Archive of SportingNews.com's old SOM Baseball forum

[b:9ea2aa5c6c]Tom[/b:9ea2aa5c6c]:

Look at your Event 5 League 6 team. It's a great team and a great example of fitting the profile!

[b:9ea2aa5c6c]Splinter[/b:9ea2aa5c6c]:

I'm still a strong proponent of the high dollar middle reliever - I have always thought it's a good idea to spend up for the guy who gets the most innings. I'm not seeing it as much this year as year's past, but you should write it up and start a discussion.

Thx for the comments guys!

LOL, was just looking at my Event 5 League 6 team.

Next to last in runs scored and the lowest HR's but with an offensive whip of 1.53 compared to a pitching whip of 1.27. Record of 72-57, 2nd best in league to J-pav.

By Jove I think he's on to something!

:idea:

[b:a294f69c75]Stoney[/b:a294f69c75]:

Well, I'd never argue to be last in runs scored, but...

(I think your pitching [best in league] has quite a bit more to do with your record, i.e. the net WHIP, but that [b:a294f69c75]IS[/b:a294f69c75] something of an anomaly, isn't it?)

By the by, that's another example of a strong team that fits the profile. FWIW, my hitter's park team in E5L6 has a NEGATIVE net WHIP (1.37-1.45)! I'm winning w/ the net homers game and strong pitching (that was my strategy from the outset).

HAL likes me, you and [b:a294f69c75]spicki[/b:a294f69c75] so far, but my gosh does he hate [b:a294f69c75]Frank[/b:a294f69c75] (minus 10 from pythag projection, .500 record despite +107 net runs).

This is like the [URL=http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/stratomatic/playoffs/standings_regseason.html?group_id=50381][color=darkred:a294f69c75][u:a294f69c75]Twilight Zone[/u:a294f69c75][/color:a294f69c75][/URL] league of all time!

What about some auto draft strategy?

I was saving that for my Secret Formula Theory in Action post, but since I went 0-3 on opening day, I'm keeping my keyboard quiet for right now!

Incidentally, here are my All-Time SOM Online conspiracy theories:

1. If you brag on a team before the season starts, HAL will destroy you.
2. If you post a team in the middle of the season that is on pace to win 135 games, you will win only 99.
3. If you have a team in the playoffs that does well, all the rest of your running teams will lose two of three or get swept.

1. click on any of the games (boxscores) of the team/league you want to link, you will see a group id #

2. Copy the group id #

3 replace the group id on the link below and voila!

http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/stratomatic/playoffs/standings_regseason.html?group_id=55320

(The link is to my latest disaster of a team)

C2

Thx [b:471c87b805]C2[/b:471c87b805]!

I thought I remembered how to do it from the boxscores, but I kept ending up w/ a blank standings page. Should work now, I think I successfully changed the "Twilight Zone" link above.

I don't see you much in these parts anymore.

You hurt my feelings by not dropping in a comment or two after checking in. Any bones to throw a fellow old dog out here?

Thanks for your help with the whole net whip concept help. I guess I was missing the boat a bit.

So what are your thoughts about playing a 4 in the corner out field spots?I've noticed you've been using Salazar (a budget oriented 3) when I would think a better bat might make sense. After all if you're crazy enough to play Guzman at SS who really cares about a 4 in one of the corners. :) Thanks in advance

Salazar's a platoon I use against RHP only. In our "Got Wood League", I'm using him as a sub (because Bonds and D. Roberts will be hurt a lot). He's not actually in my starting line-up.

I have used him successfully on some other teams. He has what I call an "okay" card against RHP, but for some unknown reason (and I have seen this on other manager's teams as well) HAL treats him unusually nice. He just seems to give you a lot of upside surprise.

I think that cards like Bourn and Lofton are statistically much better than Salazar's, but for some reason they always seem like disappointments on my teams.

I have no problems playing a 4 in the corners, and I've happily used Thome (a five) at 1B. I do try to limit the errors though, because one Guzman on the team really is enough. At some point the bad range and surplus errors will start showing up as losses. I'm trying to find the edge of that line and camp right there, because I think that's where you find the most value.

In another thread where I threw out some line-up help, a manager was going for low total errors. I think this is a mistake, because it speaks to that "too much of a good thing" stuff I wrote about above. On the other hand, I applaud him for watching the experiment unfold for himself. He's trying to isolate an idea and see what works and what doesn't.

FWIW, [b:5294dbd3a0]Durantjerry[/b:5294dbd3a0] is extremely proficient at that type of team.