- Posts: 1312
- Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 12:07 am
- Location: Usually Somewhere Else
Wed Nov 20, 2019 12:39 am
Agree with Riggo. (Not that he needs my endorsement...he's been a proven winner a long time at this). But strictly speaking...the cards are not relatively equal for ballpark effects just because they have the same number of BP HRs or singles.
Compare selected outcomes from two of the Willie Mays cards vs Righties (rounded off)
11.69M
BPHR: Loses 3.5 nat HRs, 4 FLYB?, 0.5 FLYB
BP Singles: Loses 2 singles, and 3 GBAs
10.83M
BPHR: Loses 5 nat HRs, 2 FLYB?
BP Singles: Loses 2 singles, and 3 GBBs
Similar to what Riggo said, it does make a difference which rolls are being ignored for BP effects. Pitcher's park, or in a league with many pitcher parks, the 10.83 card is not as good a value. Whereas the 11.69 is a greater value in that scenario--lots of natural HRs with less lost to BP effects.
Granted--a BP chance is a BP chance. But the cards are normalized first without BP effects, then to their ballpark--so to achieve their season statistically, you are really messing with the sauce if you put Mays' card in a park much different from his actual in that year, just in terms of card value. Same difference if you just count up or use DD to analyze the natural results plus your BP effects and then compare. But to consider them equal due to number of BP chances is not a statistically normalized comparison.
I mean you could also micro analyze it in terms of the value of losing or gaining GBAs vs GBBs, FLYB? vs FLYB etc.
Compare selected outcomes from two of the Willie Mays cards vs Righties (rounded off)
11.69M
BPHR: Loses 3.5 nat HRs, 4 FLYB?, 0.5 FLYB
BP Singles: Loses 2 singles, and 3 GBAs
10.83M
BPHR: Loses 5 nat HRs, 2 FLYB?
BP Singles: Loses 2 singles, and 3 GBBs
Similar to what Riggo said, it does make a difference which rolls are being ignored for BP effects. Pitcher's park, or in a league with many pitcher parks, the 10.83 card is not as good a value. Whereas the 11.69 is a greater value in that scenario--lots of natural HRs with less lost to BP effects.
Granted--a BP chance is a BP chance. But the cards are normalized first without BP effects, then to their ballpark--so to achieve their season statistically, you are really messing with the sauce if you put Mays' card in a park much different from his actual in that year, just in terms of card value. Same difference if you just count up or use DD to analyze the natural results plus your BP effects and then compare. But to consider them equal due to number of BP chances is not a statistically normalized comparison.
I mean you could also micro analyze it in terms of the value of losing or gaining GBAs vs GBBs, FLYB? vs FLYB etc.