Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Draft League(?)

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I'm working on an idea right now that combines a few things from different drafts that people seemed to enjoy - like Elo, single-season statistics, etc with a bit of moneyball thrown into the mix. The way I'd like to play it would require a sim as opposed to a vote and I'm working on that now.

    I don't want to hijack things and run another since I just did the last. But if this idea flies and we get participation, I'd gladly either run it or give the concept to somebody else if they'd like to run one.
    "Chuckie doesn't take on 2-0. Chuckie's hackin'." - Chuck Carr two days prior to being released by the Milwaukee Brewers

    Comment


    • I'm definitely intrigued by your description.

      Honestly, I doubt if anyone minds if you run it again.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDxgNjMTPIs

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Wade8813 View Post
        I'm definitely intrigued by your description.

        Honestly, I doubt if anyone minds if you run it again.
        I thought you might be since you have a really good grasp on how to draft. I don't just want to jump into this, but would like to see something going within the next week or so to keep us occupied now that baseball is over.
        "Chuckie doesn't take on 2-0. Chuckie's hackin'." - Chuck Carr two days prior to being released by the Milwaukee Brewers

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Ben Grimm View Post
          I'm working on an idea right now that combines a few things from different drafts that people seemed to enjoy - like Elo, single-season statistics, etc with a bit of moneyball thrown into the mix. The way I'd like to play it would require a sim as opposed to a vote and I'm working on that now.

          I don't want to hijack things and run another since I just did the last. But if this idea flies and we get participation, I'd gladly either run it or give the concept to somebody else if they'd like to run one.
          you can run it
          1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
          2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
          3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

          Comment


          • This is what I was thinking...

            An Elo draft in which the point total (using Babe Ruth as an example with 2969 points) is used as a cost for each player. I'm leaning on each team having somewhere from 35,000-40,000 points as a budget for 25 players. Players not on the Elo can have a base cost of 500 points or something like that.

            Whichever player is selected, the team that drafts him has the right to choose which single season that player will be performing. I'd like to keep current players out as solid ones with little playing time are a bit too much of a bargain. I'm actually not sure what I'd like to use as a range of seasons - do we go back to the 1800s? or something from 1901 -... or 1950 - 1990? That's pretty much up for discussion.

            The other thing I'd like to do is add a bit of a twist to this. That's where the moneyball part comes in and why I need to run this thru a simulator as opposed to a voting process.

            I'm looking to pick up a sim over the weekend. Depending on the learning curve, I hope to have it ready asap. The idea for this is to run at least multiple sims in order to establish a decent sample size to provide results I'm looking for.

            This isn't to simply build the best team money can buy - but the most wins for the least amount of money (or in this case, points). Once the draft is complete, I'd run the sim process and pull out the final W/L results for each team from each sim and find an average based on how many times I can run it.

            Once that's complete, the totals will be combined with each team's overal team salary (total points used in the draft). So a team who spends all 40k of his points to produce and average of 90 wins (444 pts per win) would actually lose out to a team spending 32k averaging 90 wins (355 ppw). However both would lose to a third team that spent 30k for 88 wins (341 ppw).

            Results from these three teams would be (using 154 games):

            Team 3: 88-56 (341 ppw)
            Team 2: 90-54 (355 ppw)
            Team 1: 90-54 (444 ppw)

            It needs a little bit of ironing out, but this is the basic idea of things. Any comments?
            "Chuckie doesn't take on 2-0. Chuckie's hackin'." - Chuck Carr two days prior to being released by the Milwaukee Brewers

            Comment


            • I love it - count me in.
              Last edited by John Shoemaker; 11-02-2012, 07:28 AM.

              Comment


              • I would suggest no deadball players and no no PED era players or at least one or the other

                Say 1920-1985
                1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
                2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
                3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

                Comment


                • I would think up to 1992 players were pretty clean. Then again up to 1985 would pretty much guarantee clean players. I hate to leave a clean Bonds off the list and since he's a good bargain with the elo rating his 1988-1992 stats would matchup pretty good. Maybe we could ban Canseco from the draft since he admitted to using since his rookie year.
                  "(Shoeless Joe Jackson's fall from grace is one of the real tragedies of baseball. I always thought he was more sinned against than sinning." -- Connie Mack

                  "I have the ultimate respect for Whitesox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Redsox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country."--Jim Caple, ESPN (Jan. 12, 2011)

                  Comment


                  • I don't know how we can decide who's a ped user and who isn't - only the players themselves know if they were using and most of them won't admit they did.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by John Shoemaker View Post
                      I don't know how we can decide who's a ped user and who isn't - only the players themselves know if they were using and most of them won't admit they did.
                      that is why eliminating the whole period is best
                      Last edited by 9RoyHobbsRF; 11-02-2012, 09:29 AM.
                      1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
                      2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
                      3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by 9RoyHobbsRF View Post
                        thta is why eliminating the whole period is best
                        Yeah you do have a good point on that whole era. I don't have a huge problem with players from 1901-1918 era though. Whatever is decided though i'm fine with. Although i'm not a big fan of the 19th century players.
                        "(Shoeless Joe Jackson's fall from grace is one of the real tragedies of baseball. I always thought he was more sinned against than sinning." -- Connie Mack

                        "I have the ultimate respect for Whitesox fans. They were as miserable as the Cubs and Redsox fans ever were but always had the good decency to keep it to themselves. And when they finally won the World Series, they celebrated without annoying every other fan in the country."--Jim Caple, ESPN (Jan. 12, 2011)

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by chicagowhitesox1173 View Post
                          Yeah you do have a good point on that whole era. I don't have a huge problem with players from 1901-1918 era though. Whatever is decided though i'm fine with. Although i'm not a big fan of the 19th century players.
                          well it was completely different baseball heavy on pitching and too many members overload their pithing staff with these pitchers

                          maybe make a rule limiting the number of players you can select from one era
                          Last edited by 9RoyHobbsRF; 11-02-2012, 09:30 AM.
                          1. The more I learn, the more convinced I am that many players are over-rated due to inflated stats from offensive home parks (and eras)
                          2. Strat-O-Matic Baseball Player, Collector and Hobbyist since 1969, visit my strat site: http://forums.delphiforums.com/GamersParadise
                          3. My table top gaming blog: http://cary333.blogspot.com/

                          Comment


                          • Two ways I was thinking as an option were this...

                            1) Use a select group of decades but not too large, so that if it works we can use remaining ones later. Such as 1921-1950 with the other being somethng like 1951-1990.

                            or,

                            2) we could use a pool from 1881-2000 (which is 12 decades). Each team's roster will be comprised of two players from each decade with the 25th player as an option to come from any one of those in play - giving each team three players from one decade. If you want it a bit more current, we could use 8 decades (3 players from each with one option) using something like 1911-1990 or 1921-2000.
                            "Chuckie doesn't take on 2-0. Chuckie's hackin'." - Chuck Carr two days prior to being released by the Milwaukee Brewers

                            Comment


                            • The point of moneyball was to have the most wins with whatever your budget is - not to be extra stingy and hope you don't lose as many wins . But your idea might still be interesting

                              It seems odd to me to ban thousands of players just because some of their peers happened to cheat (especially since players have been cheating throughout baseball history). Or in the case of deadball era players, not even because they cheat - but because one team might pick too many of them.

                              Of the options of 35k-40k points, I'd prefer to use 40k. IIRC, we used 50k before, and 35k is a HUGE drop-off. Too much IMO without any testing
                              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDxgNjMTPIs

                              Comment


                              • I don't like banning any players be it dead ball era players, current players, or players who used roids (we don't even know who they all are).

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X