I always check my boxscores in chronological order... Here are the first three I look at...

1894-06 Giants up 13-10 going into the bottom of the 10th.. Give up 4 runs... lose 14-13
1894-99 Orioles up 10-4 though 6 innings. Give up 5 + 6 + 3 innings over next three innings. Lose 17-10.
1901-13 Naps up 4-1 going into 9th. Give up 5 in 9th. Lose 6-5.
...
Think I'll check the other boxscores later.

I posted this midway through the team selection (on Oct 22). Thought I'd re-read my comments to see how close I was on my initial thoughts on some of my teams

After building out most of my rosters, I am coming to the realization that grabbing a team early during the initial team selection onslaught isn't always smart. I made a bunch of really dumb choices. Let's review some of my mistakes.

League 1: 1894-99 Baltimore Orioles
I was originally planning on taking a '88 Silver King team, but after reading the "clone" rule, I figured I could really amp up the offense on this Orioles team. I think toysboys' selection of 1888-91 St. Louis was the top pick. My only saving grace is that somehow, none of the three Silver King teams is in the NL East.
Well, toysboys' team is 11-14. They are ranked 3rd in pitching but bottom 5 in offense, so I was off on that prediction. My Orioles team is performing a bit better than expected (a bit lucky, 3-1 in 1-run games). We are 2nd in runs scored and 18th in pitching. Sadly, only a 4-5 division record. There are 3 strong teams in my division, so one will be a playoff casualty.

League 4: 1910-23 New York Yankees
This was just a really dumb pick. I was so gung-ho about getting two stud Ruth seasons + '10 Ford, that I didn't consider that many of the other choices have really good 1920's and 1930's hitting but with MUCH better pitching. This team might finish last in the NL East. I think thejuice6 got it right when he grabbed 50 years of Phillies teams (15-64), including '15 Alexander.
These Yankees are doing better than expected at 15-10 (ranked 6th in offense, 8th in pitching), slightly underperforming Pythag ExpWin% (.600 vs .620). '23 Ruth is leading the league in OPS and is 1st in the MVP rankings. '21 Ruth is 2nd in the MVP rankings despite not being in the top 25 in OPS, which I find really odd (he's hitting .272 and on pace for 19 HRs and 97 RBIs). Russ Ford has been good, but the rest of the starting pitcher are a big surprise, with Quinn, Mays and Shawkey all having ERAs in the 4's. We'll see if that lasts. juice's Phillies team is only 12-13, mostly because they are ranked dead last in offense. I guess there was a reason the Phillies had so few good seasons between 1915 and 1964.

League 5: 1917-53 White Sox
I grabbed this team because of Cicotte and most of the teams in this league don't have great pitching. What I failed to consider was that this team will be facing awesome 1920's Yankees lineups as well as a bunch of other great offenses. Not sure this team's hitting will stack up. I like kstober's 16-41 Red Sox selection. At least this White Sox team has some depth at RP.
kstober's Red Sox team is only 13-12, but their Exp WIn% of .594 is 2nd best in the NL, so I feel ok with my affection for his team selection. My White Sox have a mediocre 14-11 record. They are a better-than-expected 6th in offense. What's killed them is that their pitching is getting killed. Having both Cicotte's stud deadballer seasons in a league with HR hitters isn't panning out as anticipated. Currently ranked 15th in pitching, neither Cicotte is ranked in the top 25 in ERA. What's really frustrating is Chisock's 21 Red Faber (16-39 White Sox) has a 2.58 ERA in 52 innings, while my '21 Faber has a 7.55 ERA in 39 innings. His '17 Cicotte is crushing my '17 Cicotte also (2.58 ERA vs 4.86 ERA). Our team defense is very similar and we're playing in the same ballpark.

League 6: 1924-41 Dodgers
Yes, there's a theme here. I grabbed this team b/c of Vance/Wyatt in a league with very little pitching. Certainly, the Hubbell-led Giants and Grove-led Athletics have as good a pitching as my Dodgers, but those teams have better offenses. Also, I'll be facing multiple Ruths just about every other series. It would have been much better to grab Hubbell or Grove for their left-handedness.
Clearly a terrible pick here. We're 10-15 and it's not really bad luck. We're below average in offense and below average in pitching. Due to the terrible pitching available in this league, I grabbed 1928 Dazzy Vance as my clone (1.06 whip, 2.09 ERA, low HR). I probably would've gotten the same results with a $300K scrub pitcher. '28 Vance's stats so far: .368 oav, .561 slug, 10.46 ERA in 37 innings. Not surprsingly, 22-28 Yankees lead my division and the 26-31 Yankees lead the NL Central. Even the A's are doing well. Sometimes, I try to outsmart myself.

League 12: 1963-72 Dodgers
I mean, how could I not jump of Koufax x 2 + Drysdale + Sutton? But the hitting on this team is atrocious. There were so many better choices, with many more years. The 62-94 Astros (kstober) would have been a much better choice.
We're tied with kstober's Astros team at 15-10 (.600). Although he's been unlucky (.648 Exp W%) and I've been lucky (.549). Due to the HR propensity of my bullpen, I've been using '72 Sutton as a long closer and he's been doing great so far. We're ranked higher than expected in offense (13th) and lower than expected in pitching (8th). If you told me this team will finish with 90 wins, I'll take that right now.

League 22: 2013-18 Dodgers
I missed the 15-20 Dodgers (calhoop) by minutes, so I panicked and grabbed this version. Why? I have no idea. I ended up with 97-13 Dodgers and 04-15 Dodgers in leagues 20 & 21, so now I have three very similar teams, except this is the worst of them due to fewer seasons. I have a feeling I'm going to be sick of Kershaw midway through this tournament. I almost grabbed the '98-22 D'Backs (Chisock) and now I wish I did. If anybody wants this team, I'd give them up... just so I am not playing 3 similar Dodgers teams.
LOL, the '98-22 D'backs are in League 20, not League 22. But they are leading their division at 15-10. This Dodgers team is truly terrible and I knew it right away. Despite having Kershaw, Kershaw, Greinke, Buehler, this team is below average in pitching (13th). Bottom four in offense (which was predictable). The bullpen sucks (Rich Hill with 7.98 ERA). Both Kershaws are sporting 5+ ERAs. This is easily my worst team. Still mad I missed 2015-20 Dodgers by minutes, who by the way are in 1st place (15-10) with a .739 Exp Win%.

yes my Silver King team is 3rd in ER. :But 9th in runs allowed. My defense is so bad that 1/3 or all runs allowed are unearned.

Just had my worst session of the year 12-19. Normally, I would be down in the dumps after that, but there are two bright spots that soften the blow...

* I didn't lose any 1-run games, which has not happened in any session before now. I did lose a game 3-1, where I had a 1-0 lead late, but it's my worst team, so who cares. And now for the first time all season, I am over .500 in 1-run games (1 game over .500, LOL)

* Anytime I have a bad session, I have to keep reminding myself... it's ok - I don't really want 31 teams advancing to round 2. I need to get the number down to something a little more manageable. Maybe 24-25 teams.

The sim stats of my two Al Rosen clones (1953-94 Indians)

A: .357 / .410 / .625
B: .295 / .370 / .459

If you guessed the $12M '53 Al Rosen was player A and the $5M '54 Al Rosen was player B, you'd be wrong.

thejuice6's 1971-96 Cardinals team has been dominating early on, currently leading the entire tournament with a 27-6 record. I have a 1967-85 Cardinals team, that isn't doing nearly as well (18-15). Since I have 1968 Bob Gibson and juice does not, I assumed his 1986-96 players must be really awesome to account for the difference. So I compared the rosters. Here are my findings...

thejuice6's starting lineup vs my starting lineup (sim avg shown)
C: '77 Simmons (.326) vs '77 Simmons (.313)
1B: '79 Hernandez (.313) vs '79 Hernandez (.316)
2B: '85 Herr (.317) vs '85 Herr (.273)
3B: '71 Torre (.325) vs '71 Torre (.300)
SS: '87 Smith (.344) vs '79 Templeton (.313)
OF: '92 Lankford (.279) vs '67 Flood (.258)
OF: '85 McGee (.254) vs '85 McGee (.303)
OF: '87 Coleman (.301) vs '74 R.Smith (.320)
DH: '93 Jefferies (.270) vs '67 Cepeda (.248)

Starting Pitchers (sim era shown)
'72 Gibson (3.75) vs '68 Gibson (2.05)
'85 Tudor (1.45) vs '85 Tudor (4.58)
'89 DeLeon (2.58) vs '69 Gibson (4.33)
'82 Andujar (5.03) vs '82 Andujar (5.29)
'92 Tewksbury vs '67 Hughes (neither pitcher have started)

Bullpen
'75 Hrabosky (3.92) vs '75 Hrabosky (3.86)
'81 Rincon (3.75) vs '81 Rincon (2.70)
'88 Magrane (12.10) vs '79 Fulgham (1.80)
'92 M.Perez (2.95) vs '81 Sutter (8.83)
'95 Mathews (7.50) vs '68 Hoerner (4.50)
'90 Tudor (2.65)
'93 Kilgus (6.00)

His team has scored 236 runs on .306/.366/418.
My team has scored 195 runs on .293/.348/.415.

His team has allowed 139 runs on 256/.325/358. (Home park = Busch Stadium)
My team has allowed 153 runs on .260/.319/.393 (Home park = Royals Stadium)

Comments: The difference in the stats of our '85 John Tudors is significant. My Bruce Sutter has been horrific and I may have to relegate him to mop-up. He drafted two more pitchers than I did and is using '90 Tudor in long relief. I have '90 Tudor on a different team and he's got a 7.83 ERA on that team. I have a deeper bench. We both him pinch hitters Cedeno & Freed. I have Pendleton for defense and spot-starting (for Torre) and also have Bake McBride playing a little bit at DH (over Cepeda). He's hitting .339 in a part time role for me. My team's Exp Win% is .616 (71 points higher than actual) but we're 4-7 in 1-run games. thejuice6's exp win% is .742 (76 points lower than actual) and he is 10-2 in 1-run games. Conclusion: Our teams are a lot closer than the records indicate.

One of my worst teams so far is the 1963-81 Cardinals with Gibson clones from 68 and 69. We are 15-18. Several starting hitters are the same but not performing anywhere near as well. The only differences between my lineup and schwarze's are a different Herr season (81 vs 85), and a very different CF than McGee with a platoon of 67 Flood and 76 McBride. In LF I'm platooning 64 Brock and 80 Hendrick. The only hitters doing anything decent are Torre and Hernandez. (Side note: Maybe I should play 70 Dick Allen somewhere since he's squeezed out at 1B and DH, and it's not like we're scoring much.)

We have scored 136 runs on .270/.319/.392.
We have allowed 147 runs on .274/.327/.433. (Home park is County Stadium)

The Gibsons both have ERAs under 4, as does Dick Hughes. The bullpen has been awful with the exception of 64 Barney Schultz. Defense is doing great (27 plus, 6 minus plays, only 14 errors). All things considered it's the hitting letting us down to this point, but League 16 is rather loaded with top-notch 1960s-early 70s pitching (lots of Koufax, Gibson, Horlen, McNally, Palmer, Sutton), so I don't think it's particularly stunning either.

In my 3leagues

League 7- avg run score per team 5.8
avg ERA 5.26
avg fldng pct. .978
League 9 avg run scored 5.5
avg ERA 5.11
avg fldng. .984
League 15. avg runs 5.5
avg ERA. 5.28
avg fldbg. .988

Just a typical day in What if Sports

1894-99 Orioles
Down 5-2 in the 9th, two outs, one on, walk, single, error, 2-run single. Tied at 5-5. Top of tenth, we score 7 runs to win 12-5.

1936-51 Giants
Down 6-4 in the bottom of 9th. Single, walk, flyout, single, grand slam by Mel Ott. Win 8-6.

1964-81 Phillies
Down 4-2, going into 9th, opponents score 2 in top of inning to take a 6-2 lead. Single, flyout, single, single, double, line out, double, walk double. 5-runs, later, we win 7-6.

1994-99 Braves
Up 7-4 going into 9th, stud '95 Maddux comes into the game to close it out (he's been my closer all year, due to lack of decent RPs by Braves). Walk, double, single, out, out, walk, double. Lose 8-7.

1997-13 Dodgers
Up 4-1 going into bottom of 8th. After a couple of baserunners off the starter, Saito comes in and immediately gives up game-tying HR. Top of 9th, 2 outs, nobody on, I get single, single, HR. Up 7-4. Bottom of ninth, '03 Gagne comes in - he walks 2 in a row and reaches his pitch count (14) and comes out. Broxton comes in walks a guy to load bases, then gets a ground out, runs scores. He reaches his pitch count (11). Mota comes in, gets ground out, runs scores, then a s strikeout... we hold on to win 7-6.

I was lucky enough to win 4 of these 5 ridiculous endings. I've had many other days when I was on the wrong end of this silliness.

This is the main problem with the sim using pitches thrown to impact fatigue and this is the main reason for the crazy endings we see all too often in the sim. If a stud closer who average an inning an appearance during the season throws 14 pitches w/2 batters, how is he supposed to finish the inning w/o get killed by pitch count fatigue? I've learned all to well to never leave a modern day reliever in for more than 15 pitches. The sim needs to scrap pitch count and let pitchers pitch to their real life inning total. It's really stupid that you're allowed to roster fewer innings in an $80M league than in a $120M league. Both leagues play 162 games. Every league should need to draft 1450 innings, regardless of cap level. Then my modern-day closer can actually finish an inning. If he gives up 3 runs on 5 hits on the merits of the other team's hitters, so be it... just don't artificially inflate the opposing offense due to pitch-count fatigue, because the first two batters walked.

I'm sure I've read this somewhere before, but what does a pitcher's "effective" fatigue become once he hits his in-game fatigue? For instance, if you bring him in at 100, what is he effectively at when he surpasses those 15 pitches, or whatever the artificial barrier is? And does it go down every batter thereafter?

I contrast this with, say, a pitcher who enters the game already at 90 fatigue but never hits his in-game number. Which one is actually the better option?

I never played the live version of this game, so I don't know the exact calculations. I never purposely use pitchers (especially relievers) under 99%, but from experience, I know that after a RP (who's pitch setting might be 10/10) would come in at 100%, get bombed after throw 16 pitchers, his fatigue for the next game would be in the 75-85% range. so I assume at some point during that outing, the fatigue dropped significantly, causing the blowup.

Setting up a pitch count of 15, I've seen relievers throw 22-24 pitches, so I don't want to risk a blowup, so I set all my 1-inning-per-appearance RP at 10/10.

Schwarze...you may be on to something there with the RP PC in the last paragraph. Let me go back and look at what I have set for Sutter. Im sure it is not 15, and I have Devin Williams in another league....I know in the past Gagne past 15 was horrible.

I use 10/15 with most of these modern RP, and I’m not necessarily seeing them getting hurt by the last batter they face when pushed past 15. But I’m not really studying and tracking it closely either.

Slumps happen to every team, so I shouldn't be surprised that by playing 31 teams, it was inevitable that I would have multiple teams go into a slump at the same time.

1894-99 Orioles: 23-14 start, 2-8 since
1901-13 Naps: 25-16 start, 0-6 since
1936-51 Giants: 21-18 start, 1-7 since
1942-47 Cardinals: 22-20 start, 0-5 since
1964-81 Phillies: 22-15 start, 3-7 since
2007-109 Indians 25-15 start, 1-6 since

So that's a combined 138-98 start and 7-39 since.

Got some time so I decided to grade my clones. Note that I am not grading both clones on a team, only the secondary clone (the player that was added only because clones were allowed). For example, I have '05 and '03 Christy Mathewson on my 1896-06 Giants team. I was taking '05 Mathewson regardless, so the '03 version is the cloned "option" I chose.
.
1896-06 Giants (29-18)
1903 Christy Mathewson
Real Life Stats: 427 ip, .231 oav, 1.15 whip, 2.26 era
Sim Stats: 101 ip, .316 oav, 1.89 whip, 6.66 era, 5-5 record
Grade: D
Comment: I didn't really consider anybody else here as a possible clone. I knew this league would have tons of offense, so I figured even this lesser version of Mathewson would be better than most starting pitchers. I have tons of innings on this team. I am considering moving him into a long relief role and promoting Hooks Wiltse.
.
1894-99 Orioles (25-22)
1895 Hughie Jennings
Real Life Stats: 660 ab, .386 avg, .444 obp, .512 slg
Sim Stats: 227 ab, .313 avg, .335 obp, .410 slg
Grade: B
Comment: Again, always had a cloned-Jennings in mind when I grabbed this team with the 1st overall pick. I realize the 1894-96 hitters don't normalize well, so his .313 average (73 points below normal) is not a shock. He is leading the league in fielding % for a shortstop by a decent margin and his 11 + plays is ranked third. My better '96 Hughie Jennings was moved to 2B and has a lot of errors and only one + play (despite being rated C/A+ at SS).
.
1901-13 Naps (25-22)
1912 Joe Jackson
Real Life Stats: 606 ab, .395 avg, .458 obp, .579 slg
Sim Stats: 196 ab, .352 avg, .398 obp, .480 slg
Grade: A
Comment: The clone decision was very tough for this team (Jackson vs Lajoie vs Joss). Needing offense and also needing a lefty bat was the reason I took Joe Jackson. He's hitting as well as could be expected (25th in league in OPS). His poor defense doesn't hurt because he's playing DH. I think I got this one right.
.
1903-15 Boston Americans (31-16)
1914 Tris Speaker
Real Life Stats: 605 ab, .338 avg, .423 obp, .503 slg
Sim Stats: 175 ab, .349 avg, .430 obp, .434 slg
Grade: A+
Comment: There were a number of Tris Speaker clones I could choose from but the lack of 1B choices made 1914 the choice. His A+++ range at 1B is always a bonus (he's on a pace to finish with about 26 + plays). Whenever your sim hitting stats exceed your real life hitting stats, you're probably going to get an A+ grade.
.
1903-21 Highlanders (25-22)
1920 Babe Ruth
Real Life Stats: 482 ab, .376 avg, .530 obp, .847 slg
Sim Stats: 157 ab, .248 avg, .422 obp, .478 slg
Grade: D+
Comment: Maybe I'm being a tough grader. Ruth is ranked 17th in the league in OPS (thanks to being ranked 1st in walks and 3rd in HRs). But the guy did hit .376 and his 1920 season usually normalizes well. I wonder how many other players with .370+ averages are hitting below .250. FYI - the other '20 Ruth in this league is hitting .343. Ironically, my '21 Ruth is hitting very well and the other '21 Ruth is hitting poorly. So maybe it all evens out in the end.
.
1910-23 Yankees (31-16)
1921 Babe Ruth
Real Life Stats: 572 ab, .378 avg, .512 obp, .846 slg
Sim Stats: 176 ab, .295 avg, .442 obp, .494 slg
Grade: B
Comment: To be honest, I'm not sure if I would take '21 or '23 Ruth if I could only choose one. I think I would've leaned to '23 because that version can play 1B with excellent range and has a higher real-life batting average and on base percentage than '21. For much of the seasons, my '21 Ruth (in this league) had been struggling and despite his $26M salary, wasn't even among the top 25 in OPS. But a recent surge (.415/.489/.683 in last 10 games) has his year-to-date stats looking much better. Had I written this 3 days ago, he would've graded to a C- or D.
.
1917-22 Giants (23-24)
1922 Frankie Frisch
Real Life Stats: 541 ab, .327 avg, .387 obp, .438 slg
Sim Stats: 190 ab, .274 avg, .298 obp, .358 slg
Grade: C
Comment: Not really sure why I selected this team. I love Frankie Frisch, but his 1922 season really isn't all that great. His salary of $5.7 million has to be one of the lowest "clone" salaries among all hitters. I probably would have been better off selecting a clone Bancroft and playing him out of position at 3B. These Giants really don't have a lot of great hitters, which would explain why the team is below average in runs scored. I gave Frisch an average grade here because I can't really expect much more than this.
.
1917-53 White Sox (26-21)
1919 Ed Cicotte
Real Life Stats: 355 ip, ..228 oav, 1.00 whip, 1.82 era
Sim Stats: 97 ip, .311 avg, 1.59 whip, 5.49 era, 5-7
Grade: D
Comment: I selected this team specifically because it had two pre-1920 deadball pitchers. Playing against mostly 1920+ hitters, these pitchers should provide a massive advantage. Well, '19 Cicotte is the worst pitcher on my team. Ironically, the other two '19 Cicotte's also pretty much suck. 1921 Red Faber is outpitching Cicotte. Bill Pierce got a couple of spot-starts and is pitching well. I may move Cicotte to mop-up role if he doesn't improves soon. It's pretty obvious that I should have taken a Joe Jackson clone instead.

To be continued