All Purpose Schaefer Discussion Thread

[metirish]

I kept the beer in the cooler for last nights game...no beer for anyone.

[seawolf17]

They're open to debate and discussion, but I'm entitled to award points however I see fit. Maybe I think a guy had good at bats, or he made a nice play or two; so I show him a little extra Schaefer love. If you don't see it that way, then don't; it'll all balance out in the final tally.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I suspect that there won't be many games that get fewer voters and points than that five-inning game will.

So far, the lowest number of points awarded for a game was 3.18 for the 13-3 loss to the Braves last weekend. An 8-2 loss to the Brewers also was low-rated, with 3.72 points dished out.

(I'm not peeking under the hood for this stuff, by the way. It's all available here.)

The lowest voter turnout was 12, for an April 23 loss in San Diego. A loss to the Nationals on May 2 got only 13 votes. Opening Day was the biggest, with 35 voters. I wonder where all those people went? No other game has received more than 27 votes, and lately most have been finishing in the high teens.

[TransMonk]

I'm in agreement with the awarding points how the poster sees fit. That is the point of a poll, otherwise one poster would just tell us who the player of the game was and who got what points.

I take my voting on a game by game basis and always give out 10 points. However, more often than not, I abstain from voting at all if the game is a loss or I simply didn't watch the game.

IIRC, the whole idea of the Schaefer voting was supposded to be an improvment on the POTG poll which limited players to only one vote per game, even if there were several key players. In my mind, if we are expanding the voting to 10 points per game distributed through many players, I should be able to give those to any player that in my mind contributed positively to the game.

Personally, I remember the times a few years ago when there were just two polls, the POTG poll for wins and the Goat of the Game for losses. Those polls were a lot more fun.

I think we're all fairly intelligent baseball fans...Schaefer could be more fun, if posters didn't feel they had to justify their votes.

Edit: spelling

[nymr83]

i agree with metsmarathon...if everything isn't relative to the one game you're voting on then you need to lift the 10 point max for those nights when we win 10-0 with 3 guys who have 2 extra base RBI hits each and a pitcher who went 9 shutout innings (an automatic 6 in my book)
at that point you're really talking about a whole different system which would be 0-6 (though why 6 at that point, might as well make it 0-10 whole numbers only) for each player in each game

[Elster88]

Look, I don't want to tell anyone to vote. Saying "I think a person should choose how to vote for himself" is a little like saying "I think a person should choose how to write his own posts". (In other words, no shit.)

But people should have some sort of justification for why they are voting, otherwise, what's the point of doing this? And if I want to challenge that justification, that's my right. It's called discussion and debate.

_________________

Edit: I am a little surprised how many people are proclaiming that they believe people should choose how to vote on their own. What a radical belief (SC = 100) Is anyone really saying something differently?

[nymr83]

Elster88 wrote: Edit: I am a little surprised how many people are proclaiming that they believe people should choose how to vote on their own. What a radical belief (SC = 100) Is anyone really saying something differently?

i don't think anyone is saying differently, but someone impolied that someone else was saying differently so everyone felt the need to jump on the "i support freedom to vote as you choose too" bandwagon

[metsmarathon]

="Elster88"]Look, I don't want to tell anyone to vote. Saying "I think a person should choose how to vote for himself" is a little like saying "I think a person should choose how to write his own posts". (In other words, no shit.) But people should have some sort of justification for why they are voting, otherwise, what's the point of doing this? And if I want to challenge that justification, that's my right. It's called discussion and debate.

true enough.

on my absolute scale, everyone got the following:

trachsel 2.00
castro 1.75
matsui 1.25
beltran 0.75
delgado 0.50
wright 0.50
nady -0.30
reyes -0.30

how i award these points is tricky, and maybe i'll hafta go in and look at how i award points for a loss (right now a loss is worth -3 points. i'm thinking of looking at what happens if i make that -5 points... so long as it doesnt screw things up too much maybe i will... for comparison, a win is worth only 1 point, tho the innings pitched, strikeouts, etc that a pitcher did to get that win earn him more.)

what i do is then look at the top six performers in a game, and if their total is greater than 10 points, i scale them down to fit. if not, they remain absolute, as in tonight, where the total added up to 6.75 points.

the points for these six performers then gets rounded up or down, to the nearest whole number, and often the top performer will get a bonus point, but not tonight. i try to award points to four or at most five. rarely six. and adjust the points around to match ten, and appear fair.

this very much overly complicated, and impossible to automate, system has yielded votes in conventional wins that are often exactly the same as those which other voters give out, or are at least very much in line with the consensus.

and therefore, i consider hte overall methodology to be sound, and not necessary to abandon it in a loss, or an awkward game like last night.

that's how loduca got his 2 points.
1 hit * 0.25 + 1 bb * 0.59 + 2 tb * 0.50 = 1.75 points. rounded up = 2 points.
by comparison...
trachsel's 2 points came as follows:
4 ip * 2.00 - 6 hits * 0.25 - 2 R * 0.50 - 2 ER * 0.50 - 2 BB * 0.25 + 3 SO * 0.50 - 1 Hr * 0.50 - 1 Loss * 3.00 = 2.00 points.

of course, i did go out on a limb and award an effort point for Nady. tough luck on that play. he coulda had over 4 points on the double with three RBI. a five point swing on the nose of mr. roward, on account of the men lob.

well, that should just about kill off anybody every questioning my point totals. like you'd ever want to see me walk through that crap again!

[Gwreck]

="metsmarathon"]see, if i choose to award ten points for each and every game, i think that's my right as a schaeffer voter. the total of my points that i give out should not be subject to scrutiny, however i agree that the distribution of those points should be subject to debate and question.

Didn't mean to suggest that wasn't your right. I thought discussion of how many points to award though was as important as who got them.

="TransMonk"]I think we're all fairly intelligent baseball fans...Schaefer could be more fun, if posters didn't feel they had to justify their votes.

Didn't mean to try to take away people's fun. I did think the whole point of the board was to discuss stuff. I think that includes having some sort of basis for opinions/voting/etc.

[TransMonk]

Hey, I still think Schaefer is fun, otherwise I wouldn't do it.

I just like to spread the love.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I had posted this in the RLF, but figured I ought to post it here, too, for those of you who wisely don't visit that forum:

]Yancy Street Gang wrote: I've decided that I am going to give myself that time out I mentioned. I'm going to stop reading and posting here for a week or two. Or more. I'll try to check in once a week, maybe on Fridays, to do my Schaefer voting and to do the vote tallying. Other than that, you won't be seeing my rocky orange face around here for a while. And if a few Fridays pass without my dropping by, I'd still rather you didn't assume that I was dead!

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

If ever there were a candidate for negative Schaeffer points, it would be Lima.

He owes us beer. Lots of it!

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Month-to-date totals for May 2006
Through game of May 16, 2006

Rank	Name	Points
1	Carlos Delgado	12.99
2	Tom Glavine	11.88
3	Carlos Beltran	10.04
4	Jos� Reyes	8.45
5	Xavier Nady	7.69
6	Paul Lo Duca	7.60
6	Pedro Martinez	7.60
8	David Wright	6.77
9	Jos� Valentin	5.76
10	Victor Zambrano	4.24
11	Kaz Matsui	3.61
12	Endy Chavez	3.54
13	Cliff Floyd	3.19
14	Billy Wagner	3.03
15	Duaner Sanchez	2.99
16	Jorge Julio	2.86
17	Aaron Heilman	2.54
18	Pedro Feliciano	2.26
19	Chad Bradford	2.15
20	Darren Oliver	2.11
21	Steve Trachsel	1.83
22	Jeremi Gonzalez	1.36
23	Ramon Castro	0.93
24	John Maine	0.76
25	Julio Franco	0.47
26	Bartolome Fortunato	0.28
27	Jos� Lima	0.12
28	Chris Woodward	0.05
29	Heath Bell	0.00

Season-to-date totals for 2006
Through game of May 16, 2006

Rank	Name	Points
1	Tom Glavine	33.36
2	Carlos Delgado	32.69
3	David Wright	25.62
4	Pedro Martinez	25.09
5	Xavier Nady	22.46
6	Jos� Reyes	21.94
7	Carlos Beltran	21.89
8	Paul Lo Duca	17.12
9	Duaner Sanchez	13.01
10	Brian Bannister	12.69
11	Steve Trachsel	11.97
12	Cliff Floyd	10.82
13	Billy Wagner	10.58
14	Aaron Heilman	8.48
15	Endy Chavez	8.06
16	Kaz Matsui	7.44
17	Jos� Valentin	5.87
18	Pedro Feliciano	5.56
19	Darren Oliver	5.52
20	Ramon Castro	5.45
21	Jorge Julio	5.13
22	Victor Zambrano	4.66
23	Chris Woodward	4.08
24	Julio Franco	3.95
25	Chad Bradford	3.82
26	Jeremi Gonzalez	1.36
27	John Maine	0.76
28	Anderson Hernandez	0.57
29	Victor Diaz	0.32
30	Bartolome Fortunato	0.28
31	Jos� Lima	0.12
32	Heath Bell	0.00

[Willets Point]

Yancy's back! Now there's gonna be trouble.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

I'm just back for the Schaefering. I now return to my self-imposed exile until next Friday. See you then!

[Willets Point]

[Guest ScarletKnight41]

I miss you, man!

[metsmarathon]

whew! i had assumed he was just dead or something!

of course, he comes back and closes out games i hadn't yet voted on. the bastid...

[Guest KC]

I'll be reminding everyone and bumping the threads next week when the
next wave is coming. As it stands now, this will be a Friday thingy.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

As things stand now, the player of the year race is pretty tight, but the player of the month race is even tighter.

Which Puerto Rican Carlos will be the Schaefer Mets Player of the Month for May?

Or will Tom Glavine have a couple of strong outings and grab the award for an incredible third consecutive month?

Stay tuned!

Month-to-date totals for May 2006
Through game of May 23, 2006

Rank	Name	Points
1	Carlos Beltran	17.00
2	Carlos Delgado	16.99
3	Tom Glavine	15.27
4	Pedro Martinez	13.31
5	David Wright	11.15
6	Jos� Reyes	10.63
7	Xavier Nady	8.81
8	Paul Lo Duca	8.65
9	Jos� Valentin	7.62
10	Steve Trachsel	7.25
11	Darren Oliver	5.75
12	Aaron Heilman	5.36
13	Billy Wagner	5.23
14	Cliff Floyd	5.15
14	Duaner Sanchez	5.15
16	Victor Zambrano	4.24
17	Kaz Matsui	4.05
18	Endy Chavez	3.74
19	Pedro Feliciano	3.10
19	Jorge Julio	3.10
21	Chad Bradford	2.41
22	Jeremi Gonzalez	1.36
23	Ramon Castro	0.93
24	Julio Franco	0.78
25	John Maine	0.76
26	Chris Woodward	0.34
27	Bartolome Fortunato	0.28
28	Jos� Lima	0.12
29	Heath Bell	0.00

Season-to-date totals for 2006
Through game of May 23, 2006

Rank	Name	Points
1	Tom Glavine	36.75
2	Carlos Delgado	36.69
3	Pedro Martinez	30.80
4	David Wright	30.00
5	Carlos Beltran	28.85
6	Jos� Reyes	24.12
7	Xavier Nady	23.58
8	Paul Lo Duca	18.17
9	Steve Trachsel	17.39
10	Duaner Sanchez	15.17
11	Billy Wagner	12.78
11	Cliff Floyd	12.78
13	Brian Bannister	12.69
14	Aaron Heilman	11.30
15	Darren Oliver	9.16
16	Endy Chavez	8.26
17	Kaz Matsui	7.88
18	Jos� Valentin	7.73
19	Pedro Feliciano	6.40
20	Ramon Castro	5.45
21	Jorge Julio	5.37
22	Victor Zambrano	4.66
23	Chris Woodward	4.37
24	Julio Franco	4.26
25	Chad Bradford	4.08
26	Jeremi Gonzalez	1.36
27	John Maine	0.76
28	Anderson Hernandez	0.57
29	Victor Diaz	0.32
30	Bartolome Fortunato	0.28
31	Jos� Lima	0.12
32	Heath Bell	0.00

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Well, that's it for this week.

In case anybody missed it in the closed out games that I posted this morning, please:

No fake votes!

No quoting other people's votes!

Yes, I'm talking to you, old original jb! Please remember, by voting the way you do you're undermining everyone else's votes, and this entire endeavor as well.

I'll be back next Friday for more Schaefer fun.

[Willets Point]

Please stay around. We can be the Strawberry twins!

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

Maybe we can both dress up like Holly Hobby.

[seawolf17]

Or Strawberry Shortcake.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I love that Darryl gets to hover above the city on his flying on-deck circle.

[Frayed Knot]

I hope your (Yancy's) program has the ability to distinguish future votes for O. Hernandez without adding them to past (and possibly future as well) votes for A. Hernandez.

[Willets Point]

Let's hope O. Hernandez is able to get votes.

[Guest cooby]

hey, yancy's back

[Willets Point]

cooby wrote: Hey yancy's back

Hey la, hey la.

[Guest Yancy Street Gang]

="Frayed Knot"]I hope your (Yancy's) program has the ability to distinguish future votes for O. Hernandez without adding them to past (and possibly future as well) votes for A. Hernandez.

Not back, cooby, at least not yet. I just stopped in to do my Friday Schaefering.

I'm making a special Saturday cameo appearance because I forgot to mention yesterday what Frayed Knot apparently remembered. (Thanks, Frayed!)

My spreadsheet will be able to distinguish between the Hernandezes. But the voters will have to help:

When voting for Orlando Hernandez, please vote for OHernandez. Not dots, please. And no apostrophes, either. (He's not Irish.)

Also, when and if Anderson Hernandez returns, please vote for him as AHernandez.

Thanks. And I'll see you all again on Friday, if not sooner.