Remember when the top of the standings were so close, that it seemed as a different person was #1 every other session. justinlee_24 is currently 93-51 in this "4th-162" game stretch and has a 7-win lead on 2nd place. His 5 playoff teams is also more than anybody else.

This has been so much fun although my teams are not doing so well. It's the best competition I've seen in the 6 months I've been playing. I wish there was another one starting as soon as this one ends. I know it's a lot to organize but I will 100% be in the next one.

As for my strategies for this one of going with what I know, it didn't go so well and will do more research next time around. I noticed that either I didn't draft enough innings or the players I have are not suited for the cap I used them in.

I'll patiently wait for the next one. Thanks to all the organizers for all the great work.

My $70M team went from the WC lead to 5 games out in a 5-game span. Any time any of my teams gets remotely close, a ridiculous losing streak takes me right out of it again. Must be nice for these teams that actually maintain their momentum.

Oh, and my only team with 60+ wins just happens to be sharing a division with the best team in the theme, and another 60-win team. So that team has to scratch and claw as well.

Through the first 108 games, my teams had been hanging around 29th place, where a decent run of games could have propelled them into the cage. Since then, we've gone 12-24. Really hoping we can turn it around quickly.

There's an old saying that Rodney don't get no respect. At least in the following case, the disrespect is warranted.

In the $80M theme my Rodney Scott is having a monumentally bad season. In the league forum I lamented the fact that WIS does not have a built-in WAR calculation, then opined that Scott's would likely be -4 or -5. I then decided to see if I could estimate how close to the mark that guess really was.

According to the interwebs, the lowest single-season WAR in MLB history was Jerry Royster's -4.1 in 1977. And, as it turns out, that Royster season is a good comp for my Rodney Scott, although the fault for that (even above and beyond me rostering him in the first place) is party mine.

First, let's look at offense. OPS+ seems like a good measurement. Royster's was a pitiful 46. It turns out OPS+ is easy to calculate ((OBP/LgAvgOBP)+SLG/LgAvgSLG) - 1)*100), and Rodney's abysmal .188/.249/.224 slash line yields an OPS+ of 40. Advantage, Royster.

Now, defense. Royster split time between 2B, SS and 3B. Comparing innings-weighted averages of his fielding % and range factor, compared to identically weighted league averages of the same, show that Royster's fielding % was 26 points below league average, and his range factor was .22 below league average. Now here's the problem that I created. For some bizarre reason, which is primarily the fact that, for me, an A range factor at SS is some kind of shiny object no matter how bad the fielding rating (in this case, D), I've been playing Scott at SS and Jean Segura at 2B, when it clearly should've been the other way around. So Scott shouldn't be as bad defensively as he's been. Another problem is that it would be time-consuming to calculate league average fielding % and range factor per position, so as a proxy I used an innings-weighted average of the 25 players listed on the SS fielding page in the League Leaders list. And Scott's fielding % is...wait for it...26 points below league average. Exactly the same as Royster. However, his A range has yielded a range factor that's .37 above league average, so slight advantage to Scott.

Finally, there's base stealing. Royster was 28/38, for 74%. Scott is obviously bolstered in this respect by the restrictions on catcher's arms in that theme, and he's 37/45, or 82%, which given the arm restriction is pretty pathetic come to think of it. Still, advantage Scott.

In 1977 Jerry Royster only played in about 68% of his team's innings, and Scott's stats quoted above were from a similar percentage of the eventual total season. So, given how close the two are statistically compared to league average, I think -4 is a pretty good approximation of Scott's current WAR. However, I have pretty much no choice but to start Scott every game, so unless he turns things around his WAR will continue to decrease. I've moved him to 2B to see if that will help, but by the end of the season I expect that he will have registered something along the lines of a -5 to -6 WAR. Truly remarkable, and another way of stating yet another time-tested adage: namely, that I'm a dumbass.

My first WISC has been a real learning experience. I am consistently in the low 60s for rankings as basically all my teams are under .500 although some are clawing back, none are threats for playoffs. I am not new to WIS, nor did I expect to Win this thing or even be in the Top 10 but clearly I HAVE learned the following:

• The competition here is really strong. I actually look forward to leagues where I can watch other owners (sometimes learn from them).
• I should have taken more time to build my teams. This is the most enjoyable part but I found myself digging in and needing to "get it done" with each vs. work a little, think about it, adjust, tweak, etc. I never worry about others do but clearly some of my ideas are NOT working. hahaha.
• I seldom play Open leagues (due to cookies/FADs) and have not paid much attention to 2016-2023 players performance, so I am sure I am missing something there. I play almost exclusively Progressives so the nuances of these quirky rules (not complaining/no offense intended) leaves me in the dark vs. just doing a search and picking someone.
• I also usually only play 2 (sometimes 3 at once) because I truly like to look at the boxes and manage the team. I am finding with these 6 in addition to my two Progs, I am not staying that close vs. just looking at W/L overall. My fault, but perhaps also a contributor to my performance.
• I also never usually play really quirky themes because I love the stats/trends vs. 3 clones on the same team or 15 in the league.

Net-Net, I could go on but a huge shout out to the organizers of this tourney for all their efforts and the standings link, etc. but I dont think I will enter next time. I just have not caught the fever for this..and NOT because my teams are losing (I lose a lot in many leagues...ahahha) and I actually have a team that was in 1st and is still battling for it but that didnt keep me interested. Im going to stay involved and play spoiler where I can vs. just ******** about my teams poor performances..haha. Thanks again to the WIS Owners who are in this tourney and love the game like I do.

Are there still plans to do a consolation league for 25-48? I'd love to participate if I qualify, but don't want to invest a ton of time crafting teams if it is not likely to happen

Posted by Bansberg on 7/11/2024 12:47:00 AM (view original):
Are there still plans to do a consolation league for 25-48? I'd love to participate if I qualify, but don't want to invest a ton of time crafting teams if it is not likely to happen

I'm building my teams now and would be happy to run it whether or not I advance. We would give plenty of time even if you hadn't started, but I'd suggest starting anyway.

A milestone! For the first time all season, I had all 6 teams above .500. Of course, 2 teams then lost the next game to drop back to 59-59

My $120M team has me contemplating bailing on SIM baseball as a whole. This engine is so broken. It's ridiculous.

your complaint here is that 1930 Gehrig and Ruth are only slashing .324/.399/.556 and .309/.428/.556 respectively? may I ask what you think reasonable numbers for those two players would be?

Posted by 06gsp on 7/12/2024 2:17:00 PM (view original):
your complaint here is that 1930 Gehrig and Ruth are only slashing .324/.399/.556 and .309/.428/.556 respectively? may I ask what you think reasonable numbers for those two players would be?

It's more the teams I'm losing to. My team is top of the league in runs scored, middle of the pick in pitching, yet I'm 11 games under .500 and keep losing to righty deadballers with unexceptional numbers. Based on the raw and normalized stats, that team should be one of the better teams in the league. Not fighting to stay out of last.

Does anyone else in the Box theme have a Jim Gleeson? I got him as a teammate of Gabby Hartnett, and he’s about to win MVP with his .368 batting average and 12 plus plays

Just checked the 100M_Data tab in the standings spreadsheet. In the far right column, I see there is only one Jim Gleeson.