Comments on: More Math, Less % – WTNY Reports, You Decide… http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/2010/02/02/more-math-less-wtny-reports-you-decide/ AL Fantasy Baseball League Tue, 03 Apr 2012 21:37:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Andy http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/2010/02/02/more-math-less-wtny-reports-you-decide/comment-page-1/#comment-737 Andy Tue, 09 Feb 2010 01:57:09 +0000 http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/?p=339#comment-737 Crap! Crap!

]]> By: Marc http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/2010/02/02/more-math-less-wtny-reports-you-decide/comment-page-1/#comment-736 Marc Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:29:59 +0000 http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/?p=339#comment-736 Geek Geek

]]> By: Sot http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/2010/02/02/more-math-less-wtny-reports-you-decide/comment-page-1/#comment-734 Sot Mon, 08 Feb 2010 14:55:38 +0000 http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/?p=339#comment-734 Just wait until I start talking about Standard Deviation. Just wait until I start talking about Standard Deviation.

]]> By: Andy http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/2010/02/02/more-math-less-wtny-reports-you-decide/comment-page-1/#comment-732 Andy Sun, 07 Feb 2010 02:57:27 +0000 http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/?p=339#comment-732 THAT. JUST. HAPPENED. THAT. JUST. HAPPENED.

]]> By: WTNY http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/2010/02/02/more-math-less-wtny-reports-you-decide/comment-page-1/#comment-731 WTNY Sun, 07 Feb 2010 02:16:15 +0000 http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/?p=339#comment-731 Can's wait to hear which rule 'Will Hunting' will want to "re-vote" on next, got to say though, that's probably the best nickname I've heard since league inception. Before you waste everyone's time in the future, can you please be certain that you've got enough votes to make it worthwhile and you come up with a formula that doesn't look like HD + SV/.008 (Joba * 3.14) = I have no clue what I'm trying to do? I'd like the last week of my life back please. Can’s wait to hear which rule ‘Will Hunting’ will want to “re-vote” on next, got to say though, that’s probably the best nickname I’ve heard since league inception. Before you waste everyone’s time in the future, can you please be certain that you’ve got enough votes to make it worthwhile and you come up with a formula that doesn’t look like HD + SV/.008 (Joba * 3.14) = I have no clue what I’m trying to do? I’d like the last week of my life back please.

]]> By: King4Life http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/2010/02/02/more-math-less-wtny-reports-you-decide/comment-page-1/#comment-727 King4Life Fri, 05 Feb 2010 19:48:21 +0000 http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/?p=339#comment-727 I vote A. I vote A.

]]> By: Sot http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/2010/02/02/more-math-less-wtny-reports-you-decide/comment-page-1/#comment-723 Sot Wed, 03 Feb 2010 20:48:39 +0000 http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/?p=339#comment-723 I hear ya Richie. Teams who have cheap productive closers are always going to perform well. The save category is cyclical in nature. Either it's a young cheap stud who produces for many years, or a mid salary guy who contributes for a couple years then suddenly stops performing or get's hurt. The nature of the beast with relievers. They just don't last that long. I hear ya Richie. Teams who have cheap productive closers are always going to perform well. The save category is cyclical in nature. Either it’s a young cheap stud who produces for many years, or a mid salary guy who contributes for a couple years then suddenly stops performing or get’s hurt. The nature of the beast with relievers. They just don’t last that long.

]]> By: Richie http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/2010/02/02/more-math-less-wtny-reports-you-decide/comment-page-1/#comment-722 Richie Wed, 03 Feb 2010 20:34:14 +0000 http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/?p=339#comment-722 Don't remember consciously punting saves in '05 just looking at the saves totals that year might explain why we only had 8 saves. 2005 top 3 teams had over 100 saves next closest 73(also note the first year of holds were introduced to SOT). 2006 top 4 saves 83,79,72,56. 2007 top 4 87,79,71,66. 2008 86,85,77,69. 2009 90,75,57,49 the most notable drop in the top 4 also note quality starts were introduced. The save is struggling, yes some closers are high priced but the introduction of some other stats have played a role. Punting a category and sucking in one are totally different Don’t remember consciously punting saves in ’05 just looking at the saves totals that year might explain why we only had 8 saves. 2005 top 3 teams had over 100 saves next closest 73(also note the first year of holds were introduced to SOT).
2006 top 4 saves 83,79,72,56.
2007 top 4 87,79,71,66.
2008 86,85,77,69.
2009 90,75,57,49 the most notable drop in the top 4 also note quality starts were introduced.
The save is struggling, yes some closers are high priced but the introduction of some other stats have played a role. Punting a category and sucking in one are totally different

]]> By: alskjfgalsdjk http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/2010/02/02/more-math-less-wtny-reports-you-decide/comment-page-1/#comment-721 alskjfgalsdjk Wed, 03 Feb 2010 14:09:59 +0000 http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/?p=339#comment-721 I agree, Pete. I would be for making it 1.0 vs .50. I know I have been against the whole thing but this would be better than what was voted on. This way we just reduce the value of the Hold I agree, Pete. I would be for making it 1.0 vs .50. I know I have been against the whole thing but this would be better than what was voted on. This way we just reduce the value of the Hold

]]> By: King4Life http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/2010/02/02/more-math-less-wtny-reports-you-decide/comment-page-1/#comment-720 King4Life Wed, 03 Feb 2010 13:22:56 +0000 http://sonsoftheo.com/blog/?p=339#comment-720 I'm already sensing a trend here with DMB and this ' not enough closers to go around' - He had this same stance about catchers a few years ago. Which i think was a pretty bad rule change. Harder is better for the league IMO. Coincidence DMB never really had good closers/catchers? I think its clear people want some more value for closers. 1.0 vs .50 seems relatively simple right? Will Hunting, do you have a blackboard around where you can disprove this? I’m already sensing a trend here with DMB and this ‘ not enough closers to go around’ – He had this same stance about catchers a few years ago. Which i think was a pretty bad rule change. Harder is better for the league IMO.

Coincidence DMB never really had good closers/catchers?

I think its clear people want some more value for closers. 1.0 vs .50 seems relatively simple right?

Will Hunting, do you have a blackboard around where you can disprove this?

]]>