Quote:
Originally Posted by smiller
My fictional league is in its 10th season(started it with 1952 stats), but I want fewer home runs and better ERAs, so I'm using 1976 stats as my basis. However even with that I find some totals inflated so I continually edit select stats like home runs, bases on balls, etc. to get league totals near where I want them. I've done this in the past with other fictional leagues and it seems to work very well. You just have to keep checking and sometimes do minor readjustments.
|
after you edited the totals, did you autocalculate new modifiers for those newly inputed totals? if not, that is why.
just a note... sometimes increasing offense a bit can actually lower the ERA of your better pitchers, even though the league ERA rises.. it can, in some circumstances, create a greater deviation from the top talent compared to lesser talent levels. i have an idea of baselines i want, but if bumping it a hair predocues these results, i stick with it (only personal preference, obviously -- i think it's a sweet spot that just opens things up statistically at various ~baseline ranges, not just 1 spot)
the totals on their own only create a baseline of sorts... then the modifiers have to make it jive with player talent distribution in your league (maybe not exactly in code and behaviour, but from an end-user standpoint, that's its function)
if it's not a transition period, like i mentioned, it will stay within an expected range. i have 150-200+ years of runs that show this type of result. i use static LTM in every league i have created since i bought it for the first time.
you can expect +/- 10% or more in any stat. sb attempts are on eof the "more" categories. it takes a long time to get a beat on that long-term average that results from a static set of LTM.
if you use autocalculate, instead of one of the 2 spreadsheets spoken of in this thread, you will likely constantly adjust in any ~50 year run or so.. eventually you'd hone it down to the same ~LTM eventually if not reacting too much to volatility... with min.max you can makes some guesses if oyu know a bit about volatility for that stat and a related LTM set (full set, any 1 different can have big effect on another.. fewer hits means fewer sb attempts, all other things remaining the same).
Also, if you changed # of HR in LT, did you also adjust BABIP? if not, it's not wise to change the totals and not make them jive mathematically with each other. do the method where i suggest autocalcing, then reduce by some % you've deduced over time to work well. it should remain fairly similar if settings and statistical environment settings are not altered in the meantime.
year to year fluctuation, even a decade or 2 of futility can occur, due to dynamics of players created for a draft. it's not always the LTM/LT's cause.
koohead --
it's maybe not entire mlb history, but definitely from it. they couldn't compare it to 1871-2018 stats lumped together, i hope... i'd guess broken up by the same eras they have in game -- when LTM change etc... that's a new +/- baseline set of stats? just a guess.
you could do the math and compare to that year... maybe it's specific to the year and not average of the era? it will, nonetheless be something similar.
that screen is only visible when you start with a real world league, i think. even if you transition to fictional after 2019 and beyond. so, not sure waht the baseline they choose..maybe 2018 in perpetuity? again, if you do the math and compare you'd see if it's 35% above some RL result or not.
sb attempts... just volatile as heck even with static LTM. don't knee-jerk react to any one year... if oyu think it drops too low or high, make and adjustment due to peak or valley of concern. i'd focus on individuals for this particular LTM -- are the best guys getting the #s you want/expect? don't worry about the league-wide stuff on that. if oyu want a guy to reach 100 with max speed/stealing then up it until that occurs at the rate you want to see.
it's funky changing sb-attempts and success... once can alter the range of the other etc etc... you'll see it has multiple "steps" or if diagrmed "U" or rightside of U-shape shapes and hypotenuses inbetween
(spelling) or, that's my guess. you can rais it incrementally while changin nothign else and it will go up, up, and then down significantly (100+years of data averaged, not 1 year)
more than a few ltm work this way, but not all.