Posted by bayridgeguy on 1/1/2017 12:35:00 PM (view original):
Ozamatali, im refering to the hot streaks themselves, in my current league, ive won 24-32, exactly .750 percentage. In the team before that, 113-49, but i was playing near .800 ball for an extended span, after a huge slump. Again, i didnt say i had a.750 pct, i just said that during hot streaks i win at a .750 clip. If youre gonna post in disagreement, please read what i am saying

It's difficult to make a point about reading when you misspell my username so badly.

Personally, I can't tell if you're simply trolling or if you actually do believe in momentum in this game. I also have lost interest. The answer is a clear no. If you cannot accept that, then I wish you luck.

I clash your counterargument perfectly, and you shift the focus to me misspelling your username. Meh.

My counterargument is that your initial contention is based on a small sample size and, further, goes against the nature of the game you are playing. You offered no refutation of this, only that I misread what you were referring to with regard to your winning percentage. So, I'd argue that it was you who initiated a shift in focus, and I simply played along.

The Sim engine is based on algorithms, not luck. It doesn't take into account if you are "in the zone" or struggling. Your argument holds no water. Your claim is based on only a few seasons. Hardly a long term basis for what you claim to be seeing.

This is like that guy who was 100% convinced that the SIM was programmed for 9th inning drama and his proof was that he'd "noticed" his team blowing a lot of late-game leads. Users then posted their SLB blown save data from multiple leagues and the blown save percentages were all below real-life MLB averages. I don't think we ever heard from that guy again.

I think many of us would like to see such a thing exist. I certainly would like to have some of my teams get on a 2011 Cardinals roll. Such a team would be a delight to see.

We may only win a title every 50 teams, but...

We make the playoffs more than one-third of the time. (One-third of teams make the playoffs, at least in Open Leagues and *most* other leagues.)

In over 200 teams, we have an above .500 collective record.

We know how to build good teams. At least good regular season teams. The playoffs are a bit of a crapshoot though.

Honestly, the fact that you think your team is a .750 team is what tells me that your team is worse than you think it is. No team in the SIM is that good in an Open League (conversely, the rest of the league isn't that bad). Even if a team might win close to that many, luck definitely plays a factor. Random events are random. (Might be different in some themes, but a well-designed theme doesn't let this happen either.)

It wasn't intended as insulting. Just a dash of reality. We don't build .750 teams. No one does. Realistically, the SIM should have a greater competitive balance than real life, because everyone's on the same cap. The difference in quality comes from skill and experience to an extent, though I'm sure I can still make an open league team lose 90 games.

Then again, we don't play Open Leagues.

The OP here perfectly encapsulates our existence in a post-facts world. Some would even say post-truth.

Essentially, the argument comes down to a belief in something that can be completely disproved, but the OP will only become more convinced the more anyone tries to explain it.

This is basically what our politics have become, and it's a dangerous downward spiral.

What he (or she or it) said!

This thread has lost its momentum

Posted by laramiebob on 1/2/2017 11:20:00 AM (view original):
What he (or she or it) said!

That would be "he." Thanks.

Posted by mlent on 1/2/2017 12:43:00 PM (view original):
This thread has lost its momentum

The thread started off like gangbusters, very quickly it was up by 10 games on the second most popular thread, everyone said the pennant was locked up, World Series tickets were printed, and then...and then...and then WIS got worried and put their thumbs on the scales, gave it the malocchio, sent the doomed thread into a tailspin from which it never recovered. 1964 Phillies redux!

It sure seems that when certain players start off slow in a league, they never recover. Could be that the whole league is built in such a way that makes it difficult for that player to perform, but seems that more often than not, guys never really recover from slow starts.

I do remember one specific league where I had the 1885 Roger Connor start the season 1-40 hitting .025. He finished the season around .320 with roughly 700 AB. That means he hit about .338 for the majority of a full season (probably around 150 games), which is fantastic, but if you only looked at his raw average early on, he was in the .000's and .100's for a long time and it took nearly half the season to appear respectable again. We tend to remember and lament the guys who never seem to turn it around though, and conveniently forget the guys who do because they don't fit the narrative kept alive in the forums that the SIM is deviously programmed to hurt us somehow. Nobody mentions the guys who over perform for a full season, or update posts to say "Hey, this guy who sucked for half the year had a huge second half". When you only see complaints about the bad performances, you focus on those and exaggerate how frequently they occur.