Quote:
Originally Posted by Garlon
With regards to the reference of Bill Mazeroski... It seems that the results seem fine and that nothing should be changed with the game without further evidence suggesting something is amiss.
|
The results aren’t fine even if you only focus on the Bill Mazeroski end of the spectrum and ignore what the study was actually trying to test. The “Bill Mazeroski” in the study (the guy with a 200 Turn DP rating), turned an average of six double play a year more than the league average. That’s not 9%.
But forget about Bill Mazeroski; I wasn’t trying to test whether the game accurately simulates the skills of a Bill Mazeroski. The point of the study was to see what the game did with an “anti-Mazeroski”, a player with extremely poor double play skills. The tests indicated that such a player is only 10% worse than someone who is better than average (remember, the anti-Mazeroski had a Turn DP rating of 30 and the four other non-Mazeroski 2Bs had Turn DP ratings of 140). That doesn’t seem “fine” to me at all; that seems very much like something is amiss. 30 is not 10% less than 140.