Not at all.

The object of the game is to win. Why should I make it easier for the competition?

That's like saying that a guy in a poker game who is winning and knows that the game is gonna end after 3 more hands is a wuss if he goes out each of the 3 hands and doesn't give the other people a chance to win their money back.

And fer chrissakes.....

Could you please answer the question already, once and for all?

OMG... after all that, this month we're doing it the way we've always done it. If a problem arises, then we'll think of something for the future.

Thank you.....

Now, I think the thing is to plan things before a problem actually occurs.

We know what the scenario is that bothers us:

Someone wins Batting Average and a second category, both by small margins (how small?), and loses the third category by a large margin (how large?).

The question is, do we want to change the scoring system or live with the possibility of an outcome in a future month that seems unfair?

If we want to change it, let's decide now and do it, before next month begins.

If we wait, and next month starts to shape up like there will be a problem, people's opinions about what to do may be influenced by their own self-interest.

If all your figures are correct, DM is 38/86 and batting .442, not 39-86 (.453), so I changed it.

Now one person leads another in batting average by a tiny margin, the player who is second in batting average by the tiny margin leads in RBIs by a tiny margin, and there's a 3-way tie in Home Runs.

July 27
Corey Patterson = 1/4 (PL = .439 :p )

Just for the record, the guy I originally had playing tonite was Corey Patterson, who didn't really thrill me anyway.

July 28
3 Days to go...

Hopefully someone will hit a homerun to break the tie, but can we start discussing now how to do this for next month.

Feel free to begin...

I've said it already, assign a point value like plaw did to each category. That way overall performance is measured.

The way we do it now, I can have 1 hr, 50 rbis and .400 ba plaw can have 1hr, 1rbi and .401 ba and be the winner.

We have to decide how many points of batting average equals an rbi or how many rbi's equal a hr etc... thats my plan.

Feel free to agree...

Let me think aloud here and break it down, see if anything happens...

First off, the Triple Crown Leaderboard doesn't make any sense at all. The guy in 11th Place has more of all 3 than the guy listed #1. And the AVG % scores aren't even in order. In fact, nothing's in order from what I can see, so either we're all idiots, or, ESPN are idiots. I'm thinking the latter.

As for the Main (July) Leaderboard ... they default the list ranking w/ HRs. And in there "tiebreakers" section, they seem to favor HRs, then RBI, then AVG. They treat it, tho, as 3 games in 1 - with the person who wins all 3 getting the Triple Crown.

For HR "game" the first tiebreaker is RBI, then AVG
For RBI "game" the first tiebreaker is HR, then AVG
For AVG "game" the first tiebreaker is HR, then RBI

Personally, I don't agree that HRs should necessarily indicate the most VALUE. HRs don't necessarily win games as much as RBIs - but at the same time, RBIs are dependent upon who's on base already (out of your control). I think AVG is quite important, because the more hits you get, the more likely you are to drive in runs and win games. I'll look at that in a bit, but for now...

Another thing to consider, and perhaps this explains how ESPN ranks us. Here's a chart of how we're doing, with our overall percentile rankings for each category. I also added a column for AB's, out of curiosity. The standings are ESPN's default:

Okay, maybe this tells us nothing. If they seemed to prefer HRs and then RBIs, DJ would be ahead of PL. Okay, screw that chart.

We need to decide which is most important: HR, RBI or AVG. Let's see...

Mauer has a .375 AVG w/ 8 HR, 54 RBI
Dunn has a .261 AVG w/ 31 HR, 71 RBI

Dunn produced 71 RBI for his team while hitting only 26% of the time. Mauer produced 54 RBI for his team while hitting 37.5% of the time. Who's worth more?

Mauer produced 54 RBI in 328 ABs = 6 ABs/RBI
Dunn produced 71 RBI in 364 ABs = 5.1 ABs/RBI

Does that tell us anything? Dunn produces more often, albeit mostly from HRs. MIN has scored 502 runs (11% from Mauer) and CIN 511 runs (14% from Dunn). Granted this is a small sample, but perhaps says something about HRs being more important than AVG. It also assumes that RBI are the most important indicator, even tho who's on base is out of the batter's control.

You would think that the more HRs you hit, the higher your RBI total should be, but that's not true in PL's case. He has the highest AVG, same HRs, but trails in RBI by over 10.

Looking at the standings again, and assuming that the stats are from "one batter" who hit those stats, who was most valuable? Let's take a look at the Top 3:

I suppose Efficiency could mean overall production w/ the least amount of work (ABs). OR, what if it meant overall production when one produces (with lesser AVG)?

If the season ended with the stats above, I'd probably declare DMC the winner, even tho in the past I probably would've just looked at it and awarded it to DJ. But it is obvious that 1 RBI difference doesn't make up for .080 less in AVG. Is it? Or isn't it? What about PL's high AVG but 11 fewer RBI?

However, it's more difficult determining who'd be in 2nd and 3rd. If PL had 40 RBI, then he'd be arguably the 1st Place winner, followed by DM and DJ. But he doesn't. Should he be considered #2 if DM is #1? Is being down 11 RBI worth more than .089 in AVG (i.e., is .447 significantly better than .358)? Just visually looking at the Top 3, I'd probably put PL #3 just because of the lack of RBI. But the question remains - what if he had 33, or 36, or 38, or 39??

But wait one second here!

Maybe THIS is how ESPN ranks us... Let's look at that %ile chart again, and compute "scores" by adding our 3 %ile ranks:

Could that be it? Could our standings be determined by how we're each doing versus everyone else playing the game, combined? Should it? Shouldn't it??

If PL's high AVG is better than 97.2% of everyone overall, and DM's RBI are better than 98% overall, then didn't DM do a little better?

DJ got the highest RBI total (98.5% overall), but his AVG is only 68.5% overall, well less than PL's 97.2%.

Could this be our answer??

Everything else remaining the same, if DJ gets one or two more HRs and DM and PL don't, will the increase in %ile ranking push him to #1 for most HRs and RBI, despite AVG?

I don't fucking know - but I do know I'm getting a headache.

I beg your pardon ???

Explain to me how if the seson ended with the stats above, based on the way you said we were doing it this month, I am not the winner.

There's a three-way tie in homers, I lead in average, DJ leads in RBIs.

We're tied for the lead in one category, and each lead by ourselves in another.

But I lead in average, which is the tiebreaker.

The fact that I didn't win home runs outright, but instead I'm in a 3-way tie for winning homers doesn't matter.

If the ctireria for winning is whoever wins the most categories, we have a tie with oone win a piece.

But i still have the tiebreaker.

Talk about fuzzy math....I wanna hear the fuzzy logic that tells me I didn't win if the season ended with the stats above.

If it's you that hits it and winds up leading in homers, DM, and DJ hangs on in RBIs and I win Batting Average, then I claim the win since Batting Average is the tiebreaker.

Can we please wait 'til Tuesday, when it's all over, to argue over this? :p

No comment at all on what (else) I said?? Depending on how this works out, and if my theory is correct, then that's how I think we'll do it going forward...

July 29
*Gomes, who's 2 for his last 47, and 8 for 69 (.116, 5 RBI, 2 HR, 21 K) in July? Well, my comment probably breaks him out of his slump. :p Edit: Unbelievable. I guess when Tampa gets 19 runs, even Gomes has to contribute a litte.

Monroe 3-5, Gomes 1-4 with a Homer and an RBI.

Well, yeah. Thanks for posting that. :rolleyes: :p

What about my big long post?? :p

July 29
*Gomes, who's 2 for his last 47, and 8 for 69 (.116, 5 RBI, 2 HR, 21 K) in July? Well, my comment probably breaks him out of his slump. :p Edit: Unbelievable. I guess when Tampa gets 19 runs, even Gomes has to contribute a litte.

I said this a bunch of times:

I don't care how we do it.

I suggested a way to weight the scores that I thought made sense and was fair. You have a different way you wanna do it, that's fine with me.

Just make a decision.

My only complaint is that after you said that for the month of July you were gonna continue to decide the winner based on the way we always had --

The winner is whoever wins two categories,

If no one wins two, then Batting Average is the tiebreaker --

You started to waver.

July 30
*SNB, **D/H

[whine alert]

Thanks so much for picking Mirabelli, DJ..... :rolleyes:

That makes it much harder for me to win.

Woo-hoo!!!

This is EXCITE-ment!!!

A homer for Rivera.

That makes the standings, as of this moment
Puts me back in first place.

Whatta race!!!

You have 15 HRs & 33 RBI -- it's Sunday Night. And, of course, I benched Rivera in the draft game against Schilling.

If DM and I both have 15 homers and I lead in batting average and he leads in RBIs and batting average is the tiebreaker, how am I not in first place?

And I'm not sure what you mean when you say "Not sure what you were thinking, but, it worked out I guess."

If we did it they way I (the commish) have always done it, I think he'd win. You came up with the AVG tiebreaker, conveniently since you had a nice high AVG. But we still have the rest of tonight and tomorrow night, so let's not bicker about this now, for the 100th time. :p

As far as not knowing what you were thinking picking Rivera... he was hitting against Schilling. I didn't think he'd do anything special, having never gotten a hit against him. That's all.

And good, Lackey screwed up so I'm not sorry I benched him any more.

And shit, I wish Philly (except for Howard) would ease up on my PS.

Excuse me, but it was absolutely and positively YOU who said batting average was the tiebreaker.

Here…..

Starting the middle of page 6, on June 13th.

I know it’s a lot to read but I’d appreciate it if you would since it’s upsetting when you claim that I offered an opinion which was self-serving - i.e saying that batting average should be the tiebreaker - when I repeatedly said that I didn’t care how you did it, just pick one way and stick to it

So, after it was clearly you who decided that batting average was the tiebreaker, the conversation resumes on July 5th, page 8

There you go, starting to waver…..

I never wanted, or have yet felt the need, to change the criteria. It's you (only) who's been bitching about it. But watch, I can see it now - THIS month will be the one that'll be questionable. [/b][/quote] So I take all of that to mean that if no one wins two categories, the tiebreaker is batting average.

That’s why I sat out the night that I did – to protect my lead in batting average.

How can you say a day before the month ends and after saying twice the batting average is the tiebreaker, that now maybe you’ll pick the winner some other way?

I'll say this yet agian:

use any scoring system you like.

Keep doing it where the winner is whovever wins two categories, and pick a tiebreaker.

Use a 4-3-2-1 system.

Use a system that weights the totals.

I DON'T CARE.

Just pick something and stick to it,unless you want to change it at the beginning of the month.

But don;t tell me we were playing this month based on any other scenario but the first, or that it was me who said batting average should be the tiebreaker because I had the lead in that category.

At this point, I honestly don't care what formula or method is used to figure out that I won the month :p

July 30
That depends....

If you agree that batting average is the tiebreaker, then I win.

This is from your long post....

Seriously...

How can you run a game with no objective criteria for winning?

A game in which "(you'd) probably declare DMC the winner, even tho in the past (you) probably would've just looked at it and awarded it to DJ."

After you said I don't know how many times that the winner has always been the person who won 2 out of 3 categories, and if no one did the tiebreaker would be batting average.

If you're gonna change that, can you decide before Tuesday?

For the LAST time, can you please just wait 'til tomorrow is over? Honestly. It's NEVER been a problem before - and no one has ever complained - until you brought this up a few weeks ago. And now this could be the 1st month of many with a "problem". :rolleyes:

Obviously I need new criteria to make you happy. I will announce it on Day 1 of August. And to further make you happy, and if it helps you sleep better tonight, then congrats - you're the winner, and we don't even need to play tomorrow. :p

For the LAST time, it's not new criteria to make me happy.

I don't care what the criteria is.

I just want to know what the criteria is.

And that's the only thing I'm complaining about - not knowing.

And how can you say I won the month already and don't have to play tomorrow?

What happens if DM winds up winning homers and RBIs - two categories - to my one?

Doesn't he then win?

Is this a conspiracy to make me think I'm going crazy or something, like you see in the movies?