Subject: Stats discussions - you know you love it

(Sent to captains and others at 15:02 on 8 Sept 06)

Dearest, dearest captains,

Earlier this week, I sent around a link to the Exec meeting minutes that contained this text regarding how the awards would be worked out:

"
...[List of awards]
* MVPs (male/female/div1/div2) calculated by taking the 5 best batters (by sex and division) and looking at who, out of those, had the most fielding award nominations. Where there was a tie, the player with the highest batting average takes the award.


If anyone disagrees with these methods, please could you email Norm before 5pm Monday 11th September!
"

OK, we've had an alternative idea!! Wait for it. Keep reading...


We found that the method above tended to skew the MVP award so that it became almost the same as the 'Best Batter' award (i.e. the batting average dominated). So, please can you let me know if you are NOT HAPPY with the following alternative method (which seems fairer and more in the spirit of 'who was the best player for the team each night' - i.e. more like MVP):

METHOD: (done 4 times for male/female/div1/div2)
1. Look at each team in the division and pick out the person who had the most 'best fielder' nominations (also known, wrongly, as MVPs)
-- You end up with 4 names (5 in the 2nd div) --
2. Look at who had the best batting average from those 4 (or 5) names
3. That's your winner.

This weights the award for people who were better fielders for their teams. The other method weights the award towards just the best batters across the league (and we have an award for that).

As I said, we are probably going to change our method, so PLEASE EMAIL ME IF YOU DISAGREE.

I find stats a yawn too - and I never win anything!

Hope you have lovely weekends and good luck to those who are going to the Nationals!

Cheers,
Norm