Also, what about the list of number of people that took each combination. I assume 6-8 is one of the most frequent, but without counting everything manually, I'm not sure.

Full disclosure. . . . I've been around a couple years and still don't know exactly what a "cookie" is. Seems to be a guy that gets used a lot or is a good value or both. Is there an official definition someone can enlighten me with? :)

Cookie score.

Count how many times each player is taken across all 96 teams. Then, for each person's roster, average that number among the 25 players on a person's roster. That average (called the "cookie score") is often a weighted average based on salary. The higher the cookie score, the more commonly selected players one has on his roster.

If all 25 players on your roster were taken only once (by you), your cookie score would be 1.0

Posted by schwarze on 8/21/2019 8:08:00 AM (view original):
Also, what about the list of number of people that took each combination. I assume 6-8 is one of the most frequent, but without counting everything manually, I'm not sure.

It was easy enough to throw one of ozomatli's tables into a spreadsheet and calculate this... (pitcher year listed first)
.

Combination	Count	AvgSeed
---------------	----------	----------
8-5	14	41.5
8-1	9	48.7
8-6	9	22.4
8-3	5	51.6
8-9	5	70.2
8-7	4	42.0
4-6	3	44.0
5-0	3	83.7
5-7	3	41.7
5-8	3	51.7
8-0	3	51.3
4-0	2	48.5
4-7	2	2.0
5-3	2	65.0
6-5	2	49.0
7-5	2	47.0
8-2	2	61.0
8-4	2	61.0
1-0	1	72.0
2-1	1	60.0
2-4	1	75.0
2-5	1	43.0
2-7	1	36.0
2-8	1	65.0
3-1	1	45.0
3-4	1	81.0
3-5	1	44.0
3-7	1	84.0
4-1	1	2.0
5-1	1	90.0
5-2	1	77.0
5-6	1	76.0
6-8	1	82.0
6-9	1	37.0
7-6	1	23.0
7-8	1	14.0
7-9	1	94.0
9-6	1	57.0

Can't wait to start seeing average win totals by combination, to see which combination really was the best option.

I am surprised to see how few people took 4 for hitting. I knew I'd be in a big group with the 8 pitchers, because it came to a lot of us the same way. But just because it was the popular choice doesn't make it good or bad, ultimately. That remains to be seen. Honestly, I didn't try to build a bunch of different pitching staffs because I liked that one right off the bat and stuck with it. I'm sure some people tried to build most or all of them.

Posted by redcped on 8/21/2019 11:45:00 AM (view original):
I am surprised to see how few people took 4 for hitting. I knew I'd be in a big group with the 8 pitchers, because it came to a lot of us the same way. But just because it was the popular choice doesn't make it good or bad, ultimately. That remains to be seen. Honestly, I didn't try to build a bunch of different pitching staffs because I liked that one right off the bat and stuck with it. I'm sure some people tried to build most or all of them.

I'm still trying to figure out how I chose 8 for pitchers yet didn't roster 18 deGrom. Must of been something in the way the innings played out that he didn't fit. Seems silly in hindsight to have left him out.

I did the same thing. Once I had 08 Walsh and 18 Johnson (like many others), that was over 900 innings right there, plus the 10%. You don't really need all of DeGrom's innings despite his good value if you take those two guys. I'm sure it's workable, but I preferred to take a couple swingman types with 80 or so innings each and save some money in the process. Maybe it wasn't a good decision, though.

PS: There were tons of great 2018 RP seasons too. Definitely more options there than you'd find in 1978, 88 or 98. So that factored in somewhat for me. I went with Sean Doolittle, whose ERA is north of 8 at the moment ... plus my team is in last place, so don't take anything I say as constructive, lol

I had a xxx8 team built -- used Toney for 1918 and deGrom + Brecheen for my non-Walsh SPs

Somehow I picked the 8's and missed Walsh, Johnson, and Degrom! What in the actual **** was I thinking?

Posted by npg32433 on 8/21/2019 1:50:00 PM (view original):
Somehow I picked the 8's and missed Walsh, Johnson, and Degrom! What in the actual **** was I thinking?

Something smarter, it appears. You're 15-8.

Posted by redcped on 8/21/2019 1:01:00 PM (view original):
I did the same thing. Once I had 08 Walsh and 18 Johnson (like many others), that was over 900 innings right there, plus the 10%. You don't really need all of DeGrom's innings despite his good value if you take those two guys. I'm sure it's workable, but I preferred to take a couple swingman types with 80 or so innings each and save some money in the process. Maybe it wasn't a good decision, though.

I took all three. I just figured DeGrom would get some spot starts and pitch in relief a lot.

I could use him right now, actually. I think I had my pitch counts too high for Walsh and Johnson and am running into SP fatigue without enough options ... Ah, hindsight.

Posted by npg32433 on 8/21/2019 1:50:00 PM (view original):
Somehow I picked the 8's and missed Walsh, Johnson, and Degrom! What in the actual **** was I thinking?

I think you might have outsmarted us all. Your 1888 Ben Sanders (who I don't even think I've ever seen before:) is easily outperforming my Walsh, Johnson AND deGrom. Good work!