Hard to explain question about streaks

lgkeeper · 10-14-2003, 02:03 PM

Go with me on this one...

Can a player get "Hot"? Or a player have his good "stuff"? Or when it all comest down to it, is as likely to strike out in one AB as he was the AB before? I know this all comes down to how the game is coded.

For example:

When a pitcher gets through 3 or 4 innings in a real-life MLB game, you'll hear the announcers talk about what great stuff he has - how he's virtually unhittable on that given day. Having said that, the pitcher seems much more likely to strike out his next batter b/c - on that day - he was a better pitcher.

Now, in OOTP, it certainly seems like players have good 'stuff' on a certain day, but is it all just coincidental? If I have a guy give up 5 runs in 5 innings and want to lift him, can I say "he just doesn't have it today?" or is that not taken into account? Do I lift him for a reliever who isn't as good (ratings wise) b/c he doesn't have 'it' or, b/c he has better ratings than the reliever, is he still more likely to get the next guy out despite his poor performance to that point?

I hope you guys get what I'm saying. I tried to search for this topic, but I didn't exactly know what to search for.

Thanks in advance...

Henry · 10-14-2003, 02:07 PM

Markus once said there wasn't any reason to include coding to try and recreate streaks, etc. since the law of averages was plenty to provide a scenario close enough to reality.

I tend to believe that... when you see one of your players on the "hot" or "cold" list, he really is there out of chance, not because he's been "programmed" to do so

lgkeeper · 10-14-2003, 02:08 PM

Thanks for the quick response. Any other feedback would be appreciated.

Gastric ReFlux · 10-14-2003, 02:31 PM

I think, somtimes, that players with an inconsistent label may have "adjustments " to cause streakiness. But I may be wrong on that.

sporr · 10-14-2003, 02:32 PM

I agree with Henry. The game doesn't change the % of a player doing well based on their performance within the game.

D Love · 10-14-2003, 03:08 PM

But, if there is no code to vary a performance day-to-day, then it would seem that if the same 5-star SP throws 75 pitches through 5 IP in 1 game and allows 7 ER, and then goes the same 75 pitch, 5 IP the next start and has a perfect game, you should leave him in in either case.

My gut would say that the game should have SOMETHING (perhaps reduced ratings for the day) that explain why the guy just got knocked for 7 runs in 5 IP and that he's best off being relieved for. Otherwise, the player's individual game performance should never be taken into account when making roster moves.

lgkeeper · 10-14-2003, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by D Love
But, if there is no code to vary a performance day-to-day, then it would seem that if the same 5-star SP throws 75 pitches through 5 IP in 1 game and allows 7 ER, and then goes the same 75 pitch, 5 IP the next start and has a perfect game, you should leave him in in either case.

My gut would say that the game should have SOMETHING (perhaps reduced ratings for the day) that explain why the guy just got knocked for 7 runs in 5 IP and that he's best off being relieved for. Otherwise, the player's individual game performance should never be taken into account when making roster moves.

That's what I'm getting at. This revelation completely changes the way I will manage each game.

D Love · 10-14-2003, 04:09 PM

Well, I don't think there is a "revelation" yet. I agree with the fact that we shouldn't have "hot" or "cold" streaks affect stats. In other words, Because I went 4-10 doesn't make me more likely to get a hit in the next AB than if I went 0-10.

I THINK that the game-to-game, rather than AB-to-AB or pitch-to-pitch issue is slightly different. I would assume that OOTP has some other factors that make a pitcher more hittable on one day than another. Otherwise, this WOULD be a huge find.

A Pedro Martinez type would simply be used for X pitches every start. Once he's tired, he'll get worse. But until then, regardless of whether he's given up 15 ERs or has a perfect game, you would know his chances for a strong performance in the next inning would be the same in either case.

Whenever I delve into OOTP logic, it really turns me off to the game... I prefer the don't think, don't tell approach where I can pretend this game does take into account little nuances like these.

Sweed · 10-14-2003, 05:14 PM

Just my 2 cents worth but why would anyone want to know? If you know how the game works and why, where's the fun? I sometimes wonder how much fun the game can be for Markus to play when he knows how everything works.

I agree with D Love and the don't tell approach.

lgkeeper · 10-14-2003, 05:44 PM

I hear what you're saying. The only reason I wanted to know is that, when I have a SP who is struggling, but my bullpen is weak, I would keep him in until he's tired no matter how poorly he's performed b/c his chances are better to get the next out. There isn't (from what I'm reading) a "he just doesn't have it today" code in there.

Cooker · 10-14-2003, 06:34 PM

I have no idea how the game's coded. I also don't want to.

I only know (for example) that most days my ace SP "has it" and other days (rarely) he just doesn't.

If I leave my ace SP in for another inning despite the fact that he got uncharacteristically rocked in the first inning and then again in the second inning, hoping against hope for the law of averages to "kick in", I'm usually disappointed because it usually doesn't.

I think my players have good days and bad days, good streaks and bad streaks. This seems life-like to me and I love it.

Like I said, I don't want to know if it's coding or merely the law of averages playing out. I don't need to know. I only need to keep playing OOTP5.

Does this make any sense to anyone else?

Sweed · 10-14-2003, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lgkeeper
I hear what you're saying. The only reason I wanted to know is that, when I have a SP who is struggling, but my bullpen is weak, I would keep him in until he's tired no matter how poorly he's performed b/c his chances are better to get the next out. There isn't (from what I'm reading) a "he just doesn't have it today" code in there.

That's exactly why I don't want to know, I want to make the decision based on performance not knowing the code. If you know for sure how it's coded then you make your decision based on that and not the game situation, hardly a realistic way to do it.

It may or may not be in there through the consistency rating, who can say besides Markus? I have found though like Cooker that when a stud is getting rocked as IRL he usually doesn't get "it" back in that game but continues to get shelled.

Slant · 10-14-2003, 08:55 PM

I disagree. Every player has a 'consistency' rating, and consistency is effectively the ability to ward off streaks. Therefore, either
(A) the consistency rating does nothing, or
(B) there is code in the game for streaks.

I tend to believe B, but I have no evidence.

Skipaway · 10-14-2003, 09:55 PM

No code to change what a player will do based on what he just did doesn't mean there isn't a "he just doesn't have it today" code.

Perhaps there are indeed codes to decide how a player will do on a specific day? Something like a 10% effectiveness variation?

sporr · 10-15-2003, 09:43 AM

I always think of the consistency rating as a representation of the standard deviation for a player's stats. Take a hitter who hits .300. If he's very consistent, his actual average may vary from .280-.320. The same hitter with poor consistency may have an average that varies from .260-.340. I'm not sure if this is really how it happens, but it would make sense.

Slant · 10-15-2003, 08:53 PM

sporr:

that makes sense too.
I always thought of it as consistency over a short period, like hitting about the same every week and not going on slumps and then making up for it with back-to-back 5 for 5 performances.

But as you point out, consistency over a career makes just as much, if not more, sense. A "Precision" rating, if you will.

D Love · 10-29-2003, 11:55 AM

So did we ever come up with a conclusion as to whether a pitcher, say an HOF ace-type, should be pulled out of a game in the 2nd inning after allowing 7 runs on 10 hits? For the 3rd inning, does OOTP treat the ace as at his full ratings or is the ace effectively subject to "reduced ratings" for that day?

Gastric ReFlux · 10-29-2003, 11:57 AM

I don't know what was decided.

I just play like I would if the game were actually out there on the grass and dirt. I pull my ace if he's getting kicked around.

Ragnar · 10-29-2003, 01:08 PM

It doesn't really matter to me if there is a code in there or not. All I know is that when a pitcher plays poorly for the first 4 or 5 innings I pull him. It is extremely unlikly that he will turn it around and start pitching well for the rest of the game if i leave him in. Don't forget the batters. They may be having a good day on your pitchers expense.

10-14-2003, 02:03 PM	#1
lgkeeper All Star Starter Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: My front porch lookin' in Posts: 1,137	Hard to explain question about streaks Go with me on this one... Can a player get "Hot"? Or a player have his good "stuff"? Or when it all comest down to it, is as likely to strike out in one AB as he was the AB before? I know this all comes down to how the game is coded. For example: When a pitcher gets through 3 or 4 innings in a real-life MLB game, you'll hear the announcers talk about what great stuff he has - how he's virtually unhittable on that given day. Having said that, the pitcher seems much more likely to strike out his next batter b/c - on that day - he was a better pitcher. Now, in OOTP, it certainly seems like players have good 'stuff' on a certain day, but is it all just coincidental? If I have a guy give up 5 runs in 5 innings and want to lift him, can I say "he just doesn't have it today?" or is that not taken into account? Do I lift him for a reliever who isn't as good (ratings wise) b/c he doesn't have 'it' or, b/c he has better ratings than the reliever, is he still more likely to get the next guy out despite his poor performance to that point? I hope you guys get what I'm saying. I tried to search for this topic, but I didn't exactly know what to search for. Thanks in advance...

10-14-2003, 08:55 PM	#13
Slant Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Red Sox Nation Posts: 257	I disagree. Every player has a 'consistency' rating, and consistency is effectively the ability to ward off streaks. Therefore, either (A) the consistency rating does nothing, or (B) there is code in the game for streaks. I tend to believe B, but I have no evidence. __________________ Boiler Room Project

10-14-2003, 09:55 PM	#14
Skipaway Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Where you live Posts: 11,017	No code to change what a player will do based on what he just did doesn't mean there isn't a "he just doesn't have it today" code. Perhaps there are indeed codes to decide how a player will do on a specific day? Something like a 10% effectiveness variation? __________________ Jonathan Haidt: Moral reasoning is really just a servant masquerading as a high priest.

10-15-2003, 08:53 PM	#16
Slant Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Red Sox Nation Posts: 257	sporr: that makes sense too. I always thought of it as consistency over a short period, like hitting about the same every week and not going on slumps and then making up for it with back-to-back 5 for 5 performances. But as you point out, consistency over a career makes just as much, if not more, sense. A "Precision" rating, if you will. __________________ Boiler Room Project

10-14-2003, 02:07 PM	#2
Henry Hall of Fame Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 6,498	Markus once said there wasn't any reason to include coding to try and recreate streaks, etc. since the law of averages was plenty to provide a scenario close enough to reality. I tend to believe that... when you see one of your players on the "hot" or "cold" list, he really is there out of chance, not because he's been "programmed" to do so

10-14-2003, 02:08 PM	#3
lgkeeper All Star Starter Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: My front porch lookin' in Posts: 1,137	Thanks for the quick response. Any other feedback would be appreciated.

10-14-2003, 02:31 PM	#4
Gastric ReFlux Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Member #3409 Posts: 8,350	I think, somtimes, that players with an inconsistent label may have "adjustments " to cause streakiness. But I may be wrong on that.

10-14-2003, 02:32 PM	#5
sporr Global Moderator Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Muscatine, IA Posts: 8,277	I agree with Henry. The game doesn't change the % of a player doing well based on their performance within the game.

10-14-2003, 03:08 PM	#6
D Love All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Queens, NY Posts: 904	But, if there is no code to vary a performance day-to-day, then it would seem that if the same 5-star SP throws 75 pitches through 5 IP in 1 game and allows 7 ER, and then goes the same 75 pitch, 5 IP the next start and has a perfect game, you should leave him in in either case. My gut would say that the game should have SOMETHING (perhaps reduced ratings for the day) that explain why the guy just got knocked for 7 runs in 5 IP and that he's best off being relieved for. Otherwise, the player's individual game performance should never be taken into account when making roster moves.

10-14-2003, 04:09 PM	#8
D Love All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Queens, NY Posts: 904	Well, I don't think there is a "revelation" yet. I agree with the fact that we shouldn't have "hot" or "cold" streaks affect stats. In other words, Because I went 4-10 doesn't make me more likely to get a hit in the next AB than if I went 0-10. I THINK that the game-to-game, rather than AB-to-AB or pitch-to-pitch issue is slightly different. I would assume that OOTP has some other factors that make a pitcher more hittable on one day than another. Otherwise, this WOULD be a huge find. A Pedro Martinez type would simply be used for X pitches every start. Once he's tired, he'll get worse. But until then, regardless of whether he's given up 15 ERs or has a perfect game, you would know his chances for a strong performance in the next inning would be the same in either case. Whenever I delve into OOTP logic, it really turns me off to the game... I prefer the don't think, don't tell approach where I can pretend this game does take into account little nuances like these.

10-14-2003, 05:44 PM	#10
lgkeeper All Star Starter Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: My front porch lookin' in Posts: 1,137	I hear what you're saying. The only reason I wanted to know is that, when I have a SP who is struggling, but my bullpen is weak, I would keep him in until he's tired no matter how poorly he's performed b/c his chances are better to get the next out. There isn't (from what I'm reading) a "he just doesn't have it today" code in there.

10-14-2003, 06:34 PM	#11
Cooker All Star Reserve Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Columbus, OH Posts: 592	I have no idea how the game's coded. I also don't want to. I only know (for example) that most days my ace SP "has it" and other days (rarely) he just doesn't. If I leave my ace SP in for another inning despite the fact that he got uncharacteristically rocked in the first inning and then again in the second inning, hoping against hope for the law of averages to "kick in", I'm usually disappointed because it usually doesn't. I think my players have good days and bad days, good streaks and bad streaks. This seems life-like to me and I love it. Like I said, I don't want to know if it's coding or merely the law of averages playing out. I don't need to know. I only need to keep playing OOTP5. Does this make any sense to anyone else?

10-15-2003, 09:43 AM	#15
sporr Global Moderator Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Muscatine, IA Posts: 8,277	I always think of the consistency rating as a representation of the standard deviation for a player's stats. Take a hitter who hits .300. If he's very consistent, his actual average may vary from .280-.320. The same hitter with poor consistency may have an average that varies from .260-.340. I'm not sure if this is really how it happens, but it would make sense.

10-29-2003, 11:55 AM	#17
D Love All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Queens, NY Posts: 904	So did we ever come up with a conclusion as to whether a pitcher, say an HOF ace-type, should be pulled out of a game in the 2nd inning after allowing 7 runs on 10 hits? For the 3rd inning, does OOTP treat the ace as at his full ratings or is the ace effectively subject to "reduced ratings" for that day?

10-29-2003, 11:57 AM	#18
Gastric ReFlux Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Member #3409 Posts: 8,350	I don't know what was decided. I just play like I would if the game were actually out there on the grass and dirt. I pull my ace if he's getting kicked around.

10-29-2003, 01:08 PM	#19
Ragnar Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 3,565	It doesn't really matter to me if there is a code in there or not. All I know is that when a pitcher plays poorly for the first 4 or 5 innings I pull him. It is extremely unlikly that he will turn it around and start pitching well for the rest of the game if i leave him in. Don't forget the batters. They may be having a good day on your pitchers expense.