*** VD 13 Commentary Thread ***

[The Feral Slasher]

Felt like I was looking at that forever.

Duration Mulling Bonds ? Lengthy

[The Feral Slasher]

that could be true, Mom worked in a Dairyette, Dad was a farmer/ and Hauled Milk . He was dipping into the “ice cream “

Dad Married for Butter and Lactose ?

[frae]

Drafter micro Bonham late

[Ken]

Game theory question - do you prefer seeing teams picking players who are in positions/decades you already picked (thereby increasing the relative demand for those positions/decades and allowing your needs to slide to later spots), or do you prefer seeing someone pick a player from a decade you need, but not the specific player you are targetting (which makes it more likely you get that one individual player later in the draft)

[TS Garp]

Game theory question - do you prefer seeing teams picking players who are in positions/decades you already picked (thereby increasing the relative demand for those positions/decades and allowing your needs to slide to later spots), or do you prefer seeing someone pick a player from a decade you need, but not the specific player you are targetting (which makes it more likely you get that one individual player later in the draft)

They're both very satisfying. I'd say the latter is more anxiety-reducing.

[DMT]

Game theory question - do you prefer seeing teams picking players who are in positions/decades you already picked (thereby increasing the relative demand for those positions/decades and allowing your needs to slide to later spots), or do you prefer seeing someone pick a player from a decade you need, but not the specific player you are targetting (which makes it more likely you get that one individual player later in the draft)

Interesting question. The former is much more frequent but as we progress the latter becomes much more valuable IMO.

[The Feral Slasher]

Game theory question - do you prefer seeing teams picking players who are in positions/decades you already picked (thereby increasing the relative demand for those positions/decades and allowing your needs to slide to later spots), or do you prefer seeing someone pick a player from a decade you need, but not the specific player you are targetting (which makes it more likely you get that one individual player later in the draft)

I'd rather they take from a decade I've already picked. IF they pick from a decade you havent picked yet, even if it is not a guy you want they thin out the herd and make it more likely the guys you want will be taken.

[Bene Futuis]

Blech, feeling like dogshit. Let me drag my carcass over to my computer and input some picks.

It’s bullshit to feel this bad when you don’t even get hammered for the Super Bowl.

[hacko]

Blech, feeling like dogshit. Let me drag my carcass over to my computer and input some picks.

It’s bullshit to feel this bad when you don’t even get hammered for the Super Bowl.

Get a hold of a bad Bag of Dicks?

[Bene Futuis]

That was a very difficult decision. Time to go cry myself to sleep.

[Kevin Seitzer]

That was a very difficult decision. Time to go cry myself to sleep.

Dry my blinking lids

[mjl]

The most interesting thing I've learned while working on this is how terrible the MVP voters used to be.

In 1950, Jim Konstanty won the NL MVP with 18 out of 24 first place votes. He was 16-7 with a 2.66 ERA in 152 innings. He would have had 22 saves if the save stat had been invented yet. But most importantly, he played for the team that won the pennant. Stan Musial came in second with two first place votes; he hit .346/.437/.596 and had 3 more bWAR.

In the other league, the MVP was Phil Rizzuto, who actually did come in second in bWAR in the league, behind a guy who went 13-18 with a 1.431 WHIP and more walks than strikeouts and who looks clearly worse than a couple other pitchers, so I dunno what's going on with that. In second place was Billy Goodman, who hit .354/.427/.455 and led the league in AVG while putting up 2.7 bWAR, 25th among all hitters.

There are actually a bunch of relievers who threw a lot of innings and did well in the MVP voting back then. Hoyt Wilhelm came in fourth in the NL in 1952 with a 15-3 record and 2.43 ERA in 159.3 innings; Warren Hacker was 15-9 with a 2.58 ERA (and twice as many bWAR) in 185 innings as a mostly-starter and finished 23rd, tied with Warren Spahn and others.

In 1955, the immortal Ray Narleski finished 6th, by a wide margin the best among pitchers. He was 9-1 with a 3.71 ERA (and 19 saves if they existed) in 111.2 innings. He even got a first place vote! Billy Pierce and his 15-10, 1.97 in 205.2 innings finished tied for 18th.

[mjl]

also, has anyone noticed a recent change where the alerts about PMs only go out on the hour? I used to get an email notification at the same time I was sent a PM, and now the emails come exactly on the hour.

[The Feral Slasher]

also, has anyone noticed a recent change where the alerts about PMs only go out on the hour? I used to get an email notification at the same time I was sent a PM, and now the emails come exactly on the hour.

I dont even get an email anymore. Better go.chexk my settings

[mjl]

The first couple I got after the change got spam filtered. I had to tell Gmail that emails from RJ weren't spam unless they had Johnny's name in them. Now it works again.