Quote:
Originally Posted by Orcin
I am not a statistician, so I am asking those that are for an honest appraisal. Is this within the expected range of variance?
I took the Trouts in my league that had over 2000 plate appearances (perfect leagues only). Surely that is a big enough sample size and yes there is variation in the competition etc.
To me, a variance in OPS between .841 and .702 for a card that is rated "perfect" is pretty large. However, that .702 could be an outlier. So if you tell me that the difference between the second-best and the second-worst OPS in this list is well within the expected results, then I will accept that this level of variance is normal and shut up.
Attachment 605457 |
This is perfectly fine.
Guys, this is all within normal statistical variances. There is no bug, it's the way it is meant to be and it is 100% realistic. It's all about sample size and the competition that the player faces.
We could easily eliminate all variances (if AVG < Expected_AVG then player_gets_hit
but that would destroy the whole engine and be totally unrealistic.
I'll close this thread now, as it discusses a problem which does not exist.
