Posted by erne6 on 6/5/2014 2:46:00 PM (view original):
I noticed brianjw used his first 9 picks for pitchers. Maybe that is the secret??

This was a change for me; I'm normally a hitting first guy. But I realised that there is much more agreement over who the best pitchers are than who the best hitters are. I think having ERC# in the search makes it a bit easy. That's not a perfect measure of value of course. But the rule "Draft the best ERC# you can get with the $ you have to spare" is a pretty good approximation to the ideal. There is nothing like that for hitters.

So there are almost no hidden gems on the pitching side by the middle of a draft, but there are plenty on the hitting side. And that's especially true in a low to mid cap draft. If I did this over, I might have gone even heavier on pitching, and not been left with Mike Maddux pitching crucial innings.

I draft my staff with ErC3 as my primary category, using other stats to fine-tune selections.  Back when Wissearch was around, the closest batting stat to ERC# I found was RC27#, I used it all the time.  Of course, we don't have that in WIS ...

Hey, I broke up those Killer B's.

Posted by schwarze on 6/10/2014 4:29:00 PM (view original):
Hey, I broke up those Killer B's.

Yes you did, what was more impressive is that you did it after drafting Elton Chamberlain

Something doesn't seem right with the last update...  I know brianjw is doing really well but I can't see his teams gaining 20 points when they've only played 2 games each  between the update from 62 games to 64.  My preliminary addition via standings have it 193, 189, 179 with the order still brianjw, me then schwarze (didn't look if he got passed).

Consider I've gone 5 for 5 the past 2 cycles, I was kinda surprised I lost ground/got passed 

yeah, something is wrong - I zip right through these updates, copying/pasting/deleting rows columns/adding formulas and sorting a few times different ways to parse the data I want.  I must have made a mistake somewhere.  I will update again this afternoon.

Yep, I expected to fall back after a 2-8 performance the last two sessions.

Pythagoras where art thou? We are currently playing between .60 and .80 % points below our expected record in each league!

Through 80 Games

brianjw	238
buddhagamer	227
schwarze	226
Trentonjoe	220
barracuda3	219
batandball	218
dorkster	217
mpitt76	215
SpotSell	206
mllama54	202
pinotfan	201
cholatse	198
razorclams	198
ybjsports	197
ghsisler	193
besterateam	193
calhoop	191
snuffy45	191
horus_6	188
markeking	188
contrarian23	184
reddtrain	181
pmars2001	164
erne6	145

Thank you for not doing any differentials between updates.  I don't want to see just how bad a tailspin I am in.

My five teams are on a pace to win 104, 100, 96, 86 and...... wait for it..... 69 games.

I'm not sure if I'm more shocked that three teams are doing extremely well, or that one team is doing extremely poorly. 

Well my teams tried to keep up with Brianjw, but seems to have fallen off the pace dramatically.  Maybe schwarze can make a run at him instead.

Through 92 Games

brianjw	275
schwarze	261
dorkster	258
buddhagamer	255
Trentonjoe	253
mpitt76	250
batandball	248
barracuda3	246
mllama54	235
cholatse	231
SpotSell	231
razorclams	230
snuffy45	229
ybjsports	229
pinotfan	228
besterateam	222
ghsisler	220
calhoop	219
markeking	219
horus_6	214
contrarian23	208
reddtrain	206
pmars2001	186
erne6	167

SpotSell, feel free to leave old posts up (instead of replacing them).  I like to see trends.

Consistently average: all five of my teams have 45-48 wins.