|
||||
|
|
OOTP 17 - General Discussions Everything about the latest Out of the Park Baseball - officially licensed by MLB.com and the MLBPA. |
|
Thread Tools |
12-31-2016, 03:14 PM | #1 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 7,167
|
Pyt +/-
Pyt +/-
so, i've been having hard time this year getting this to be a consistent positive. i've realized it was soemthign i used to do that i am now, or was, ignoring. in addition to coaching strategy, individual player strategies are JUST as important. i've been totally neglecting it this year, and it turns out to be quite a factor over 162 games, lol. figure you'll win 4-7 more games than if you had left them all at default. ( i was averaging ~0 or less pyt before i amended this egregious error, even worse when i tried drastically different coach strategies) make sure the guys that can't sacrifice are 0 or 1 tick from nothing. if you don't like bunts for hits, drop that to 0 or 1 -- also, make sure it's set to "Adjust to Team Strategy," because in some situations when a steal is necessary, you want that to override the player's individual strategy. so, if you see a guy attempting 30 steals a year and only getting 50-66% succeess, go into this strategy, not your coach's!!, and reduce that single players stealing likely hood. Baserunning, i'm pretty sure, is relative to speed... so you don't need to move a clomper to 0/10 on the slider... but 1-3 clicks down isn't a bad idea either depending on how slow they are... a 0-10/100 type guy i put 3 clicks down and scale up from there as they get near 50/100. i won't go more than 3-4 clicks up even for the greatest baserunner/speed combo. same with steals, more than +3-4 and they may start losing success%. (and that's only for the 200+ speed/stealing guys - above scale values) imo, if they aren't 70-80%, i cut them down (not necessarily based on the stealing slider position, but based upon the season's results from those sliders) all of a sudden i am averaging my typical +4-5 each year with my coaches mostly normal strategy (i've changed it so much i don't even know anymore what's normal from last year... i have a screenshot that keeps me somewhere near what i want, but it wasn't the one i meant to keep). Last edited by NoOne; 12-31-2016 at 03:20 PM. |
12-31-2016, 05:59 PM | #2 |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,303
|
While the strategies are helpful I don't think it's why your teams are suddenly getting positive pythag.
|
12-31-2016, 07:55 PM | #3 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The big smoke
Posts: 15,628
|
With no evidence but lots of experience I'd bet that my consistent negative Pyth is based on AI bullpen management.
__________________
Cheers RichW #stopthestupid “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” Frank Wilhoit |
01-02-2017, 04:19 PM | #4 | |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,119
|
Quote:
__________________
"Sometimes, this is like going to a grocery store. You’ve got a list until you get to the check-out stand. And then you start reading People magazine, and all this other [stuff] ends up in the basket." -Sandy Alderson on the MLB offseason |
|
01-02-2017, 05:43 PM | #5 | |
Major Leagues
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 385
Infractions: 0/1 (1)
|
Quote:
So any time you modify a player strategy, it completely disregards and overrules the team strategy? I'm confused. |
|
01-02-2017, 07:55 PM | #6 | |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,119
|
Quote:
__________________
"Sometimes, this is like going to a grocery store. You’ve got a list until you get to the check-out stand. And then you start reading People magazine, and all this other [stuff] ends up in the basket." -Sandy Alderson on the MLB offseason |
|
01-02-2017, 07:59 PM | #7 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 11,806
|
And sometimes the game is just out to get you...
__________________
Portland Raccoons, 83 years of excell-.... of baseball: Furballs here! 1983 * 1989 * 1991 * 1992 * 1993 * 1995 * 1996 * 2010 * 2017 * 2018 * 2019 * 2026 * 2028 * 2035 * 2037 * 2044 * 2045 * 2046 * 2047 * 2048 * 2051 * 2054 * 2055 1 OSANAI : 2 POWELL : 7 NOMURA | RAMOS : 8 REECE : 10 BROWN : 15 HALL : 27 FERNANDEZ : 28 CASAS : 31 CARMONA : 32 WEST : 39 TONER : 46 SAITO Resident Mets Cynic - The Mets from 1962 onwards, here. |
01-02-2017, 08:28 PM | #8 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The big smoke
Posts: 15,628
|
Quote:
__________________
Cheers RichW #stopthestupid “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” Frank Wilhoit |
|
01-02-2017, 09:55 PM | #9 | |
All Star Reserve
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 623
|
Quote:
|
|
01-06-2017, 06:16 PM | #10 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 7,167
|
Quote:
that sounds solid.. but in application it does not work that way despite what the manual says (i didn't click so maybe misread or it's just plain wrong i this case). (plus the difference between the dictionary definition of "override" and "adjust" should be a clue too) try reducing stealing aggresiveness and leaving "adjust to strategy"... they will attempt less stolen bases. if it had no effect, it wouldn't drop. if the manual stats somethign different, it's wrong in this case. (drop it to zero in the slider for a guy with 100speed/100steal and see the difference) - no doubt about this from experience. when i see a guy with sub-70% success i drop them to zero or 1 tick up on the slider and they barele steal after that... i only leave it on adjust becasue i'm sure there's a situation that can occur that i want them to steal no matter what - so "adjust to team" strategy should cover those situations, i hope. In the past i have been able to have a consistent +3to4 over 100+ years with maybe a negative every 5 years or so on average - if that... so it's not likely coincidence that stratgy affects the resulting calculated value... (edit: a likely reason why it's positive is given below - somewhere below, lol) pyt is guesstimating how many wins you "should" have won relative to run differential. whacky luck is not the only reason why you would not realize that win total... what decisions we make will drastically affect distribution of runs scored and therefore the volatility of this calculation, too. (we can increase or decrease chances of whacky luck by the decisions we consistently make - consistent is key here for this topic) e.g. a high hit and run is a high risk / reward decision that will result in more feast/famine results... this will result in clumping of runs more so than if you choose a lower hit and run strategy - this is the same type of 'luck' that can casue a more volatile Pyt value to result more often than other choices for hit and run. e.g. raise stealing bases up quite aggressively overall and by player... you are more likely to see more volatile results like an elevated hit and run due to introducing more volatility to results. you may end up averageing the same # over 100+ years but you'll see a lot more up and down. amongst other conlcusions: i'd wager a feast famine type of strategy will increase volatility if you employ it more often - which should make differential from Pyt value more volatile. i'm sure there are other reasons why strategy is relevant to this caclulation. this is just one example showing it. our decisions effect distribution of runs scored relative to each game, therefore it can influence the results of the calculation. distribution matters - it's very significant to this caclulation... being the most efficient and making the best decisions will give the best consistent result. also from what i read, depending on the equation they are using it may be off by 2-3 games, inherently - which would explain why i see a roughly +3 result - i may actually just more consistently hitting "0" despite what it says. either way i look at it as reducing risk - not necessarily that i will win more games than i should - that's stupid and only makes sense of you believe in magic - winning more than you "should" is luck. assuming this caclulated value is incontrevertable isn't too birght and not the intention nor message the Pyt estimate is communicating, either (as i said it's been "fixed" to be "more accurate" since it's inception, so it's been wrong before, lol - whether they are using the improved version or not isn't certain - bill james is not a genius, btw, he's not even that skilled at math - he's just a nerd that likes baseball too much -> nerd does not equal smart - his method to figuring out this calculation should be enough evidence as to his actual ability).. i am just using it as risk assessment tool. consistency, dependability with superb talent = win. when you have crappy talent you tend to gamble more in an effort to win more than you typically would (not unlike the luck involved when buying a lottery ticket)... you hope you can force a lilttle lucky redistribution of how runs are scored for your team's benefit - > to your benefit (luck if it happens, but still achoice that will influence distribution of runs scored). (higher volatility - more feast famine results - more clumping- which imo, is bad for consistency... if i have a borderline playoff team, i'll think about doing more risky things in order to eke out those extra wins needed - but it is coming down to dumb luck even when you increase volatility - but, increased volatility is the best way to get that +10 wins.) Last edited by NoOne; 01-06-2017 at 07:12 PM. |
|
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
|
|