farmteam Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 So I simmed the season through OOTP6, just to see what would happen. Well, Scott Podsednik led the league in batting average at .361! And Joe Borchard hit .281! Also, Josh Fields came up and hit .277 with 3 homers and 10 rbis. Final standings: Minnesota 89-73 Detroit 87-75 Cleveland 81-81 KC 80-82 Chicago 74-88 So odd...normally, OOTP is a very accurate sim. At least I hope it's innacurate this time around. Oh yeah...the DBacks topped the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim 4 games to 2 to win the World Series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSteve Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 So unrealistic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 :headshake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlackSox8 Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 Wow... :headshake How the hell does it simulate into that?? Why the f*** isn't my illini sig not showing up???? Image shack is working...obviously, because my avatar is working... i'll have to upload it again. :headshake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 1 sim means nothing, but there's obviously something wrong with the ratings -- Arizona, in 100 sims should never make the playoffs, let alone win the series. They're a 75 win team, tops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 Uh Oh, better start looking towards 06 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxhawks Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 what the hell is ootp6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wise Master Buehrle Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 I demand a re-sim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goober Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 QUOTE(soxhawks @ Feb 7, 2005 -> 08:57 PM) what the hell is ootp6 a simulation video game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 That thing is really off. There is no way in hell the Royals will win 80 games. That's what irked me the most. And if Podsednik led the league in hitting, how did we only end up with 74 wins? Did our pitching staff implode? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnB Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 QUOTE(farmteam @ Feb 7, 2005 -> 07:52 PM) So I simmed the season through OOTP6, just to see what would happen. Well, Scott Podsednik led the league in batting average at .361! And Joe Borchard hit .281! Also, Josh Fields came up and hit .277 with 3 homers and 10 rbis. Final standings: Minnesota 89-73 Detroit 87-75 Cleveland 81-81 KC 80-82 Chicago 74-88 So odd...normally, OOTP is a very accurate sim. At least I hope it's innacurate this time around. Oh yeah...the DBacks topped the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim 4 games to 2 to win the World Series. was that using halofan's new rosters? i'm doing a day-by-day sim with those now, the sox are 24-8 i believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshPR Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 QUOTE(ZoomSlowik @ Feb 8, 2005 -> 03:36 AM) And if Podsednik led the league in hitting, how did we only end up with 74 wins? Not only that. Borchard hit .280 :rolly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesox91403 Posted February 8, 2005 Share Posted February 8, 2005 QUOTE(JoshPR @ Feb 8, 2005 -> 12:24 AM) Not only that. Borchard hit .280 :rolly yes, but it was only in 15 AB's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(whitesox91403 @ Feb 8, 2005 -> 01:05 AM) yes, but it was only in 15 AB's It would have to be atleast 50 AB's. The absolute minimum amount of AB's required is 50, with 14 hits. 14/50 = .28 Sorry, I was bored EDIT: all that work, and I lied The fewest is 25 AB's. 7 for 25 = .280 Edited February 9, 2005 by witesoxfan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissa1334 Posted February 9, 2005 Share Posted February 9, 2005 look at the bright side of the sim...Pod's led the league with a .361 ba Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Feb 9, 2005 -> 04:32 PM) It would have to be atleast 50 AB's. The absolute minimum amount of AB's required is 50, with 14 hits. 14/50 = .28 Sorry, I was bored EDIT: all that work, and I lied The fewest is 25 AB's. 7 for 25 = .280 Where stupid is interchangable with nerd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 That won't happen. If the standings are exactly like that, I'll jump on a raft and go to some deserted island for a few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigred3535 Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 That simulation is the reason that when ESPN does theirs using similar programs, they do at least 100 of them. There are always going to be outliers, but if you average them you'll get something closer to what would really happen. I imagine if you did 100 of those the sox would make the playoffs at least between 25 and 35 times, if not more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(bigred3535 @ Feb 10, 2005 -> 12:45 AM) That simulation is the reason that when ESPN does theirs using similar programs, they do at least 100 of them. There are always going to be outliers, but if you average them you'll get something closer to what would really happen. I imagine if you did 100 of those the sox would make the playoffs at least between 25 and 35 times, if not more. Just incase anyone is interested, this Yankee fan who has a blog did the same thing (not with OOTP, but with another baseball simulator -- Diamond Mind). 100 seasons, Sox make the playoffs ten times, 2 Wildcards, 8 Division Titles. Yankee Fan Blog Simulation Results FWIW, this is pretty updated, from Jan 29th. I'll be interested to see how accurate their average is in regards to this season... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wise Master Buehrle Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Feb 9, 2005 -> 07:49 PM) Just incase anyone is interested, this Yankee fan who has a blog did the same thing (not with OOTP, but with another baseball simulator -- Diamond Mind). 100 seasons, Sox make the playoffs ten times, 2 Wildcards, 8 Division Titles. Yankee Fan Blog Simulation Results FWIW, this is pretty updated, from Jan 29th. I'll be interested to see how accurate their average is in regards to this season... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> In other words, our team sucks... ...on paper I hate paper. *lights it on fire* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted February 10, 2005 Share Posted February 10, 2005 QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Feb 9, 2005 -> 07:49 PM) Just incase anyone is interested, this Yankee fan who has a blog did the same thing (not with OOTP, but with another baseball simulator -- Diamond Mind). 100 seasons, Sox make the playoffs ten times, 2 Wildcards, 8 Division Titles. Yankee Fan Blog Simulation Results FWIW, this is pretty updated, from Jan 29th. I'll be interested to see how accurate their average is in regards to this season... Projections from the last five seasons. 2000. http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/proj2000.htm 2001. http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/proj2001.htm 2002. http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/proj2002.htm 2003. http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/proj2003.htm 2004. http://www.diamond-mind.com/articles/proj2004.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Here's one I found using the most up to date ZiPS/line-ups/etc. Sim was run 100 times... W/L record is average Team W L RF RA DIV WC American League East Baltimore Orioles 82 80 831 823 1.0 13.8 Boston Red Sox 97 65 941 765 77.5 18.0 New York Yankees 89 73 859 784 20.5 34.0 Tampa Bay Devil Rays 70 92 705 813 0.0 2.0 Toronto Blue Jays 80 82 784 785 1.0 7.3 Central Chicago White Sox 80 82 792 811 29.0 0.0 Cleveland Indians 81 81 815 810 28.0 0.0 Detroit Tigers 74 88 783 839 6.5 0.0 Kansas City Royals 68 94 754 895 0.0 0.0 Minnesota Twins 82 80 788 791 36.5 0.5 West Anaheim Angels 87 75 826 775 45.5 9.0 Oakland Athletics 88 74 831 750 44.5 9.8 Seattle Mariners 81 81 802 801 7.0 5.0 Texas Rangers 76 86 829 894 3.0 0.5 National League East Atlanta Braves 83 79 756 746 15.0 10.0 Florida Marlins 81 81 714 700 7.5 6.8 New York Mets 89 73 769 701 35.0 17.3 Philadelphia Phillies 90 72 765 688 38.5 20.7 Washington Nationals 79 83 692 695 4.0 7.0 Central Chicago Cubs 84 78 747 704 3.0 19.8 Cincinnati Reds 71 91 745 823 0.0 0.8 Houston Astros 74 88 707 786 0.0 2.0 Milwaukee Brewers 78 84 703 740 1.5 3.3 Pittsburgh Pirates 67 95 668 794 0.0 0.0 St. Louis Cardinals 98 64 779 622 95.5 1.0 West Arizona Diamondbacks 74 88 725 806 0.0 0.0 Colorado Rockies 76 86 815 864 2.0 0.0 Los Angeles Dodgers 94 68 762 652 87.0 2.3 San Diego Padres 82 80 738 715 11.0 8.5 San Francisco Giants 76 86 747 803 0.0 0.3 In the AL Central, the RA seem inflated for a few teams (minnesota in particular)(They allowed 715 last year, and I think their pen may be even better this season)... Still, a 29% chance of making the post season seems pretty accurate to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 Is it just me or does it really tend to clump teams too much. There aren't any high win totals or high loss totals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 2, 2005 -> 12:38 PM) Is it just me or does it really tend to clump teams too much. There aren't any high win totals or high loss totals. That's a product of running so many sims... In a division without a clear cut winner it's probably gonna do just what you said, because of the unbalanced schedule. (example: one sim the sox win 90, but because they have to win those games mostly against their division, the twins finish with 70 wins. The next sim, the reverse happens. Result: each team is predicted to win 80 games) If you just ran a couple sims you would get some real fluky results, like the Detroit winning the WS or something. Running multiple sims helps remove the "noise" from those fluke seasons, but most teams inevitably fall in the phat part of the Bell curve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamTell Posted March 2, 2005 Share Posted March 2, 2005 I've never been a big fan of sims or projections, I just want to see results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.