Page 4 of 7

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:55 am
by J-Pav
Hanley can get you a LOT more than 100 in the right environment. The net runs are dramatically lower, but again, SS is such a hard place to find ANY offensive production.

The problem w/ Hanley though is that he's not exactly cheap. Jeter makes way more sense in this price range, and you already know I like Guzman because of his price to value. That value is not without some risk however.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:10 am
by thisisray
when using a park like citizens bank i found it easy to get players like buck and sexson. now they will hit around 200 but put them at the bottom of the lineup for cheap power and they can get over 30 home runs almost every time. you can even get uggla to dh and he too will get around 30 homers. to me they are great bargains and almost always not drafted.

Buck obviously overperformed in this season and its the best i have had him do to date:

Sexson hit 31 homers with 96 rbis(.199 BA) :D

Sexson with 35/97:

These are just a few examples but they have done it consistently for me, and I find them to be good bargains. I could give plenty more examples but its all pretty much the same result. I find it hard to pass up someone who can knock in 90 runs for under 3 mil and under 2 mil. they have helped me be able to put my money into other players. i have had great success with these players maybe you can too :D

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:47 am
by AeroDave10
Ray, those are great examples of getting production while saving cash, but in those last two examples you left money on the table. In one league it was 1M+ :shock:, and in the other it was :shock: :shock: 10M+ :shock: :shock: ... Isn't the point of saving money on some players so that you can spend it on others. You do know that SOM doesn't send refund checks or stimulus packages, right? :wink:


PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:38 pm
by edub1969
Great stuff J-Pav and everyone with comments. This really "opens my eyes" to other strategies to being the baseball statistical geek that I am :wink: it gives me something to play around with.

Also, I purchased the ratings disk, which has been VERY helpful, is that the same as your reference to the ratings book?

Thanks again J-Pav!

Keep these mind-numbing posts coming!


PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:59 pm
by edub1969

I know the OB and TB you are using in your example are "generic", meaning w/o BP effects on them. We'd be able to get more specific then by plugging in BP effects correct? So at AT&T Park (one I'm using currently) Sizemore's OBP and SLG I would use to plug in to the Lineup Analysis would be .415 and .434 respectively vs RHP. Am I doing that right? Thanks!


PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:34 pm
by thisisray
the team with 10+ mil is an AL only team. i forgot to mention that. there were salary requirements that we had to be under. I did have 3 mil less spent on players because of a bad draft, but there were no other guys left to get. somehow i made it to the finals and that starts tonight. i will most likely get easily beaten because of the injuries i have. and in the other one i dropped a RP and had some extra cash after getting a replacement and never used it, but in the beginning of the year I used all of the money i had. so of course im going to use all the money on other players that i have from saving by getting a few cheap guys with pop.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 10:41 pm
by J-Pav

I'm not sure if the ratings are zero ballpark effects or if they are with 1-10 (neutral) effects, so I'm not sure if your numbers are right. To me it doesn't matter, because I'm not trying to be that specific.

If you're willing to compute all that, that's fine - but I think in the end, all you need is that ratings book number (same as the disk) to tell you what you need to know.

PostPosted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:59 pm
by cummings2

As always, major kudos for the great thread and keeping on improving on the previous years' Magic Formula (tm). Not easy to do but you keep doing it.

I have been pretty quiet on the boards and "on the field" as I have been plagued with some pretty bad rolls for about a year and a half, I know enough of this game to know when I just got lousy rolls and with the exception of the odd team here and there that has been the way for me for some time. Still I enjoy the game and keep playing but I'd be lying if I didn't admit it it gets tiresome to have the opponent's Doug Davis strikeout my Magglio Ordonez three times while throwing a shutout. Sometimes it's just bad luck.

What has happened to me is that I haven't been experimenting as much as before and therefore my interest has been curtailed somewhat, experimenting is what makes this game fun for me, that's one of the reasons why I think the world of [b:aea1377ebe]fatty[/b:aea1377ebe], [b:aea1377ebe]luckyman[/b:aea1377ebe], [b:aea1377ebe]yourself[/b:aea1377ebe] and the wacko-wazacko players that are willing to try something new.

One of the few notions that have been playing in my head is the [i:aea1377ebe]head-to-head salary matchups[/i:aea1377ebe] that is how much moolah are you playing vs the opponent. In teams with stud aces -say Peavy- (I'm guilty of such teams) three out of every four games (75% of the games you play) you are already sitting down 9 mil. If on top of tha you have a Milton Bradley injured (likely scenario) you are already sitting down almost 16 mil. and if you have a 1.5 mil backup catcher then you're already down 17 mil, throw in a platoon where you split 4 mil in 2 players say 2.5 vs RHP and 1.5 vs LHP and voila you're nearing the 20 mil on the bench. Then you add the other members of the rotation and before you realize you are actually landing a pretty crappy team 75% of the times.

So what's my point... I have no idea. Just a thought that has been floating in my knuckleheaded universe.

Anyway, given my record in the last year and a half no-one should listen to C2 :lol:

As always, all best of luck J!


PostPosted: Thu Nov 13, 2008 5:34 pm
by durantjerry
I have had trouble putting toigether good teams with Peavy. He hasn't been dominant enough for me to justify, as you said, sitting down 9 million 75% of the time.