Season Score: 74 out of 100

Vida Blue · 04-01-2007, 10:42 AM

Anybody know how this is determined? I just finished the 1924 season with the A's (111-43) and won the WS. I should have gotten a perfect score with winning the WS and having an impressive record.

bababui · 04-01-2007, 10:50 AM

Sounds like my University Profs graded your season.

tysok · 04-01-2007, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vida Blue

Anybody know how this is determined? I just finished the 1924 season with the A's (111-43) and won the WS. I should have gotten a perfect score with winning the WS and having an impressive record.

I don't know.
I had a better record and better score, but not perfect. I believe I was 126-36 on the year, winning the world series and scored a 92.

Probably looks at your team stats some. Two years ago I won the world series with a 114-48 and scored an 82. We mashed our way though, pitching was 10th in the AL.

Russ · 04-01-2007, 10:57 AM

I went 90-72 and got an 83. I see no reason why I would get a higher score.

Syd Thrift · 04-01-2007, 11:00 AM

Overall talent level, perhaps? I have no insights as to why the game might score one person higher than another but perhaps it takes things into account such as transactions and the overall level of talent of a team on Opening Day? A pretty good team that goes crazy or gets traded into a great team would probably get a better score than a really good team that didn't do much other than rest on its laurels.

CHCfan · 04-01-2007, 11:06 AM

What was your payroll compared to the rest of the league. That should explain part of it (but not entirely for a score that low).

DougWyatt · 04-01-2007, 12:15 PM

To add to the data ..

I got a 100/100 after winning the WS with a 90-72 record. Financials were off, was my 1st season, had full draft, had a Cy Young pitcher, and an MVP 2B.

Russ · 04-01-2007, 12:25 PM

I'm going with CHCFan and guessing it's about financials.

bababui · 04-01-2007, 12:38 PM

I say its either the lib media or right-wing talk radio but I dont know which one.

CHCfan · 04-01-2007, 01:13 PM

If it weren't 1924, I'd suggest it's the anti-Moneyball crowd keeping your A's down. If ESPN were around back then, I'd suggest your non-Yankee/non-Red Soxness was holding you back. But as it is, I stand by my first guess for now.

Giants44 · 04-01-2007, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bababui

I say its either the lib media or right-wing talk radio but I dont know which one.

best post of the day!

Vida Blue · 04-01-2007, 09:01 PM

My payroll was second highest in both leagues and I had a Cy Young winner.

CobaltJays · 04-01-2007, 09:11 PM

In my first season I had a score of 65/100, despite finishing 96-66, winning the championship and having the award winners for best pitcher and best hitter on my team. I did have the highest payroll in the league, however.

ravinhood · 04-01-2007, 10:07 PM

It probably looks at the power of your team vs the rest of the league. The lower this is and you still win the higher your score. I mean cmon it's easy tow in when you have an allstar lineup and have exploited the AI to the maximum to do so (especially if you are using average trading settings and normal preferences). I use hard trading and highly favor prospects and I get scored in the 90's. So, I think it's based on the ease of play and the strength of your team vs the rest of the league and you winning. So, quit exploiting the ai and quit buiding allstar teams that never happened and you'll probably get higher scores. Also play with harder settings vs the ai.

Faaip De Oiad · 04-01-2007, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bababui

Sounds like my University Profs graded your season.

That is so true. Made me laugh.

Exodor · 04-02-2007, 01:56 AM

After managing my 2007 Royals to last place I received a score of 11.

chippered · 04-02-2007, 04:17 PM

After winning my division and making it to the League Championship series, had the league MVP, and I got a score of 24/100. This seemed sort of strange, but unfortunetly it was a test league, so I dont have any other information. Kinda curious how the score is created though.

Layton is my Homeboy · 04-02-2007, 04:51 PM

I believe that it is based in part on your team's talent level and the owner's expectations. That is, you can get a high score if you have a bad team and a good record, whereas you can get a somewhat lower score if you have the most talented team in baseball and barely manage to meet your team's expectations.

chippered · 04-02-2007, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Layton is my Homeboy

I believe that it is based in part on your team's talent level and the owner's expectations. That is, you can get a high score if you have a bad team and a good record, whereas you can get a somewhat lower score if you have the most talented team in baseball and barely manage to meet your team's expectations.

That makes sense.

spark240 · 05-05-2007, 12:36 AM

Okay, I just had a fictional team play .595 and win the championship in their world's first season. 40/100?

They only played a 42-game schedule.

04-01-2007, 10:42 AM	#1
Vida Blue Major Leagues Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Greater Reich of Ontario Posts: 323 Blog Entries: 2	Season Score: 74 out of 100 Anybody know how this is determined? I just finished the 1924 season with the A's (111-43) and won the WS. I should have gotten a perfect score with winning the WS and having an impressive record. __________________ "The only way I'm going to get a Gold Glove is with a can of spray paint." - Reggie Jackson

04-01-2007, 10:57 AM	#4
Russ All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Essex HON! Posts: 1,924 Blog Entries: 1 Infractions: 0/1 (1)	I went 90-72 and got an 83. I see no reason why I would get a higher score. __________________ If you don't love Russ, you don't love America. This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

04-01-2007, 12:25 PM	#8
Russ All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Essex HON! Posts: 1,924 Blog Entries: 1 Infractions: 0/1 (1)	I'm going with CHCFan and guessing it's about financials. __________________ If you don't love Russ, you don't love America. This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.

04-01-2007, 09:01 PM	#12
Vida Blue Major Leagues Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Greater Reich of Ontario Posts: 323 Blog Entries: 2	My payroll was second highest in both leagues and I had a Cy Young winner. __________________ "The only way I'm going to get a Gold Glove is with a can of spray paint." - Reggie Jackson

04-01-2007, 10:50 AM	#2
bababui Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 14,147 Infractions: 0/1 (1)	Sounds like my University Profs graded your season.

04-01-2007, 11:06 AM	#6
CHCfan All Star Starter Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Grand Island, NE Posts: 1,117	What was your payroll compared to the rest of the league. That should explain part of it (but not entirely for a score that low).

04-01-2007, 12:15 PM	#7
DougWyatt All Star Starter Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Michigan Posts: 1,117	To add to the data .. I got a 100/100 after winning the WS with a 90-72 record. Financials were off, was my 1st season, had full draft, had a Cy Young pitcher, and an MVP 2B.

04-01-2007, 12:38 PM	#9
bababui Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 14,147 Infractions: 0/1 (1)	I say its either the lib media or right-wing talk radio but I dont know which one.

04-01-2007, 01:13 PM	#10
CHCfan All Star Starter Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Grand Island, NE Posts: 1,117	If it weren't 1924, I'd suggest it's the anti-Moneyball crowd keeping your A's down. If ESPN were around back then, I'd suggest your non-Yankee/non-Red Soxness was holding you back. But as it is, I stand by my first guess for now.

04-01-2007, 09:11 PM	#13
CobaltJays All Star Reserve Join Date: May 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 698	In my first season I had a score of 65/100, despite finishing 96-66, winning the championship and having the award winners for best pitcher and best hitter on my team. I did have the highest payroll in the league, however.

04-01-2007, 10:07 PM	#14
ravinhood Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 374 Infractions: 0/1 (1)	It probably looks at the power of your team vs the rest of the league. The lower this is and you still win the higher your score. I mean cmon it's easy tow in when you have an allstar lineup and have exploited the AI to the maximum to do so (especially if you are using average trading settings and normal preferences). I use hard trading and highly favor prospects and I get scored in the 90's. So, I think it's based on the ease of play and the strength of your team vs the rest of the league and you winning. So, quit exploiting the ai and quit buiding allstar teams that never happened and you'll probably get higher scores. Also play with harder settings vs the ai.

04-02-2007, 01:56 AM	#16
Exodor Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 473	After managing my 2007 Royals to last place I received a score of 11.

04-02-2007, 04:17 PM	#17
chippered Minors (Double A) Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 191	After winning my division and making it to the League Championship series, had the league MVP, and I got a score of 24/100. This seemed sort of strange, but unfortunetly it was a test league, so I dont have any other information. Kinda curious how the score is created though.

04-02-2007, 04:51 PM	#18
Layton is my Homeboy Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Winnipeg, Mb Posts: 429	I believe that it is based in part on your team's talent level and the owner's expectations. That is, you can get a high score if you have a bad team and a good record, whereas you can get a somewhat lower score if you have the most talented team in baseball and barely manage to meet your team's expectations.

05-05-2007, 12:36 AM	#20
spark240 All Star Reserve Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Highest county in the Virginia hills Posts: 637	Okay, I just had a fictional team play .595 and win the championship in their world's first season. 40/100? They only played a 42-game schedule.