Відео

Big surprise. Did not think the jays pitchers could shut down 98 Yankees ⚾️

Hello

What do you think of the 88 team .100 wins but lost to Dodgers in NLCS ?⚾️

+2 In left +2 in CF arms in the OF scare me

This is the big reason they traded for Carter in spring of 85

Great series! Excellent choice of teams. It might be interesting to see how the 76 Reds do against the 53 Dodgers. The Dodgers everyday lineup matches up well against the Reds, but the bullpen was not used as extensively back in 53, That would hurt that Dodgers' chances. Still, given your excellent review on the 53 Dodgers, I think you could do a series as competitive as this one. I do enjoy your work. 😄

Great series . I wonder what 76 reds could do against the best early 70s Oakland teams ⚾️

No surprise . My favorite childhood team turns out to be one of the greatest ⚾️

Great results. No surprise. Would pick reds to beat 79 Baltimore since they just beat the team that won 79 series. Would really like to see 76 reds vs the best 70s Oakland team 👍⚾️

In one of my Strat League tournaments, I took the 1953 Brooklyn Dodgers to the championship. The other teams were: (1) 1954 New York Giants, (2) 1984 Detroit Tigers, (3) 1961 New York Yankees, (4) 1961 Detroit Tigers, (5) 1971 Pittsburg Pirates, (6) 1957 Milwaukee Braves, (7) 1986 New York Mets. There was a guy set to play the 1976 Cincinnati Reds, but he cancelled. I would have loved to have seen how the 53 Dodgers did against the 76 Reds. My batting order was: (1) Gilliam, (2) Reese, (3) Snider, (4) Campanella, (5) Furillo, (6) Hodges, (7) Robinson, (8) Cox. As a person with great familiarity with the 53 team, your analysis was spot on. One of my loses was to Dwight Gooden, a righthanded pitcher who can get righthanded batters out. Truth be told, before the tournament I used your wonderful system of analysis, and quickly concluded Labine (pronounced with bine rhyming with pine. La-Bine.) is the best of the relievers. I also had great success using Podres in relief or Myer and Loes, which threw off lefthanded batting orders, and left anyone who started mixing in righthanded batters vulnerable to Jim Hughes (and Labine). I am glad we got the tournament in before you posted this video. Gosh, it would have tipped off all the other teams. There was actually a few teams that started lefthand pitching (and we are talking number 3 pitcher, at best) against the Dodgers righthanded power. Excellent analysis!

On my tweaked groundball and X-charts, an unforced runner on third with less than 2 outs gets thrown out trying to score in 2 different scenarios. The first, and far more common than the second, is when there are runners on first and third and the middle infielders (2b and ss) are playing back and a gb(B) is hit to the pitcher, catcher, or IN-playing cornerman. In these situations, a second-to-first DP is possible, so the runner on third has to try to score in case the DP is either unsuccessful or there are no outs. The defender, meanwhile, decides not to try for the DP and throws out the runner trying to score. (This sometimes causes 3 different possible results for infield BACK, IN, or cornermen only IN.) The other instance is when there is a G3 off the SADV X-chart when it is hit to the P/C or infielder playing IN. That's a DECIDE play with the usual adjustments for runner's speed and fielder's range rating. This is not the most complicated tweak I made (it's the second-most), but it the most consequential. The most complicated one is the streamlining of the definition of IN or BACK for the pitcher and catcher to be used for the regular and X-chart. The definition I use is this: They are IN whenever a runner is on third base except for runners on first and third. With runners on the corners, the pitcher and catcher are assumed to be playing the same as the middle infielders. Other tweaks are more simple and affect a limited number of results, often to make the groundball and X-charts more internally consistent within them or with each other. Many of my tweaks are based on groundball data someone from a Strat forum sent me, using data from the 1970s and 1980s. While the database didn't indicate how the infielders were position (sometimes it could be inferred), it did include who got putouts and assists, so I could vary my tweaks by position. This made me more comfortable that I was doing the right thing, or at least something reasonable, especially with the unforced runner on third situation.

One of my many tweaks to the Strat groundball charts (and X-charts) is to eliminate most of the automatic outs at home when there is an unforced runner on third with less than 2 outs and the ball is hit to the pitcher, catcher, or infielder playing IN, especially on gb(B). I have that runner on third holding his base most of the time instead. I made these tweaks back in 2007 when I returned to Strat after a long layoff from the game. I play about 500 games a year and always feel vindicated when one of those unforced runners on third remains there instead of making that suicide run to home. This tweak is part of some other related tweaks. They are a little lengthy but I can post them here is anyone is interested.

Number one, old retrosheet data doesn't record infield back, infield in, or corners in for the outcomes. The effects of each fielder on the runner on 3rd chances is also effected by the different base situations with the runner on third. Strategy wise it could be decided by the runner's manager with some formulation or the runner may still automatically go home on the infield or corners in gbb as originally intended. However: I could see the runner's rating, the infielders range, and the catcher's plate blocking ability contributing to the outcome on a remaining automatic out basis by split chance. SOM was designed when a lot of data wasn't available as today. The game also is designed using it all comes out in the wash testing versus going the way of always using strategy in obtaining the extreme outcomes. This is why to use some formulation that gives the runner going home on the infield in or corners in for the GBB strategy a chance to score. Just me, but this isn't a time for managers to take advantage or stratballing the numbers, since this is a original designed it all comes out in the wash part of the design. IOW, the runner goes as designed every time, but give him a chance to be safe based on the skils of the runner, the range the selected fielder, and the catcher's plate blocking ability. I've been working on a solution for more fun in this case. This was discussed some time ago on the strat-o-matic forum and the real data for these situations. BTW, the runner's manager already has a chance to avoid the GBB result with strategy and it's the bunt squeeze play.

I agree with overall rating. Live in the Bay Area and saw early 70s and late 90s Oakland teams as well as the Giants . Baker went with inexperienced Solomon Torres on last day of season which would be thier last game after winning 103 games 😩⚾️

The one thing I note from San Fran's lineup is their EXCEPTIONAL defense. I count five 1's, and most everyone in the field had low e ratings. They won't give up much on their X rolls, that's for sure.

Thanks for sharing this. Nicely explained. The '80 White Sox don't look THAT bad according to Baseball Reference, certainly not at the '62 Mets level. They looked like a typical 70-win team. You should definitely match up that team against other teams you think are bad. I would definitely be interested in watching. I like watching bad teams do good things.

You're not missing it. One house rule idea is on a groundball B, take the runner on third's running rating. Subtract 10 if hit to 1st, 3rd, or P, subtract 5 if hit to 2nd or ss. Add the fielder's range. So a 1-15 runner hits a gbB to a SS3. Minus 5+3= safe on 1-13. Same gbB to a 3b1, minus 10+1=safe on 1-6.

Runner on third less then two out GBP B would the rubber on third really go on contact and get chucked out. I agree with you

Great fun! Looking forward to the 1970's NL Tournament. My guess is the 75 Reds will take it.

70 Baltimore and 72 athletics stand out in this group but anything could happen when great teams match up. 70s NL teams might be 75-76 reds 71-79 pirates 74-77 dodgers 77 Phillies ?

Great stuff!! Makes me want to do the same!!

My Strat Group finished an eight-team tournament on Saturday. My team, the 1953 Brooklyn Dodgers, defeated the 1972 Pittsburg Pirates in the finals. Other teams in the mix included: 1961 NY Yankees (playoff contender), 1961 Tigers (playoff contender), 1954 Giants, 1986 Mets, 1957 Braves, and finishing last the 1984 Tigers. I agree on paper the 84 Tigers seem solid, but they do not do well at these tournaments. They have no left-handed starting pitchers and their lineup does not do as well verses lefties. This was my first tournament win. May of the other players were surprised how deep the Dodger lineup is. The pitching is suspect, but I mixed and matched enough, and got great pitching from my number one starter, Carol Erskine, to win. The win was slightly tainted by the fact the 1976 Reds pulled out of the tournament. League rules on starting pitching requires a certain number of innings or games started, and Don Gullet did not make the cut. So, the manager requested a “refund.” I know, right. Lucky they were not his dice. He should have just used Gullet in long relief. I did that with Johnny Podres, and it worked great. If you own the 1953 Brooklyn Dodgers a team I would be interested if you think they might give the 1976 Cincinnati Reds a challenge. I am bidding my time waiting to spring the 1989 Oakland A's team on a future tournament (one that does not ban steroid tainted player."

A 1993 Giants analysis would be fun. A 1998 San Diego Padres analysis would be fun too. Back in those days, we didn't get to see too many west coast games in Michigan. I remember the season. Burkett and Swift put the Giants on the brink of tying the Braves, but Salomon Torres get lit up in the final game of the regular season. The Giants just missed out by a whisker.

Thank you for the video. The results seem quite good in comparison even though it was a single team replay. The hot and cold streaks of the dice affect the results more in the individual's stats, which is why I look more at the total team averages for better accuracy. Since we don't get a card for every player unless you use the computer game, I figure that 105-110% usage is acceptable. When making pitching changes, did you wait until the pitcher became fatigued or did you make the decisions yourself? Also, how did you decide on when the runners attempted to steal a base? Also, I try to get the hitters their actual number of sacrifice bunts. I like seeing and getting to know how others play and their preference (basic, ADV, SADV). I haven't purchased the new SADV version yet but plan to in about a week or so. I have the original set plus the additional player set. I also might be trying to replay a two-team replay with the 1941 set (Red Sox and Yankees). Thanks in advance and again for the video.

Are both teams from the diamond gems collection? DG sets play different then original 1980 Orioles and 93 giants from their true sets play

Hmm, what did I think? I live in Michigan. The 1984 Detroit Tigers were swept by the 1985 Royals. FIX! FIX! OK, I have vented. Seriously. The Oakland Athletics won pennants in 1988, 1989, and 1990 and the World Series in 1989. I can see them winning the tournament. Yes, I can see them winning the tournament despite the fact my Strat club bans them from our tournaments because of steroid use. I found your setup innovative and compact. I have been a part of Diamond Gems championship series. All of which involve a best of 7 for all matches. With 8 teams and the possibility of each series going 7 games, that is a possible 56 games. You have compacted that into a plausible and manageable schedule. I think the only team that might have benefitted from a full 7 game competition is the 82 Brewers who were hampered by the injury to Rollie Fingers. On the whole, I enjoyed the tournament and (as always) would consider utilizing your innovative ideas in a tournament of my own. I am looking forward to checking out your NL tournament.

Thanks for the video. These results are extremely close to real life, with some modest deviations. This is what you want out of a baseball sim. Have you only played SOM? Or have you attempted this same replay with Statis Pro Advanced, APBA, Payoff Pitch etc? As you probably know, you can find that 1985 season in other games.

85 cards are a nightmare for any team. 5 hitters in lineup with 400 plus slugging 2 with 500 plus. They stole bases at will. Tudor Andujar Cox great 123. Had arguably one of the greatest managers ever. Tudor and McGee standouts ⚾️

The 85 Blue Jays were special. Surprised they didn't pull a World Series title then or in 87. Have you done the 68 Tigers vs the 84 Tigers?

There are some things I disagree with Strat on. Not many, but a few. I believe the thing I disagree with Strat the most on is the ballpark home run effect for the 1954 New York Giants. The Polo Grounds was shaped like a horseshoe. If the batter hit the ball down the line (Like Dusty Rhodes did in game one of the 1954 World Series) it was an easy home run. If the batter hit the ball to centerfield (As Vic Wertz did in game one of the 1954 World Series) it fell into the glove of an outfielder. I don't know. I presume Start did its usual diligent research on the subject, but it seems to me a more realistic ballpark home run effect for the Polo Grounds in 1954 would have been a 1 to 10.

Totally agree. I would not let Albert Belle beat me either. Albert's 1995 card is stacked. My Strat Group finished our 1920's Diamond Gems Championship. The winner was the 1924 Washington Senators. You could have knocked me over with a feather. I never excepted the Senators to win the tournament, but they get full credit. The 24 Senators swept the 1929 Chicago Cubs. They came from behind 0-2 to beat the 1927 Yankees in six games. In the final, they game back from being down 0-2 to beat the 1920 Cleveland Indians in six games. I know the "second guess myself" feeling. I was playing the 1927 Yankees in their game six elimination. The game went into extra innings, and I am still kicking myself for bringing in Bob Shawky in relief. That cost me the game. Oh well, that is Strat. 🙂I enjoyed the "Battle of Ohio".

Thought 95 Indians would be a little better with that offense. Being a 10 year old in 76 I was a huge big red machine fan. 95 Cleveland lineup reminds a little of those reds teams ⚾️

Are your games In full super Advanced? I enjoyed your videos

I think you slightly overrated this team . Solid team but one of the more weaker ws teams in history. Trash starting pitchers outside of Brown. Only alou sheff and Bonilla have only quality bats in order

I enjoyed this one. In late innings, that is exactly what I do with this team. Hegan to first, Hendrick to center, Jackson to right. The lefty-righty makeup of the bullpen really messes with platoon teams like the 69 Mets. You can pretty much keep swapping lefty and right relievers to completely disrupt the platoon system. One funny thing. The actual 72 team would repeatedly pinch-hit for the second baseman, which is why they have so many of them. I agree with your analysis. Pick the best glove at second and let him play. 1965 Twins might be a good one, if you have it.

Bluejays were the victim of the 7 game LCS because under old rules they play the Cardinals In the world series and then you never know

Keep in mind these are Gems and not the original 85 set. The Gems are normalized so they can play against other 80 gems.

Would you be able to explain the numbering system you are using here please? What do the #/#-#/# represent? You mention a stratomatic book, what book are you referring to? My apologies for basic questions, appreciate your consideration in answering them. Thank you.

With all the platooning the 69 Mets did, I figured it would be a challenging team to analyze. Nice job!

Just curious, but would it be better to just look at their real life stats rather than the cards? More to the point, have you found cards that don’t seem to be representative of the players’ real life performance?

Great tips. Especially on Lopez. I do have a story to share. I played the 70 Orioles against the 1959 Chicago White Sox. To my shock, the White Sox swept the Orioles in 4 games. Now, it is true the dice did NOT fall favorably for the Orioles, but the bigger problem was base stealing. The 1959 White Sox were known as the, "Go Go Sox". They have several players (notably leadoff man Luis Aparicio) who could steal bases. We were playing by the advanced rules. In advanced, you subtract/add the catcher's throwing arm rating to the base stealing formula. The Orioles catchers could not stop Chicago from stealing. This was the series that lead to the switch to super advanced. With super advanced, the pitcher's hold rating could help negate a poor catcher's throwing arm. McNally and Cuellar have outstanding hold ratings. Palmer does not. My Strat group is talking a tournament in June. I might take this team although (based on your ratings), I also like the idea of a "sneak attack" and buying (and bringing) the 1989 Oakland Athletics. No one would expect that team). If I do take Baltimore, I will be sure to get Marv Rettenmund some playing time. That is another great tip. I love the Diamond Gems analysis!

I've done that myself with the 97 Marlins,play Council at 2B I can't play a 4 with a high e-rating in the middle infield. What impressed me most with the Marlins, how many good bats they have that for time reasons I couldn't get in I try to keep these team analysis videos to about 15 mins. Thanks as always for watching & commenting!

I do love these analysis. I don't think I would buy this team as a single, simply because there are so many players on other Diamond Gems teams. Although, I do LOVE the Gary Sheffield card. I am a big fan of Sheff from his time with the Tigers, because he worked the count better than anyone I have ever seen. The heck of it was, while the Tigers signed Sheff to DH, he insisted on playing the field, where (of course) he got hurt. Such is life. I think I would play Council every game at second, unless he has a card like Atlanta shortstop Santana against lefthanders (NO HITS AT ALL). When I play the Braves, I start Jeff Blauser and live with his 3 rated defense. No way am I playing a guy with zero hits against a southpaw. Gosh, you have worked thru most of the teams from the eighties and nineties I own. How about a suggestion from the seventies (if you have it). The 1972 Oakland A's. Gosh, the 73 Oakland A's would have been a much better Diamond Gems offering by Strat, but no complaints. 72 is pretty cool too. Keep them coming. 😀

Excellent (as always). I thought the 93 Blue Jays were stronger offensively (Paul Molitor and Rickey Henderson really added some punch), but the pitching might have been weaker. I would definitely consider buying this team. I remember the 97 Marlins. Blockbuster's Wayne Huizenga bought himself a champion (much to the pain of Cleveland fans). Looking forward to the next one.

We need a 1992 Toronto Blue Jays Team Analysis. 😀

Where are you getting 33? There are 108 possible chances on each side of each card (not counting splits)

Very insightful as always, and thank you. I'm not a huge Yankee fan, but I love both Guidry and Reggie, so I tend to play Yankee teams of this era a fair amount. I've had pretty good success with '77, but '78 and '81 tend to give me trouble, Guidry's heroics notwithstanding.

I watched this while my boy was giving me sloppy. Real good stuff bro

Another excellent video. If I may. Do you play with super advanced base stealing? The reason I ask is one thing you do not evaluate is the catcher's throwing arm. In my Strat Club, a catcher's throwing arm can completely change the opponents running game. Against a team like the 85 Cardinals, negating a strong running game is a must. I enjoyed the analysis of the 98 Yankees and I found the "Achilles heal" of their bullpen to be very telling. Looking forward to the 75 Red Sox. I would love to see a video on the 75 Reds. I watched your video (and was shocked, but as a Tiger's fan very happy) to see the 84 Tigers beat the 75 Reds. In my Strat club, the 75 Reds are one of the more difficult teams to beat. The 75 Reds have power, speed, and a great defense. If the manager makes Don Gullet the ace, he usually delivers. Currently, I am in a tournament with the 1920's Diamond Gems. Gosh, what a field day you would have with analyzing teams from that era. Players have decent fielding ratings, but by gosh the error ratings. Even the best teams routinely have double digit error ratings. Equipment was primitive in that era.