One undefeated team left.

Posted by schwarze on 10/30/2024 6:23:00 PM (view original):
One undefeated team left.

They'll regress to the mean soon enough...

Update through 13 games...

The good news is that so far, we don't have any terrible teams. My worst team ('00 A's) is 5-8 and is in a 3-way tie for first in what I anticipated would be a very weak division (this team is 0-2 in 1-run games).

I have five 6-7 teams (30-35) but they are a combined 4-12 in 1-run games, which means 26-21 in games decided by 2+ runs, so there's hope for improvement.

I have four 7-6 teams (combined 7-5 in 1-run games). Two are currently advancing, two are not, including my top pick, 1915 Red Sox.

Ironically, my four 8-5 teams have been extremely unlucky (1-6 in 1-riun games). That's 31-14 in 2+ run games.

My three best teams (10-3, 10-3, 9-4) have been the recipient of good luck (14-3 in 1-run games, 15-7 in 2+ run games).

Overall, my 17 teams have an aggregate winning% of .561 with an average expected winning% of .570, which matches up with a 26-28 record in 1-run games.

It does feel that 1-run game luck will have a huge impact on playoff teams and which teams advance. There are 18 teams currently at 10-3 or better. They are a combined 51-13 in 1-run games and not a single one of these teams is below .500 in 1-run games. There are 38 teams at 9-4 and they are a combined 82-41 in 1-run games.

So far, I've drawn the short straw in comparisons to teams with similar rosters in my leagues ('60 Braves, '18 Senators, '33 Yankees, etc.). Hopefully things shift the other way soon.

So far about as expected. Luck and 1-run games playing a huge role in the standings. Bullpens, especially modern RPs with low IP/G, are vulnerable.

10 of my 16 teams are 7-9, 8-8, or 9-7. 2 teams overperforming ('52 Red Sox at 11-5, '40 Tigers somehow at 15-1). The '59 Reds are about as bad as I expected.

I am happy when any round is 9-7; ecstatic when it's better than that.

20-10 start. Absolute garbage since. 3-4 teams that already aren’t even worth checking anymore.

I’m enjoying the start for my 1928 Senators, 10-7 with Exp% over .600. I don’t expect it to last but maybe they’ll be better than I thought. For one, I stuck the team in Coors to go all in on the Sisler/Goslin/Cronin offense and the abundance of at-bats and innings (so fatigue isn’t an issue). For two, I didn’t actually realize this was Sisler’s only season in Washington so maybe that does give me a little differentiation over the other teams around us, though can’t imagine it offsets having 600 innings of the Big Train.

Thru 19 games, I have four teams below .500. They are a combined 3-16 in 1-run games. (31-26 in games decided by 2+ runs.)

Has anyone in any theme...in any league...in any salary cap...in any capacity at all...EVER had any luck with freakin' Billy Herman? Babe Herman, yes - but Billy Herman? He must have really ****** off the creators of the database because I believe he's wired to automatically be horrible.

I've been participating in these juice leagues since 2020. I've always had a bunch of teams in round 1. I've never gone undefeated in a single round 1 session, not would I ever expect to... with this many teams.

This pm session was the closest I've ever been. My 17 teams went 16-1, with the only loss a 6-5 Giants loss in extra innings. I was on the lucky side of the ledger though as I was 6-1 in 1-run games and 2-0 in 2-run games.

Yes, I know a 5-12 session is right around the corner since I posted this, but it was pretty cool. (I was also 6-1 in my other seven theme leagues).

I'm about 16-32 in division games in leagues where I have very similar/identical rosters to my division mates ('60 Braves, '18 Senators, '32 Yankees, '64 Giants, '20 Browns).

Fun with numbers - I was looking at the bang for the buck .......or the lack of bang for the buck for my high salaried hitters. I looked at all my hitters whose salary is $8.00M and above. For each of them I calculated their salary divided by there total slash line. For instance my 1930 Pirates K.Cuyler $8.29/1.129 = 7.28. The lower the number the better. The following are my results;

I have 14 hitters with a salary between 8.00M and 8.99M. Their average rating was 7.49. The best in that range were L. Berkman 01 STL 5.82, C. Jones 08 ATL 5.96 and N. Garciaparra 99 RS 5.99. The worst performers were J. Cronin 30 Wash 9.75, A.Jones 00 ATL 8.72, and F. Robinson 66 BAL 8.67.

I have 15 Hitters between 9.00M and 9.99M. Their average was 8.96. The best performers in that range were H. Manush 28 WAS 6.53, P.Rose 69 CIN 6.58 and J. Foxx 33 A's 6.94. Worst performers were J. Bench 77 CIN 17.35, W. Mays 62 SF 11.67 and G. Foster 77 CIN 10.25.

I have 7 hitters between 10.00M and 10.99M. Their average rating was 9.22. The best performer was T. Speaker 23 CLE 7.66 and the worst performer was L. Gehrig 30 NYY 11.87.

I have 5 hitters between 11.00M and 13.00M. Their average rating was 11.86. The best performer was J. Jackson 11WS 8.83 and the worst performer was W. Mays 54 SF 15.38.

I have 5 hitters over 15.00M. Their average rating was 18.46. The best performer was J. Foxx 32 A's 17.67 and the worst performer was B. Ruth 21 NYY 20.07
Not sure what that all means but I can say the numbers are skewed when you get to salaries over 13M. My best bang for the buck are in the $8M and 9M range, and J. Bench is my worst bang for the buck. Does anybody have a hitter to challenge J. Bench?

You're not factoring in defense. So Bench's will look bad because he has an A+ arm. Same with rangy centerfielders like Andruw Jones and Willie Mays. Also, small sample size. In a single league you can just get lucky, or unlucky. For example, in the 90M league, there were three Dave Davenports all with vastly different ERAs in the 2's, 3's and 4's.

Great defensive players (i.e., their salary is higher) will look worse than poor defensive players (given similar real life hitting stats). Bench, Mays, etc. Also, players like '27 Gehrig, '80 Brett, etc. will look worse b/c of their dynamic salary increases.

Great points about defense. I'm just saying Bench's slash line of .119/.241/.179 in 79 AB's is a disappointment. His 17.35 for 9.89M is going to be tough to beat.