|
Yes, I'm a big fan of Bill James (not that I can claim that I'm an expert on all of his formulas). And I completely agree that a team's won-loss record in a given year is always going to contain a certain element of luck. I just felt, and I still feel, that OOTP's simulation can be off base on certain historical teams, especially since the new version was just released and bugs are still being fixed. My assessment is that the 1922 Chisox were not really a good enough team to win 77 games without a lot of luck ... based on a look at their roster, plus their record the following season, I think they were already enjoying a large helping of luck to win 77 games in 1922. But in the OOTP simulation, they're consistently winning MORE than 77 games, sometimes significantly more. So I think that there are some incorrect ratings on that team. I could be wrong, of course. And like I said before, it's really not that big of a deal. I'm going to do more testing of historical seasons and see what I get. The game is fun, which is the bottom line. But to me, it's more fun if I feel like it's really giving me realistic results.
|