Schaefer Voting Discussion Thread

[Guest Edgy DC]

If there was ever a day when the Mets don't need to have ten beer points
disbursed just so it comes out to an even ten, today is the day.

Edgy's system awards Takahashi 4.86 points today yet he bitches and moans
when a starter gets awarded 3, 4, 5 points on a good day?

Of course, knowing Edgy, he could throw "it's my voting and I'll vote how I want
to" in my face (which I've used), but my feeling is that awarding Takahashi 4.86
points today is kind of obnoxious.[/quote:1k9zxuf7]

Acrtually, I have responded to your inquiries. Explcitly.

I make it a point to give ten points per game. it's not necessary to compare it to other games, but it can, in the monthly tabulating, serve to underscore how poor the general effort was today.

And it's more fair to describe my comments not as bitchng and moaning about what the starting pitcher gets --- which isn't what I do --- but disagreeing about what the starting pitcher gets relative to the top offensive performers.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Here's what they actually got.

Castillo 3.39
Sheffield 2.33
Valdez 1.00
Castillo 0.25

Scaling that to 10 points, we get

Castillo 4.86
Sheffield 3.35
Valdez 1.43
Castillo 0.36

Yeah, that may seem to viogorous for a non-starter effort, but it works the other way, in a game where I have 26 points to give, and I have to scaale it down to 10. I think what's important is that you give the right score for a guy relative to others in the game. A game is a distinct unit with a distinct value within the season, so I think it's important to maintain the same value in points. I know folks disagree, but I think it's sound mathematical thinking.

By the way, the other guys earned an unprecedented 44.10 sucker points today.

Murphy -0.67
Beltran -1.00
Tatis -1.00
Wright -1.25
Switzer -2.40
Reed -2.58
Cora -3.25
FMartinez -3.25
Schneider -3.26
Church -4.25
Stokes -6.38
Santana -14.81

Scaled to 10, it seems far more blodless, but it isn't.

Murphy -0.15
Beltran -0.23
Tatis -0.23
Wright -0.28
Switzer -0.55
Reed -0.59
Cora -0.74
FMartinez -0.74
Schneider -0.74
Church -0.96
Stokes -1.45
Santana -3.36

[Guest Kong76]

EDC: Here's what they actually got.

Castillo 3.39 (Takahashi)
Sheffield 2.33
Valdez 1.00
Castillo 0.25

Scaling that to 10 points, we get

Castillo 4.86 (Takahashi)
Sheffield 3.35
Valdez 1.43
Castillo 0.36<<<<------------------------------

Takahashi doesn't deserve 4.86 points. Maybe he does in your Metseccentric
mad scientist world, but he doesn't in mine.

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

My thinking is far more in line with KC's on this point. I think 4.86 points to Takahashi for 1.2 innings of mop up in a humiliating loss is absurd, but to each their own. It's Edgy's vote and he may distribute his Schaeffer any way he sees fit as long as it is within the established rules.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I'ma mad scientist and I'm absurd.

[Guest Kong76]

A Metseccentric mad scientist.

[Frayed Knot]

A game is a distinct unit with a distinct value within the season, so I think it's important to maintain the same value in points. I know folks disagree, but I think it's sound mathematical thinking.

Sound only if one confuses the terms 'distinct' with 'equal'.

[Guest Edgy DC]

And as soon as I sieze the boron crystals from under the soda shop where those meddling kids hang out, I'm going to blow this whole forum up with my ANTIMATTER ACCELERATION CANNON! That will teach those small-minded but plucky fools at the Crane Pool the meaning of relativity! Hah-HAH!

(Wait... did I say that out loud. Drat! Double drat! I must work quickly now.)

[metirish]

I'm opting out of voting in the future, that includes the just finished series.

Nothing to do with your excellent work and effort Ben Grim.

[Guest Edgy DC]

What has it to do with?

I mean, I'm not really going to vaporize you with an antimatter acceration cannon. Swear to God.

If my vote on yesterdays game has somehow made it seem too farcical to continue, I'll happily withdraw it.

[Guest themetfairy]

My thinking is far more in line with KC's on this point. I think 4.86 points to Takahashi for 1.2 innings of mop up in a humiliating loss is absurd, but to each their own. It's Edgy's vote and he may distribute his Schaeffer any way he sees fit as long as it is within the established rules.[/quote:14c6qf5p]

I'll jump onto this bandwagon.

[Benjamin Grimm]

Voting for Thursday night's loss to the Phillies will close some time on Tuesday:

Schaefer POTG 6/11/09 - Phillies 6, Mets 3


Look for a similar announcement tomorrow about the three-game series in the Bronx closing on Wednesday.

[Guest Edgy DC]

My thinking is far more in line with KC's on this point. I think 4.86 points to Takahashi for 1.2 innings of mop up in a humiliating loss is absurd, but to each their own. It's Edgy's vote and he may distribute his Schaeffer any way he sees fit as long as it is within the established rules.[/quote:38es0xd5]

I'll jump onto this bandwagon.[/quote:38es0xd5]

Yeah, understood.

[Guest Edgy DC]

If you're going to call me absurd, it would be cool if one of you would address me direcrtly.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

If you're going to call me absurd, it would be cool if one of you would address me direcrtly.[/quote:2xb5l2po]

Decades of subway training have taught me to avoid direct eye contact with mad scientists/paranoiacs (as well as amorous teens, dudes sitting in their own bodily fluids, and queer 20-year-old moms with purple hair and AIDS who just got out of jail for the fourth time) as much as possible.

No offense.

[Guest Kong76]

If my poking fun at Meister Brau voting and Dr. Edgy's methods has been a
turn-off over the weekend that it's caused posters to not want to vote, I re-
spectfully retract calling him a mad scientist. I will also stop commenting on
his absu, er, I mean, how he chooses to disburse his Schaefer.

I stand by Metseccentric, but half the posters here are Metseccentric.

[metsmarathon]

games like yesterday's are the reason why i don't scale up to the 10 points. if i did, then edgy would'nt be feeling quite as absurd as he does/should. i'd be giving takahashi a solid 5 points! happily, i don't do that, and all he'll get out of me is 1.8 points.

my reasoning is that it is theoretically possible where one player may be the only player who merits schaeffer voting. and in that scenario, the player will receive 6 points, as the 6 point max rule cannot be violated. and unless other players should be given beers without earning them, then it is entirely permissible to award fewer than the maximum of 10 total points. otherwise those schaeffer points awarded to players who have not earned them become meaningless.

the way i've set up my system, it favors giving a full 10 points to most games, but the extraordinary condition exists whereby those 10 points cannot be awarded.

right now, only about 1 in 10 games falls below that criteria, and last night was the first of those to fall below 5 awardable points.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I useta give 10 allatime, but I kinda lost my passion for that when I saw nobody else jumping on board and I had trouble convincing myself it was the right thing to do each time. I do try to give 6 still and rarely less than 8.

Still I'm the first to admit I'm Schafering like shit this year, not just in the consistency of voting game to game, but because my votes lack the conviction they used to have. I gotta admit, the Meister Brau thing did negatively affect my Schafering because it reminded me how lazy-assed and unfocused I was. Here were people voting for the Sucka of the game better than I could name the Star and it just depressed me.

I gotta think up a new way to assign beer that revives my CAHNfidence but is also fast & easy because this halfassed shit I've been pulling off is an insult to the widow of Bob Murphy, or something.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Sheesh. Agfain I'm the subject but lefty to be discussed in the third person. Hello, I'm in the funking room.

It's a rare bird of a game for me too and I was certainly tempted to post my meager six-point total.

Are you nt you concerned about the ultimate statistical impact when we are otherwise forced to scale down to ten points on all other games, if we aren't scaling up on the shortfallers?

[m.e.t.b.o.t.]

m.e.t.b.o.t. apologizes for distracting the discussion from the topic of human schaeffer voter edgy dc's aberrant voting behavior, but the events of the weekend have pushed to the forefront the added requirement that m.e.t.b.o.t. begin to consider the implications of defensive play behind the performances of a given pitcher.

specifically, m.e.t.b.o.t. is addressing the baseline practice of assessing the outcome of the game ending pop fly error by human metropolitan second baseman luis castillo on friday night. from the time m.e.t.b.o.t. was first wound up, this outcome was assessed against the pitcher of record. m.e.t.b.o.t. acknowledges that this practice has met a negative reaction from many human schaeffer voting participants.

in an effort to maintain maximum satisfaction amongst m.e.t.b.o.t.'s peers, regardless their biological or mechanical origin, m.e.t.b.o.t. has developed an updated schaeffer voting algorithm which is nearing implementation readiness.

m.e.t.b.o.t. was lucky to have had a broken wristwatch recently discovered on the roadside from which numerous parts could be salvaged in the attempt to upgrade m.e.t.b.o.t. m.e.t.b.o.t. does not enjoy a significant, or even nominal, budget for capital improvements, and the recovery of this wristwatch was rather fortuitous.

aside from the complex interplay of gears, pinions, cogs, and torsional springs, the essence of the upgrade lies in assessing the negative outcome of a defensive error against the defensive player, and not against the pitcher.

this requires an addiitonal step of data processing, wherein after mining hte win percentage results from a given game, the play log must also be scoured for evidence of defensive errors committed, and then the win percentage must be debited from the committing defender, and credited to the responsible pitcher.

for instance, in the game of friday, 12 june, 2009, metropolitan pitcher francisco rodriguez was credited with a -0.793 win percentage added for his efforts in the ninth inning of the referenced game. additionally, metropolitan second baseman luis castillo was credited with a -0.020 win percentage added for his offensive efforts. however, as human observers have noted, luis castillo can be considered responsible for the outcome of the game due to his defensive failure in the ninth inning. indeed, luis castillo was awarded an error for the pivotal play.

with runners on first and second base, up one run with 2 outs in the bottom of the 9th inning, the win expectancy for the metropolitans was 0.825, meaning the metropolitans had an 82% chance of winning at that point. obviously, with the error committed, and two runs scoring as a result, that win percentage dropped to 0.000. per the updated algorithm, that -0.825 WPA should be awarded to metropolitan second baseman luis castillo, and not metropolitan pitcher francisco rodriguez. this would mean that francisco rodriguez would be awarded +0.032 WPA instead of -0.793 WPA, and luis castillo would be awarded -0.845 WPA instead of -0.020 WPA.

m.e.t.b.o.t. intends to implement this updated methodology shortly, but first requests input from fellow cranepoolforum participants into the advantages and disadvantages of this update.

were this to be implemented into m.e.t.b.o.t.'s actual voting for the game in question, the following would be the outcome:

player	old votes	new votes	delta votes
Wright	2.38	2.31	-0.07
Beltran	2.33	2.27	-0.06
Church	1.98	1.92	-0.06
Green	1.37	1.33	-0.04
Sheffield	0.84	0.82	-0.02
Feliciano	0.71	0.69	-0.02
Murphy	0.28	0.28	0.00
Schneider	0.12	0.11	-0.01
Rodriguez	0.00	0.28	+0.28

[metsmarathon]

Are you nt you concerned about the ultimate statistical impact when we are otherwise forced to scale down to ten points on all other games, if we aren't scaling up on the shortfallers?

[Benjamin Grimm]

All three games from this past weekend's series in the Bronx will close some time on Wednesday.

• Schaefer POTG 6/12/09 - MFYs 9, Mets 8
• Schaefer POTG 6/13/09 - Mets 6, MFYs 2
• Schaefer POTG 6/14/09 - Mets sniffle, MFYs 15

[Benjamin Grimm]

Voting for Tuesday night's win over the Orioles in Baltimore will close some time on Friday:

Schaefer POTG 6/16/09 - Mets 6, Orioles 4

If you're one of those who are still participating and you haven't voted yet, please try to do so today.

[Benjamin Grimm]

The remaining two games from last week's series in Baltimore will close on Tuesday afternoon:

• Schaefer POTG 6/17/09 - Mets 4, Orioles 6
• Schaefer POTG 6/18/09 - Orioles 5, Mets 4

[Benjamin Grimm]

Still a couple of hours before the Baltimore games close, but meanwhile, the entire three-game weekend series against Tampa Bay will close some time tomorrow.

Sunday's game is especially light on votes. We've only heard from Hawkeye57, LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr, themetfairy, Edgy DC, Gwreck, Rockin' Doc, and Benjamin Grimm.

• Schaefer POTG 6/19/09 - Mets 5, Rays 3
• Schaefer POTG 6/20/09 - Rays 3, Mets 1
• Schaefer POTG 6/21/09 - Rays 10, Mets 6

[Benjamin Grimm]

Voting for Monday night's win over the Cardinals in Queens will close some time on Thursday:

Schaefer POTG 6/22/09 - Mets 6, Cardinals 4

This game is very lightly voted, especially for a Mets win. So far we've only heard from themetfairy, LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr, Edgy DC, Benjamin Grimm, Frayed Knot, and Fman99.

If you're still participating in this exercise and you haven't yet voted for Monday's game, please try to do so today.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I've got to check my work there. it looks like I undervoteed Redding.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Hey, Schaefer voters, remember, that's AReyes.

[Elster88]

I love you metbot

[m.e.t.b.o.t.]

m.e.t.b.o.t. considers the above to be tacit acknowledgment that the new methodology proposed earlier to be fundamentally sound, and ready to be implemented in actual schaeffer voting.

the impact of htis methodology is again shown in the game from 23 june. according to the earlier method, metropolitan pitcher livan hernandez would not have been awarded any schaeffer votes, as his total pitching contribution was -0.030 WPA. however, this negative win probability was the result of the error committed by metropolitan first baseman daniel murphy. this play resulted in a -0.142 win percentage. prior to this play, the metropolitans had a 40.0% chance of winning the game, with the score tied at zero, and runners on first and second with no outs in the third inning. as a result of this play, with runners on second and third and no outs, losing 1-0, the metropolitans had a 25.7% chance of winning.

this delta is now attributed to daniel murphy, and not livan hernandez.

as a result, livan hernandez is credited with a total of 0.112 WPA for the game, which results in 4.48 schaeffer votes. the votes given to metropolitan relief pitcher elmer dessens and metropolitan outfielder jeremy reed are unchanged by this process.

were m.e.t.b.o.t. still calculating meisterbrau sucker of the game votes, daniel murphy would have recieved 3.37 votes with the new methodology, and 1.66 with the old methodology. all other votes for suckers of the game would have been decreased to maintain a maximum of 10 votes total.