DMB coming to an end.

Orioles · Post by **Orioles** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 4:08 pm

Athletics wrote:I honestly don't see the rush. I'd imagine that "someone" will be producing a DMB disk for at least the next 5 years, whether it's Zips or someone else. Frankly, if we were the first ones to come up with a formula we could probably sell it and make a little money ourselves (at least enough to cover the operating expenses Shawn incurs on the site). DMB 9c is clearly functional, so I don't see needing to switch as imminent. Also, I'm a big proponent of H2H, especially for the playoffs, and losing that would cost the league more than whatever new management features exist in OOTP would be worth, especially considering how well OOPSS works.

What he said.

Orioles · Post by **Orioles** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 4:15 pm

Doesn't somebody usually publish an annual article about the accuracy of a few different projection systems? (CHONE, ZiPs, PECOTA, DMB I think).

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 4:16 pm

RedSox wrote:I didn't say that the majority of the league never plays h2h. I said that for a few people h2h is a big deal. To me, a big deal is refusing to make a switch to another program because it doesn't have h2h. Almost all of us have probably played an h2h game at some point, including myself, but I doubt more than a few are so steadfastly pro h2h that they'd refuse to switch to a better system because of it (I'm not saying OOTP is better, I haven't looked at it enough, I'm just speaking in generalities).
It's fun when you've got the time, but it's a minor part of the league.

I guess my question is what could possibly be so much better about OOTP that would justify dumping H2H? I'm not asking specifics I'm asking generalities, would it be organization? A better SIM manager (if such a thing is even possible)? More specific slots for players? What's important to the league that will make it the most fun?

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Sat Feb 28, 2009 10:16 pm

A better SIM manager would certainly do it, especially one that doesn't do wonky stuff like make silly PHing and reliever decisions. More customizability in lineups. A better engine that made small projection sizes less stable.

Padres · Post by **Padres** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 7:18 am

While I have been reading this thread and following this topic closely in this league, on the DMB forums and in a few other leagues I have not responded to this topic yet primarily due to a couple of reasons:

1.) I am so bummed out/disappointed with the folks at DMB my "feelings" have been clouding my thoughts about their product.

2.) The weather here has been great and there is so much downed hardwood from the winter storms that the past few days have been a wonderful opportunity to harvest next winter's wood. With Patti's help, along with a cousin of mine, we have collected and cut what we estimate to be nearly 9 cord of beautiful free oak, maple, birch and black cherry. Still needs to split and stacked to begin the drying process but that will have to wait until after the next storm ... besides that, this old guy is sore and needs a couple of days to loosen up.

As to the subject at hand ...

While I am disappointed in DMB's decision I still believe they have the best product and I am right there with those GMs not wanting to throw the baby out with the bath water.

I have used Zips as an informational base (much to JT's chagrin I have followed and quoted the various projections, Chone, Marcel, PECTOA, Zips and even some fantasy issuers such as RotoWorld, Tim Dierkes, etc) both for my fantasy teams and in assembling SIM teams. Zips is getting better though it still not close to what I felt we got from DMB. I am not happy but understanding reality am prepared to go with Zips this season. If Clay at BP can produce something and it can be somehow melded into the projections by some GMs smarter then yours truly, I am willing to go with that ... BP's base of players will likely be smaller then the 2,000 Dan is promising this year. Using Zips will result in virtually no SIM stars and lower run totals this year I expect.

I really am upset with what I consider to be a combination of bad business decisions, misplaced priorities and a lack of focus on allocation of resources at DMB. Yet I remain hopeful of the future and will give them the benefit of doubt while believing they can realize the errors of their ways and make a better decision in the future. At this point I am holding off on purchasing Version 10 until I see what direction they are going in. At the same time, I understand the improvements they made going from Version 8 to 9 were very meaningful and I expect the same from Version 10 when it comes out. They have heard loud and clear from me and others though that the purchase of Version 10 is incumbent on some sort of commitment to the future of the SIM projection game - not just the production of a current season disc.

This is terribly long for me but there you have it ...

Reds · Post by **Reds** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 7:55 am

Well that pretty much nails it.

Phillies · Post by **Phillies** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:09 pm

please tell me using Zips isnt something we are looking into...

BlueJays · Post by **BlueJays** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:20 pm

Nick, have you been reading this thread at all?

What do you suggest?

Tigers · Post by **Tigers** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:26 pm

Phillies wrote:please tell me using Zips isnt something we are looking into...

At this point the options appear to be:

A) Use Zips with player splits vs RH and LH
B) Use PECOTA with no player splits or defense ratings

Mets · Post by **Mets** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 1:40 pm

I'm pretty much ready to start making moves, so let's get on with it.

Angels · Post by **Angels** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 9:37 pm

To be honest, I am totally unfamiliar with Zips, Pecota, or anything other than DMBs past projections. So I really cannot give an educated opinion on how to move forward. I've been following this thread and it's obvious many of the GMs here are very knowledgeable on our options, so I will trust the majority as to what we do going forward.

If anyone has any links to send me or help in researching options I'd appreciate it. I'd like to add any input I can, as well as understand how the projections work once a decision is made.

Thanks fellas,
Kelly CLE

Rays · Post by **Rays** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 10:43 pm

I'm for using the ZiPS at this point.

Like Jag and others, I would be in favor of using the defensive ratings from the 2008 dmb SD.

Since the ZiPS first iteration comes out tomorrow, maybe we should have a league vote on this soon.

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 10:46 pm

I know it's hypocritical of me to say since I'm on a pirated copy, but I don't want to use anything from the 2008 DMB season disc if it means buying one. That defeats the purpose of not buying v10.

Rays · Post by **Rays** » Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:28 pm

Good point. Using any new DMB contributions would be going against a boycott.

Many GMs have probably seen this already,but here's a link to a 2007 Nate Silver breakdown of major proj systems

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=564

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=569

Rangers · Post by **Rangers** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:21 am

Phillies wrote:please tell me using Zips isnt something we are looking into...

I've not been a fan of ZiPS in the past, but they do look better this year, a lot of similarities with PECOTA, etc. on guys I've checked. Obviously none of us have seen his splits, and I don't think that the defensive stuff has been too hot from the team pages, but I guess we can review everything when he puts the "disk" out.

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 3:46 am

Some of the defensive stuff is definitely wacky, I think we should be vigilant about dumping stupid projections (e.g. Chipper Jones getting all that love at SS last year). I think we should use whatever Zips puts out as a base, and maybe we let GMs challenge certain defensive ratings and if they can make a case (preferably based on #'s, there are plenty of good stats out there) then change them for our version of the DB.

Marlins · Post by **Marlins** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:10 am

My two cents: the issue is that we cannot run the league based on our existing structure (i.e. using the DMB projection disk). I think the best option would be to maintain as much of the existing integrity of the league as we can, keep DMB, keep the DMB defensive ratings from the season disk, and, since it seems PECOTA and Zips seem to be the only feasible options, have a league-wide vote on which to use for projections only this year.

In addition, I think this should be decided as a temporary, 2009-only fix. Should we decide after this season that, whether due to better performance or another lack of DMB projections, we want to keep the other projection, we should have another vote on that.

That is all.

Guardians · Post by **Guardians** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 9:47 am

Giants wrote:My two cents: the issue is that we cannot run the league based on our existing structure (i.e. using the DMB projection disk). I think the best option would be to maintain as much of the existing integrity of the league as we can, keep DMB, keep the DMB defensive ratings from the season disk, and, since it seems PECOTA and Zips seem to be the only feasible options, have a league-wide vote on which to use for projections only this year.

In addition, I think this should be decided as a temporary, 2009-only fix. Should we decide after this season that, whether due to better performance or another lack of DMB projections, we want to keep the other projection, we should have another vote on that.

That is all.

Will someone have manually input all the defensive ratings if we use the 08 regular season disk and the ZIPS dmb file?

Mariners · Post by **Mariners** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:00 am

Astros wrote:Will someone have manually input all the defensive ratings if we use the 08 regular season disk and the ZIPS dmb file?

Yes, not only that, but all the players who did not play in the Majors last year would still have to have the Zips ratings. We can't have a situation where all the 'MLBers' have DM "D" and the 'MiLBers' have Zips "D" ratings.

The Zips ratings are gonna kill my defense (Nils too), but I don't think we have a choice, we have to just suck it up!

Marlins · Post by **Marlins** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:07 am

And what if we decide on PECOTA to use?

Rays · Post by **Rays** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:51 am

I think we should use whatever Zips puts out as a base, and maybe we let GMs challenge certain defensive ratings and if they can make a case (preferably based on #'s, there are plenty of good stats out there) then change them for our version of the DB.

I think it should be all or nothing here or we're
going to have endless back and forth over ratings.

Mets · Post by **Mets** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 1:12 pm

Giants wrote:And what if we decide on PECOTA to use?

Master Yoda!

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 2:05 pm

Giants wrote:And what if we decide on PECOTA to use?

If PECOTA doesn't come with splits and defense and Zips does I don't think it's even a choice. For next year we can develop a formula that's 5 parts Pecota and 4 parts Zips or whatever that article said, but at this point I think we need to keep it as simple as possible.

Tigers · Post by **Tigers** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 2:17 pm

Athletics wrote:
Giants wrote:And what if we decide on PECOTA to use?
If PECOTA doesn't come with splits and defense and Zips does I don't think it's even a choice. For next year we can develop a formula that's 5 parts Pecota and 4 parts Zips or whatever that article said, but at this point I think we need to keep it as simple as possible.

I'd have to agree with Jake on this. PECOTA tends to be the better projections, however without splits and defense ratings it is going to become way too complicated and controversial get something adequate by the start of the season.

Make do with the best option we have for this season and then go from there.

Guardians · Post by **Guardians** » Mon Mar 02, 2009 2:20 pm

With 148 replies, can the ExCo please make a decision for 2009? lol We are beating this thing to death here...

We can then debate for a whole year on the 2010 season.