but the roster has talent. I would venture that most colleagues in this league share my surprise as to my team's demise. And despite any efforts on my part to turn the season around, I'm met with incredible circumstances like a 8-23 record in 1 run games by the All-Star break and multiple instances of the bullpen blowing 5+ run leads late in games.

Antecdotally, I've noticed similar occurrences in other leagues- a team that should perform better but unexpectedly tanks.

Do I should chalk this up to statistical variation? Or it there something more sinister in the engine? Are certain franchises cursed by the simmy in a given season? I know it's far-fetched but this one season has me puzzled.

I think it may be, in part, that you had some guys - particularly pitchers - who overperformed last season and come back to earth (or have slightly worse than expected) years this season.

For example, Ajax Patel - he gave you 124 IP at a 3.04 ERA last year. That's significantly better than I would expect for someone with his ratings, esp. in Texas. He's struggled this year, with a 6.50 ERA.


A new callup who isn't helping matters is Beinto Uribe - he was in AAA season, which may (frankly) be where he belongs. Instead, he's been holding a spot in your rotation, with 14 starts, 56 IP, and a 6.27 ERA (1.88 WHIP). Pitchers with a control as low as his (45) generally have to be exceptional in some other facet of pitching, and he doesn't have that to compensate. I'm not surprised at his struggles.

Overall though, I do think some of it is just a product of statistical variation. While your overall team numbers aren't as good as last year, your expected win % is still significantly higher than your actual win % at this point (.493 to .378). It's largely due to you struggles in 1-run games, but that again is something that you probably did better than you *should* have last season (29-14) and worse than you *should* be doing this season (8-25).

Make the changes that make sense (for ex., maybe shore up the pen to bring that 1-run record back up next season), but there are times when you just chalk it up as a lost season (esp. if a similar management/ownership style has a proven track record of success).

Did other teams in your division get better since the previous season? With minimal change to your own roster, that would make your team worse. Maybe that contributed to it.

Quote: Originally Posted By nfet on 2/28/2010
Did other teams in your division get better since the previous season? With minimal change to your own roster, that would make your team worse. Maybe that contributed to it.

You only play 30 games against your division. That wouldn't account for a 40 game swing in his record, even if he went 30-0 the previous season and 0-30 this season, which is very unlikely.

I had a similar experience in Cooperstown. We got old.

7	MikeT23	ML	106-56	.654	1st	No	Yes	yes	no	no
8	MikeT23	ML	94-68	.580	1st	No	Yes	no	no	no
9	MikeT23	ML	92-70	.568	2nd	Yes	No	no	no	no
10	MikeT23	ML	65-97	.401	3rd	No	No

Sometimes, when you're standing still, you get passed.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

If you want to look at schedule as a factor, I don't understand the reference to "division". You play 10 games against each of the other 15 teams in your league, and then 12 games total against the other league. So in terms of schedule, division has no meaning within your league because all 15 teams are treated equally.

Perhaps his league as a whole got significantly better (not just his division mates), along with maybe playing a tougher division of interleague games this season as opposed to last.

Still, my experience is that significant swings in W/L record from season to season goes well beyond schedule, to the point where I think that overall schedule is an insignificant factor.

yeah, i didn't know that games vs your league were spread out evenly. I would change that to league then.

If opponents get better, and you stay the same, it's safe to say you've gotten worse. It contributes, and i doubt that there is one single factor working here.

You also don't need to account for the full 40 games, just what takes you beyond what you would think would be a normal swing in W/L would be.

I just had a team win 113 games and have a +20 record in 1-run games, mostly due to an incredible season by one relief ace. Said relief ace managed to balance the equation by blowing two leads in the playoffs, including in Game 5, coughing up 5 runs in 1/3rd of an inning.

Regression to the mean is a huge *****.

Or put another way - even with 10 straight or 100 straight heads results on a coin flip, the odds remain 50/50 on every flip.

Players seem to be "programmed" at the begining of a season to be better, same, or worse than average. Rarely have I seen a player turn around during a season, except at the all star break - so I have wondered if that is a "re-set" point.

Have also wondered if a similar "programming" event takes place regarding overall team play (better, same, or worse than predicted) since I have had teams "bounce back" the following year (and even at the all-star break) with little change in personel.

Inquiring Minds want to Know

Of course this is all anectodal. I of course have no evidence to prove a conspiracy. But in both of my leagues, I have seen teams exceed expectations and also inexplicably disappoint. I can think 1 team in each of Kinsella and GAP just this last season.

In my case, of course I expected some players who exceeded expectations to return to the norm this season, but I have multiple pitchers who have a WHIP 0.2 worse than any career worst.

Also players who have my squad this season to go elsewhere, immediately start to produce for their new teams.

Age is of course a consideration. But the players who are tanking aren't that old, and I try to keep my roster all younger than age 34.

I also signed multiple players in the off-season to contract extensions. I know that admin states that does not affect performance, but I don't know if I believe admin.

Another thought.

I'm sure many of you've had games before when you send out 4-5 pitchers who all get hammered. How often does that happen in real life? It's as if the sim is determined that in a given game, you are going to get lit up no matter what who you send to the mound.

I'll be honest, if I thought my team was "programmed" to lose in a given season regardless of it's construction, I'd give every team away right now and find another way to kill time.

Quote: Originally Posted By akgsports on 2/28/2010

Another thought.

I'm sure many of you've had games before when you send out 4-5 pitchers who all get hammered. How often does that happen in real life? It's as if the sim is determined that in a given game, you are going to get lit up no matter what who you send to the mound.

It happens all the time. There are games were real life pitchers just dont have it, and it doesnt matter who you bring in, they arent going to get an out.

When it doesnt go my way (the sim), thats what I blame it on. Like when my team scores 10 runs in the first 2 innings, then gives up 6 in the 8th and 6 in the 9th to lose. You never seem to call it a sim luck when you win.