** On-line SOM Baseball - Dan P. Merzenich - "Mesquiton" **

(First contact with Dan: - As I shared above Dan answered a post I put into the Barnstormers' Forum, looking for players of this tournament or who had been intimately involved with the Online Baseball Game that might be opened to be interviewed. I am sharing below first, the initial email I received from Dan as it gives a little more insights about his background then he did in his interview and discusses some of the other on-line tournaments that exist. Enjoy.)

-----

Wed, 26 Mar 2014

(Note from the Wolfman: So now you know why I was very excited to be in touch with Dan, after having my first experience with an on-line tournament and not even finishing at .500 that I had to know more about Dan and see if he would impart his insights and player knowledge to our members!!  So here is Mesquiton!!)
 

Wolfman:  Hello dear members. As you may recall from our last issue (this May) we have been doing some special interviews with various individuals who have been involved with the on-line gaming system SOM offers for their baseball game.

Today we have >>>>> D.P. Merzenich (aka Dan, Mesquiton or Cabobob) <<<<< who has been involved with this form of game play for about a dozen years, since 2002, shortly after Strat first went online with this version of the game.

Although Dan plays in various leagues (usually several at the same time), Dan mostly prefers to play in the various tournaments that are offered.

Dan has been a finalist in all three tourneys, including five trips to the PC finals and then finally won the PC tourney this May as his first online championship.  Last year, he made the playoffs in the finals leagues of both the PC and Barnstormers tourneys.  Anyway he is a very competitive and knowledgeable player, who wouldn't be making all the playoffs in these tournaments otherwise.

We are very grateful to Dan for his help to give us a better idea of what it is like to have a team in one of the leagues or tournaments being offered via the on-line gaming as well as letting us down this interview with him.

Dan, welcome to the Ultimate Strat Baseball Newsletter.

Dan:  Thanks, pleasure to be here!

Wolfman:  So Dan, when you were younger, were you very interested in MLB? Who was your favorite team and what players did you follow?

Dan:  I grew up in the '50s and '60s, in a small lumber town in rural Oregon. The only MLB for me was the CBS Saturday Game of the Week, with Dizzy Dean and Pee Wee Reese, on black-and-white TV. One of the teams was almost always the Yankees. The Yankees never lost, and Mickey Mantle almost always hit a home run. I guess he was my hero. I remember how sad I was when he was injured and Maris pulled away from him in the '61 homerun race. Later, in college, I got to see him once in person. He popped out his only time at bat (he could barely hobble to the plate), in a game at Fenway in 1968, one of the last at bats of his career. But I won't forget it.

Wolfman:  What about playing baseball, did you engage in little league, high school and college? If so what was your best position?

Dan:  I mostly played softball as a kid, that's what we played at school, thru 8th grade. A very small school, rarely enough guys to play teams, so we usually played "workup". Outside school, when we could round up enough kids in the neighborhood, we'd play in somebody's back yard or vacant field. Sometimes we played baseball, if the field was big enough, but mostly softball.

Spent many of my very best summer days playing all day long, until it got too dark to see the ball.

In workup, you get to play every position, and I liked them all. On teams, I usually played 2B, pitcher or outfield. As a kid I was small for my age, but had a pretty good swing, was often the best slugger on the
field. Loved to hit, slugger teams are still my favorite.

Played some little league, not much, and some intramural softball in high school and college. Went out for the baseball team as a high school freshman, but didn't stick with it.

I loved to play, but practice bored me, and there was way too much practice and other nonsense. I preferred to be home, playing Strat-O-Matic.

Wolfman:  Now, how did you hear about the version of the SOM Baseball game that was on-line?

Dan:  It came to me in a vision. It dawned on me, one day in 2002, having not played Strat for years, that in this online age, the Strat-O-Matic Co., if it still existed, perhaps had seen the light. So I googled it, now I'm hooked, the rest is history.

Wolfman:  Did you start to play when Strat-O-Matic worked with the Sporting News to offer this version of the game?

Dan:  Yes, I started maybe a year after Strat and TSN first got together.

Wolfman:  Have you also played the board game or the computer game?  Did you know about these versions of strat-o-matic before you met the on-line gaming version? Do you have a personal preference which version you prefer?

Dan:  I've played them all. First played the board game when I was thirteen, with a 1963 "selector set" ordered from the back of Boy's Life, the Boy Scout magazine. I could only afford 8 teams. Of course, they included the 1962 Yankees, I knew them from TV. Also the Orioles, Red Sox, White Sox, Reds, Dodgers, Giants and Cards. No problem recalling that, even after 50 years.

Soon, I had a serious addiction. I won't call it a problem. I survived.  It went on for a number of years, at least until I got serious about girls, and I was a late bloomer in that regard. Then I fell off the wagon a few more times after I discovered my wife didn't mind if I played Strat now and then.

Played the computer version a few times, wanted to like it more, but never got hooked.

I'd say each version has its place, and I've enjoyed countless hours with the board game. But now it's the online game for me. No contest.

Wolfman:  What is so appealing about the on-line game? What do you like about this version?

Dan:  The online game has all the advantages of the computer game (and uses much the same game engine). Lots of stats without tedious work, faster game play so its easy to play more games or leagues, quick and easy player sorting, that kind of thing. The online game takes all of that a few steps further.

Teams cost $16-20 each, depending on the package. Not exactly cheap, but teams in each league play full 162-game schedules, a three-game series each night, so each team is good for a couple of months of fun and frustration.

Also, winning brings prize credits to defray the cost. I've played dozens of leagues on free credits, gone a year or two without paying for a team. And there are free trial leagues for learning the basics.

The online game also offers options and features not available with other versions. Player pricing and salary caps add a major new element to the game. More card sets to choose from, some you can customize. A variety of player drafts. Visual game replays. Various league setups. Intra-league, public and private messaging. Sponsored tournaments, with prizes. The list goes on. There's pretty much something for every Strat freak.

But, the most important advantage of the online game is that it offers a community of other gamers ready, willing and able to play. Public leagues, private leagues, theme leagues, keeper leagues, tournaments, make up your own, you name it.

The forums that go with the game ("the boards") offer a great way to organize leagues, learn the game, find out about or advertise leagues and tournaments, meet folks with common interests, make new friends and playmates. The company also posts announcements, updates, and special promotions from time to time.

To get the most from the game, check the forums regularly, even daily, whether you choose to post or not. I keep a browser link handy, so it just takes a click anytime to see what's going on.

Many top managers post on the forums, and most are generous with their knowledge. Don't hesitate to ask questions. Always somebody willing to help, regardless of your skill level.

Wolfman:  Are there any aspects of the game that you think might be improved? Have you seen improvements over time?

Dan:  It's a complex game system, there will always be room to improve. The company says it's committed to working on that, into the future.

We've seen many improvements in the game over the years, first at TSN and now at SOM. Game play, options, stats, card sets, player pricing, team and player settings, overall consistency and reliability, all have improved since the game's relatively primitive beginnings. It's a great game already, but should only get better.

Wolfman:  Now, lets talk about your experiences with your game play. Do you prefer the leagues offered or tournaments and why?

I occasionally play other leagues, but I prefer tournaments. They provide a little more incentive, and overall better competition than the public auto-leagues. Not that anyone should be afraid to enter a tournament, managers of all skill levels are welcome, including beginners. It's a great way to get to know other managers, and to learn from them as you play and improve your own game.

Wolfman:  I understand there are various sets of players you can use for your leagues or tournaments, which set do you prefer and why?

Dan:  I like different sets for different reasons. The All Time Greats (ATG) set is fun because it has players from all eras of baseball, even the deadball era and the Negro Leagues. The huge player pool allows more flexibility and variety in building your teams. Even if you miss the players you want in the draft, you can usually find others that work to build the team you want.

The "Mystery Card" sets offer a different challenge, also a bit more luck.  Each player has cards for 5 different years, and you don't know which year you are drafting. So part of the game becomes trying to determine, during the season, which card you have, dropping players on their "bad" years, and trying to replace them with players on their "good" years.

Probably my favorites are the 20xx sets, that's what I've played most. They use the latest player cards, so there's a new card set every year, which keeps the game fresh. I don't follow MLB much these days, but if you do, the players are familiar and current. The player pools are smaller, more challenging to draft and build the team you want. 

Wolfman:  Do you have any great stories to tell our readers? About some success you had with a certain team you are proud of. Or a special game that happened. Or a special player who had a great season. An usual story?

Dan:  I forget most of my teams about 5 minutes after they finish their seasons. Especially the bad teams. At least, I try.

I do recall one story, from a long time ago. I'd been playing online for a couple of years, but had only played a few teams, still considered myself a newbie.

I felt sure I was in over my head when I discovered that many of the top managers not only had played hundreds of teams, but relied on spreadsheets to sort and analyze players. Spreadsheets!! I'd never used
a spreadsheet in my life, let alone for SOM, and was still looking for my first league championship.

But, I decided to enter the Players' Championship Tournament for the first time. There were five or six qualifying events, with the top 12 finishers in the point standings playing in a final "Champions League"
for the title.

I managed to hang in with the pack through the early events, not expecting to rise very far in the ranks. Around the fourth event, I was in a league with a guy I still consider the best ever to play the 20xx game. His win % was off the charts. His main handle was "luckyman," but we mostly called him "Lucky".

Lucky was already something of a legend as a manager, and also a great guy.  Had his own system for rating the players, but he shared his ratings with everybody on the boards, and they became the Holy Grail for many managers to evaluate their own players. He'd take time to help anybody with their team, even as they competed against his.

Lucky also created a forum thread to teach new players the basics of building winning teams. That thread was salvaged from the TSN forums, and is still a "must read" for beginners and experienced managers alike.

Anyhow, here I was in a tournament league with Lucky, the best manager ever.  Fortunately, he was not in my division. But, I got a little lucky myself, won my division and found myself facing Lucky in the league finals, a best-of-seven "world series" format.

He won the first game at his place, but we got lucky again and won the second. At home, we won games 3 and 4 with our aces on the mound. Suddenly, we were just one game from winning the series.

My team was the Yucca Mountain Meltdown, but I can remember only one player from the team, Mike Maroth, a super-cheap scrub starter. He was in our rotation as a last option, had won just enough games during the season to keep him there. But not the guy you wanted when the chips were down.

Lucky had been trash-talking me mercilessly (but kindly), mostly about Maroth. How did he get in my rotation. How could I even call him a pitcher. One of the lowest-rated starters he'd ever seen.

So, of course, you guessed it. Game five for the ring, and Maroth gets the win. After that, typically gracious, Lucky called him "Cy" Maroth. I felt like the newbie had arrived. My very first ring, and against Lucky, no less. To top it off, the win also vaulted me to 6th place in the tourney standings and a spot in the finals.

Of course, Lucky was also in the finals, and almost won. (As luck would have it, he never did, tho his was always the team to beat.) My team finished a respectable 4th in wins, but 3rd in division, so we missed the wildcard and the playoffs by a dice roll, to uncle ny, who went on to beat Lucky's team for the champion-ship.

Sadly, the last we heard of Lucky, some years ago, he was in the hospital, too ill to play. I know I speak for many who still miss him.

I've had better teams and tourneys I've forgotten, but I guess you always remember the first time, and Lucky made it a little extra special.

Wolfman:  How much time does it take you to manage your team and play in a league or tournament?

Dan:  It can be as much or as little time as you want. You can even let Hal, the online computer, do it all for you, and just sit back and watch the games play out if you want.

I typically spend a few hours designing my team, preparing my draft card, planning waivers, scouting opponents, making free agent moves and preparing my team for the season. But, if I'm busy or have more than one or two teams going, I might only spend a few minutes.

During the season, apart from time to watch the games play, usually no more than a few minutes a day to adjust settings, lineups, etc., if needed. A little more day-to-day managing for Mystery Card leagues, or
if my team makes the post-season.

Maybe a little more time for tournament teams, but they are basically the same as other teams, except that you might be playing half a dozen successive "event" leagues instead of a single league.

Some of the crazier addicts play dozens of teams at a time, could hardly have time to spend more than a few minutes on each team. I've had as many as six or seven teams at once, mainly due to overlapping events in multiple tournaments. But I prefer no more than two or three at a time, and can easily fill all my play time taking care of those, if I want to.

Wolfman:  What about strategies to build a successful on-line team.  What would you suggest to our readers, especially people who have never played the on-line SOM baseball game before?  What should they watch out for?

Dan:  Going into strategies in any detail would take forever, so I won't.  I'll say only that it's essential to have a strategy, and then to draft or otherwise acquire the players and ballpark best suited to carry it
out. Every player on your team should be there for a reason.

Everybody should read the online rules enough to be familiar with the basics. Learn how to read the player cards, that's essential. I highly recommend the beginners' thread I mentioned earlier, in the Strategy forum.  Try a free trial league to get a feel for things.

Once you know the basic mechanics of the game and are ready to draft your team, be sure to match your ballpark to your strategy, and your players to your ballpark. That's the best way to leverage players' salaries and talents to gain an edge.

Scout the other teams and be sure to match your team to your division's opponents. A team that wins with ease in a division stacked with lefties in pitcher parks might be massacred in a division stacked with righties in slugger parks. Nearly half your games will be within your division, and winning against a division opponent also knocks him down a notch in the pennant chase, so division wins are doubly important.

Look at successful managers' teams to see how they are built, and try to figure out why. Browse the strategy forum. Ask questions. People are always willing to look at your team and offer comments and suggestions if you post a link on the boards.

Don't be too quick to make mid-season roster moves, probably beginners' most common mistake. They cost salary and usually do more harm than good. Avoid them altogether if possible. Unless there's an obvious reason for a player's under-performance, he'll usually come around over the course of the
season.

Remember, there's a lot of luck involved in the game, anything can and does happen, especially in the short run. What happens over a few games or a few series doesn't necessarily indicate what will happen over an entire season.

Don't expect players to perform up to their card stats...only a portion of the player pool will be used, so all the teams in the league will be stacked with only the best players. Pitchers won't pitch as well and hitters won't bat as well, facing only the best every day.

Finally, remember the game is really much more about mathematical probabilities than baseball. Statisticians tend to be better Strat managers than MLB pros.

And the most important thing: Have fun!

Wolfman:  What type of team do you like to play with and why?  Can you tell us about one or two of your teams you were very proud of (please mention which card set you used)?

Dan:  I usually prefer slugger teams, although tourneys often require playing all kinds. I like homeruns, and seeing my players high in the offensive stats. That's just me, others love and do great with smallball.

As I mentioned earlier, I tend to forget my teams about as soon as they are done. My favorite team is usually the one I'm working on. So much depends on the luck of the dice rolls, I try not to get too full of myself when I win, or too disappointed when I lose.

I always enjoy teams that start slowly, as many good teams do, then come on strong down the stretch to take the pennant and make me look like the genius I'm not. Coming back from 3 games down to win a championship series is always fun, but so is sweeping your way to a title.

Every team is unique, a learning experience, and mostly a personal experience. Frankly, I find it kinda boring when other folks go on about their teams. Again, maybe that's just me. But teams are like daydreams, everybody has them, and your own are likely to seem far more interesting than somebody else's.

So, rather than bore folks with self-serving tales of my own brilliant achievements, I'd suggest they draft a team of their own, join a league, feel the ups and downs first-hand and start making their own great stories.

Wolfman:  If you have played the computer game, how is the on-line game different, it seems building the computer manager is similar to the strategies you setup for the on-line gaming?

Dan:  I think I've already answered that, but I'll just re-emphasize that the player salaries and salary caps add a whole new dimension to the online game. Apart from all the extra features, the forums, and the
abundant availability of leagues and playmates, the salary structure is the big difference. With salary caps, budget considerations become a critical part of all strategies, more like real life.

Also, there's less in-game managing. You can plan and set up strategies before each day's 3-game series, but then Hal runs the games and does the in-game managing, following your instructions, you hope.

Wolfman:  Is it easy to join a league or tournament? Is it easy to create your own league or tournament? Do you have to speak to the game company to do this or via their on-line system you can just set it up.
Is there any special treatment you get if you are the commissioner of a league or tournament?

Dan:  Couldn't be much easier, once you know the basics.  Just create your team and enter a league. For private leagues, theme leagues, keeper leagues, tourneys and so on, you might need to sign up on a forum first, but that's also easy.

Except for public auto-leagues, all leagues and tourneys are started by the folks who play them, not the company. No need to contact the company, unless you have special requests or are seeking company sponsorship or something.  To start your own, just set it up, maybe invite folks to join on the boards.

Nothing much special about being a commissioner, just means you get the work of organizing, settling any disputes and keeping things moving. For that reason, commish is typically a time-consuming job few people want. We're always grateful for anyone willing to take it on.

The company is more likely to try to accommodate a commissioner's special requests for league or tourney formats and such, but that's about it as far as any special treatment.

Wolfman:  Any comments about how drafting you teams works? I understand besides the secret bidding system there is also a live on-line draft. Is the live drafting system working or popular?

Dan:  There are two basic types of drafts, auto-drafts and live drafts.  For auto-drafts, you rank 25 players on your draft card, in order of importance, how badly you want them, or how likely you think that you'll get them. When your league fills, the draft runs, and players are awarded based on who ranks them highest. If you miss a player on your draft card, the next-most-expensive player at the same primary
position is awarded instead.

For live drafts, with the current system, the league commish sets a draft time, with pick times up to several minutes each. Live drafts give more control over the players you get, but can also be inconvenient. Some folks like them, some don't. Managers take turns drafting players, or set players to be drafted automatically if they are away when their turn comes. If they are simply away, Hal the computer will pick for them.

The company has promised an option for longer pick times, so drafts can be stretched over a few days to better accommodate tournaments and schedules for folks unable to free up a single rigid block of time for the draft. Live drafts are also done on the boards, usually with longer pick times, often just partial drafts or
ballpark drafts.

After the draft, there's usually a secondary "waiver" draft, then there's a waiver period during which you can drop and add free agents with no penalty, until league opening day. After the season starts, there's a 5% to 20% salary penalty for each player drop.

All of this is explained in detail in the rules, but that's basically how it works.

Wolfman:  What about the on-line community. I see there is a forum where people can talk to each other, ask questions or share stories.  You have the ability to send other messages - how does this on-line community work? Are there people who have formed close friendships?

Dan:  I've probably said enough already about the importance of the online community and how it works. Beyond that, I'd just say browse the forums and check it out. It's a great way to learn all kinds of things about the game.  Many managers have regular groups they like to play with who stay in touch on the boards, and yes, there have indeed been many close friendships formed as well.

Wolfman:  Is there anything else about the on-line gaming system you wish to share that was not asked in the questions before that you think would benefit the members of our newsletter?

Dan:  Although I've only scratched the surface, I think we've pretty much covered the basics. Beyond that, I'd just say go to strat-o-matic.com and check it out first-hand.

It costs nothing to browse the forums, read the rules, look at teams or leagues or watch game replays, explore the player card sets, or even play a 21-game free trial league.

Don't worry if it seems a bit overwhelming at first, everybody was once a newbie, and it only gets easier. Nobody knows it all, the learning never stops, and that's a big part of the fun.

Wolfman:  If a member of the newsletter wished to contact you, to ask questions or advice, is this possible and what is the best way to contact you?

Dan:  Please send any questions to this newsletter (ATTN:Mesquiton), where I'll try to answer them, or send a message to "mesquiton" in the SOMO forums.

Wolfman:  Thank you so much for taking time out of your busy schedule to share about the on-line gaming experience.

Dan:  Yer more than welcome, thanks!

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Speed can make a difference, especially on smallball teams, where there will likely be fewer sluggers to drive in runs.  I've seen some great teams very dependent on speed and stolen bases, but they'd be a minority.  Less important on high-scoring slugger teams.  Also pretty easy for opponents to neutralize with good arms at C and OF.

I generally value speed over stealing, easier to score by taking extra bases on hits.  Always nice to have stealers on my team, but unless it's a dedicated speedster/smallball team, usually have better uses for my cash.

2) How important is it to have hitters that are able to hit Homers if such a team requires a hitters park and most of the managers choose pitcher's type of parks?

It's always very important to have hitters with ballpark homers on their cards in parks that favor homers.  If I have that, I don't worry much about the other managers' parks.  I hope they will have more trouble in my park than I have in theirs.

Once my BPHR sluggers are in place, I want all the extra OB, pitching, hitting, natural homers, speed and defense I can still afford, for when I play in their pitcher parks.

Of course, I want those things anyway, they'll help in my park, too.  But I won't be able to afford all that I'd like in those areas, so will need to budget and prioritize where I think it might do the most good, after scouting opposing teams and assessing my needs.

3) What about Fielding - it is said having a 2B-SS-CF with a 1 rating is key since this positions have more X-chances but is it good during the beginning to have a good defensive team or just to have defensive replacements at the end?

If your defense is good enough that it probably won't hurt you too much, might make more sense to leave your starters in, in case you need a couple more runs after the other team scores again, which it will sometimes, even with your best defenders on the field.

Defensive chances decide far fewer games than hitting or pitching, and of those games, defensive replacements will decide only a small fraction.

So, good defense is always better than bad defense, especially up the middle, but defense is seldom my top priority, defensive replacements much less so.  I want good defense, but I'm not afraid of a few 2s, 3s, even an occasional 4 or the rare 5, if I think their bats are good enough to offset defensive lapses.  If I have a horrible fielder in my lineup for his bat, I'll try to have a sub who can replace him late on defense, but there's more important stuff to fret over.

4) How important are your relief pitchers - in your strategies you suggest to get cheap relievers who are good one way - a RHP good vs. Righty Hitters, a LHP good vs Lefty Hitters, Reverse RHP and LHP also?  Is this because you hope your starters will do most of the work?

Otherwise, for a primary reliever, I'd typically have at least a mid-range guy who is balanced, can go a couple of innings as setup and/or closer.  Behind him, maybe a similar but cheaper reliever, maybe somebody other-handed, or who leans a bit the other way if the primary guy is a bit unbalanced.

I like cheap, extreme one-sided relievers for specialists, but not often as primary relievers, as they get clobbered on their weak sides.  Likewise for cheap reverse relievers, also good for switch-hitters.  And, if there's a one-sided starter in my rotation, I might want a cheap, opposite-sided reliever who can also spot-start for him when needed.

There's never enough room or cash for everything, so it's always important to scout the opposition batters, especially in your division, as well as addressing your own weaknesses, to see what types of relievers might help you the most.  Spend your money on those. 

5) What about the importance of a closer?

In 20xx leagues, closer ratings do come into play, and you are required to have at least one closer-rated reliever on your roster.  But, other relievers won't tire either if they are pitching well, so closers won't necessarily pitch any better, even in closer situations.

Some successful managers always want dedicated closers on their teams, and it's great to have a stud closer in there at the end of a tight game.  But, it can also be an unnecessary expense, especially if you have plenty of other good relievers.  Don't short the rest of your staff for the sake of an expensive pure closer, unless you're sure he'll get enough closer innings to justify it.

Closer innings are more valuable than others in the sense that they come when the game is on the line.  But, a run still counts the same, in the first inning or the last...give up too many early in the game, and your expensive closer won't be used at all.

You can win without a closer, but better to have at least one decent guy who can close.  If I want an expensive closer, I'll usually set him to come in as setup also, to try to maximize his innings.  He'll still get most of the closer opportunities, but I'll get more stud innings for my buck.

6) How to value hitters?  Is it good to have a hitter with a good OB but this OB is high due to walks?  Is it better to get pure hitters?

High OB is always good, but so is high BA, SLG and homers.  Billy Beane says teams with the most walks and homers win the most, and that can indeed be a winning strategy.

But, if you live in a pitcher park, where BPHRs mostly become outs, you need the hits to knock in runs, and doubles, triples and natural homers become more important.

In a homerun park, those same BPHRs become homeruns, and can be a very powerful weapon in your arsenal.  You still need runners on base for the sluggers to knock in, but BA becomes relatively less important.  A walk is as good as a hit, when it's crossing home plate in front of a homer.  Converted BPHRs also boost overall BA and OB numbers.

Conventional wisdom is that OBP is more important than SLG, but that's not always true.  Like most things, it's a matter of balance, and everything is relative, depending on the situation, ballpark, adversary and overall strategy.

I'd value OBP over BA and SLG for my leadoff guy, but probably not for my cleanup hitter.  If a player has a .500 OBP, I might take him for leadoff even with a .180 BA and .250 SLG.  If he has a .600 SLG, and eight ballpark homers on his card, in a homerun park, I might consider him for cleanup or lower in the order, with just a .300 OBP.

My slugger teams might rank near the league bottom in BA, higher in OBP (due to walks), but first in SLG, homers, scoring and wins. But, with a smallball team in a pitcher park, I'd like to be at the top in BA and OBP, with lots of doubles, triples and natural homers.

In short, once again, what's most important depends on the situation.  Ultimately, the strategy for every team should be to leverage salaries to get the most value from each player.  You can do that by getting the right players into the right ballparks and the right situations against the right opponents, but there's no right answer for every situation.

Conventional wisdom is to lean more toward pitching in pitcher parks, more toward hitting in homerun parks, leveraging salary by putting as much as possible where your ballpark strengths lie.  I generally agree with that, but again, it's not ironclad.  One of the charms of the game is that, sometimes, going against conventional wisdom can itself be a successful strategy, if the circumstances are right.

I typically prefer two or three good players to one great player, but not always.  I've heard the probabilities argued both ways, but I think it's mostly a matter of personal preference.

It's risky to put all your eggs in one basket, but sometimes I risk it. Can depend on the salary cap, or on who's available.  I'd be much more likely to take the most expensive player in the deck with a high cap than a low one.

A monster Babe Ruth card might be able to carry your offense, but if it doesn't, there will be a lot less cash left for supporting players.  Even the very top pitchers get half their results from the batter's card, and vice-versa, so even the very best cards can have surprisingly disappointing seasons.  Or monster seasons.

Probably the most typical lineup salary distribution for a successful 80M team would be along the lines of 9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2, and something like 9-7-5-3-(2) for starting pitchers, but a more even distribution, or a more expensive guy at the top and/or some cheaper guys at the bottom, would not be unusual.

As for how many cheap players, I want everybody on the bench to be as cheap as possible, and as few as possible.  Don't waste money on guys who won't play.  I'll spend a little more for injury backups and platoon players, if they'll be playing more innings.  But no more than minimum salary for seldom-used bench guys, pinch-runners, defensive subs and such. You want your money on the field, not on the bench. 

8) Finally in your mind is the game engine better suited for a team with great pitching, defense and on-base than a team with decent pitching, defense and power hitting - speed - onbase.  It appears most teams who have winning records have success with superior pitching and hitters with high averages.

Managers tend to favor one style or another, get comfortable with it, get better with practice, have more success with it, so they play it more and get even better at it, and decide it's the best way to go.

But, another manager will go through the same process with a different type of team, have just as much success, and come to a different conclusion, for equally good reasons.  If you play mostly the team you like, chances are you'll have more success with that type of team.

I'd recommend experimenting with both types, as well as others, and see what seems to work.  There's nothing wrong with learning to play more than one type of team, tournaments sometimes require it.

If most winning teams are pitcher teams, then most losing teams probably are, too.  I'd say most winning teams (and losing teams) are more balanced, because most managers seem to try for balanced teams.

It does seem that pitcher teams are more popular than slugger teams, but I'd guess the ratio of winners to losers for slugger teams and pitcher teams is very likely about the same.

There seems to be a perception among many managers that it's easier to win with pitching teams, so for them it probably is.  But for others, including myself, it seems easier to win with slugger teams, maybe just because we prefer them.

In the dozen years I've been playing, I've seen managers equally successful with both kinds.  Sometimes the same manager.

In short, I think the key to success is not the type of team you play, but how well you learn to play it.

===========