is there ever a good time to cut players? Topic

mixtroy
Posts: 1057 (0)
Hall of Famer
120 3 1 2
Prospect
That's so funny Crazy!!!!

I understand your question to Grizz in regard to whether it ever occurred to him that the Maddux he dumped could've done the same thing. But the point is he WASN'T doing it up to the time he got dumped.  And I'm one of those guys who believes that whatever a player is doing at the midpoint, is generally going to continue throughout the season, give or take a few exceptions.  Just look around your leagues that are nearing their end and see how many supposedly great players are having awful years whose team would probably be in the playoffs had it had better production from that player.
6/1/2011 9:26 AM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Show
mixtroy
Posts: 1057 (0)
Hall of Famer
120 3 1 2
Prospect
You won't believe this, but despite me penchant for cutting guys who, in my opinion, aren't living up to their salaries, relievers are the exceptcion in that I rarely dump them (unless they're absolutely horrible) and generally stick with them because their sample size is so small that only one bad game or two can make their ERAs extremely deceiving. But Buck's a pretty good pitcher.  I wouldn't dump him, unless I was getting a Milacki type in return.
6/1/2011 11:46 AM
eastvanmungo
Posts: 6381 (1)
Hall of Famer
483 7
Hall of Famer
Relievers (and PH's) tend to extreme performances based upon small sample size.
6/1/2011 1:00 PM
crazystengel
Posts: 12431 (0)
Hall of Famer
712
Hall of Famer
Exactly.  And half a season of 1994 Maddux is a small sample size, too.  In fact, so is a full season.
6/1/2011 1:07 PM
mixtroy
Posts: 1057 (0)
Hall of Famer
120 3 1 2
Prospect
I usually draft three or four 26-30 Inning $1mil closers, because just as eastvanmungo said, relievers are subject to extreme performances (good and bad).  This way, if they suck really bad, they're much easier to get rid of than the $2-$3mil closers.
6/1/2011 9:21 PM
napolean
Posts: 689 (0)
Hall of Famer
606 7 232
Rookie
The WW is a little like a security blanket for draft picks you may not otherwise try. Also regardless of the sample sizes etc., sometimes an under performer simply has to go... just peace of mind.
6/2/2011 2:58 PM
mixtroy
Posts: 1057 (0)
Hall of Famer
120 3 1 2
Prospect
Right on Nap!!!!!
6/2/2011 8:21 PM
pinotfan
Posts: 1828 (0)
Hall of Famer
461 1
Hall of Famer
I approach the WW this way vis-a-vis relief pitchers.  When the transaction deadline is looming and I'm in the playoff hunt, I look at my RPs who are underperforming and - acknowedging the sample size is small - ask myself if I would use that player in the playoffs, or would I bury him so low in the 'pen that he'd never get used?  If the latter, I may as well waive him as I'm not going to use him anyway.
6/2/2011 9:01 PM
thunder1008
Posts: 1851 (0)
Hall of Famer
2009
Hall of Famer
The best time to cut players is right before they begin extended slumps.
6/3/2011 12:47 AM
mixtroy
Posts: 1057 (0)
Hall of Famer
120 3 1 2
Prospect

Or right after they hit .600 in their last ten games. LOL

6/3/2011 9:20 PM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Show
crimsonblue
Posts: 340 (0)
Hall of Famer
183 1 1
Prospect
I have to believe that results here are not purely randomly generated on a per atbat or per inning basis. The standard deviation from the mean is far too high. If Simleague creators were striving for realism, (and I'm sure they were) then they would have to have included the "human factor" into player performance. A player (not being a machine) when in a "slump" generally continues to slump in real life (It's human). There are other "human" anomalies.  For example, pure randomness in a 50/50 proposition (a coin toss) would make the average streak in any sequence (win streak or losing streak) equal to exactly two.  Yet throughout baseball history (and what astute gamblers know) is that the average streak in real life baseball as examined through studies is about 2.07.  Which may seem like a small variance,  but as a long term number, it is astounding. I haven't researched it but the average winning or losing streak in simleague play is surely not 2.0 for teams at or close to .500 it's definetly higher, which lends credence to the incorporation of the human factor. Tells me there is some "doctoring" going on.
6/4/2011 6:31 PM
mixtroy
Posts: 1057 (0)
Hall of Famer
120 3 1 2
Prospect
I can't definitively say its a "human" factor, but I know from experience that a hitter or pitcher who is still hitting or pitching poorly at the halfway point of a season in the sim, more often than not (NOT ALWAYS) will continue to hit or pitch at about that same poor performance for the rest of the season, and I just love it when my opponents hold on to them. 
6/4/2011 8:46 PM
uncleal
Posts: 1619 (0)
Hall of Famer
339 6 2 4
Rookie
Posted by crimsonblue on 6/4/2011 6:31:00 PM (view original):
I have to believe that results here are not purely randomly generated on a per atbat or per inning basis. The standard deviation from the mean is far too high. If Simleague creators were striving for realism, (and I'm sure they were) then they would have to have included the "human factor" into player performance. A player (not being a machine) when in a "slump" generally continues to slump in real life (It's human). There are other "human" anomalies.  For example, pure randomness in a 50/50 proposition (a coin toss) would make the average streak in any sequence (win streak or losing streak) equal to exactly two.  Yet throughout baseball history (and what astute gamblers know) is that the average streak in real life baseball as examined through studies is about 2.07.  Which may seem like a small variance,  but as a long term number, it is astounding. I haven't researched it but the average winning or losing streak in simleague play is surely not 2.0 for teams at or close to .500 it's definetly higher, which lends credence to the incorporation of the human factor. Tells me there is some "doctoring" going on.
SIM win stats are skewed by good teams beating up on newb owners. In RL baseball, all 16/20/24/28/30 teams are at roughly the same skill level in upper management save the occasional genius and occasional idiot... we have a lot of "idiots" in the SIM, in that sense, and probably worse, since anyone with $12.95 can by a GM in the SIM, and they can suck at it horribly. If a good team has two bad/newb opponents in a row it's a virtually automatic W6 or at least 5-1 in that stretch unless they get really unlucky or tank games during the stretch... for that matter, tanking games (pitching 0% 200K mop-ups to save SP's innings) will skew the numbers in a similar fashion... in RL everyone plays to win 162, not the case for experienced SIM owners necessarily.
6/4/2011 11:47 PM
◂ Prev 12345 Next ▸
is there ever a good time to cut players? Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2025 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.