Quote:
Originally Posted by DawnBTVS
With all that said, when I do choose 3 year recalc, I'm fine with a 75-80% closeness. If you look at enough players in real life, they usually have an aberration or two season wise (e.g. David Cone went from 20-3 to 14-8, 14-10, and finally 14-14 but bounces back to 17-10). So which season is "realistic"? The ones where he's winning 14 games or the top end of 17/20 wins?
|
Wins aren't an effective measure of a pitcher's talent as Felix Hernandez has shown us. I'm more concerned with WHIP and ERA+. With that said, when a pitcher has three years of 1.35, 1.41 and 1.24 WHIP and posts a 1.05 it throws me off. In my mind, that pitcher has shown he's not capable of that type of year in real life, so why is he all of the sudden so much better in the game (assuming he is on same team with coaching off). That's exacerbated when the 1.24 was a career low. If he was on a different team with better coaching I could maybe see it. But all things being even, it's hard to wrap my head around.
As far as your comment about looking at box scores, for me, I like to get players to perform like real life and then see what happens if some of the free agents signed with different teams or a few trades were made that didn't happen in real life. Could being on a different team affect their stats? Could they propel a 2nd place team to win their division? Kind of like your scenario of Bonds going to the Red Sox instead of the Giants.