Every off-season I am asked to contribute to the PICKS AND PANS section of the Fantasy Baseball Guide magazine, published by my friend Peter Kreutzer, aka Ask Rotoman, with a bunch of help from the crew at CREATiVE SPORTS. (Hey Lawr, I am contractually obligated to always do the all CAPS, small "i" thing?)
Unfortunately, with the resurrection of Mastersball, I plumb forgot to send them in on time, so they did not make the publication deadline. But fear not, this allows me to share them with you here. While I won't let you completely behind the 4th wall, let's just say the notes I used to write these had gravy and cranberry sauce stains -- okay, that's a little poetic license, I don't eat gravy on my turkey, but turkey and stuffing don't really stain. Well, and I really didn't write notes on a piece of paper either.
Without further ado....
HITTER PICKS
Hunter Pence – Some bad luck on balls in play depressed average enough that he could be a value pick as the power is real. He will also steal double digit bases in spite of a rather poor success rate.
Alex Rios – The numbers guy in me won’t like this, but sometimes you have to trust your eyes and gut. Rios’ power appears to be slipping, but his approach definitely changed after being re-inserted into the 3-hole after the mid-season managerial change. For some of early 2008, Rios was miscast at leadoff, as he tried too hard to play the role, hitting more grounders than normal, impacting his power. His second half total of 11 homers is more indicative of his potential.
Chase Headley – After opening the season by drawing no walks in his initial 53 at bats, Headley’s patience improved to the tune of 30 free passes with 278 at bats, a very good percentage. This should lead to an improved batting average. Though PETCO likely played a role, don’t be too concerned about Headley’s drop in homers as the season progressed. He puts the ball in the air a lot and his doubles rate was strong, suggesting more home runs are in the cards as he develops.
Fred Lewis – Meet the new Randy Winn with a little less power and a bit more speed, though he does strike out more than Winn. Okay, so the comp is not perfect, but Lewis is bound to fly under the radar much like Winn has for years. Lewis is the perfect outfielder if you need steals but cannot totally ignore power.
Ichiro Suzuki – The effect Ichiro has on your team’s batting average is one of the more underappreciated elements of player ranking. Last season, a down-year by his lofty standards, Suzuki still finished the campaign as a top-20 fantasy producer in mixed leagues, earning most of his owners a profit. Yet his stock is slipping, meaning if you design your offense accordingly, owning Ichiro could be a second or third round steal in drafts.
PITCHER PICKS
Josh Johnson – Might have lingering risk from the ‘returning from Tommy John surgery’ stigma, even though he spent the last half of 2008 shaking off the rust so he should be at full speed to start this season. As with many post TJS returnees, the extra work during his rehab may have actually improved his stuff.
Jake Peavy – Injuries and a subpar campaign have dropped Peavy’s stock to a point he could be a value play, assuming good health. This time last year he was the second starting pitcher off the board, now he is out of the top-5.
Kyle Lohse – While his K-rate is not what most desire, he doesn’t walk many and keeps the ball in the yard and has the appearance that he will continue to do so, making Lohse a viable back-end starter for a staff otherwise staunch in strikeouts.
Daisuke Matsuzaka – I am going to assume my fantasy brethren have panned Dice-K, correctly suggesting his success was more luck than skill as he cannot be expected to repeat that stellar ERA walking so many. In fact, I am going to assume this is commonly accepted in the general fantasy community. This all assumes that Matsuzaka does not improve his BB-rate. But what if he does? What if he improves his control while maintaining the rest of his peripherals? The inevitable reversal of fortune will be balanced by allowing fewer runners. I’m betting he makes an effort to do just that.
Carlos Villanueva – As a starter, Villanueva’s spotty control and penchant for giving up the long ball were his downfalls. But as a reliever, albeit in a small sample, he displayed much improvement in these areas. So much so that if he shows the ability to maintain this new level of skills, he could find himself working later in games, perhaps even at the very end.
HITTER PANS
Ryan Ludwick – Yes, the power is real, but the near .300 batting average was completely driven by an unsustainable line drive percentage. Assuming that returns to his career norm, Ludwick becomes a .270 hitter with pop that strikes out a lot. If he incurs a degree of bad fortune, his average could drop even more, putting his playing time in question.
Dustin Pedroia – The reigning AL MVP has nowhere to go but down, which considering how high he is currently being valued, will likely result in a profit loss to his owners paying full price. In order to simply repeat last year’s phenomenal performance, Pedroia needs to maintain an excellent line drive and contact rate, when historically, players regress a bit off the previous season’s mark when at that level. He will also be hard-pressed to repeat his 20 of 21 stealing success.
Chris Dickerson – Dickerson might be a popular end-game selection based on his late-season performance, but the truth is his production was fueled by a fortunate .410 BABIP, masking his below-average contact skills. He also displayed more power than in the minors which is not guaranteed to manifest again.
Josh Hamilton – It’s a bit odd how many are downgrading Ian Kinsler but not Hamilton. Much of Hamilton’s 2008 success was because table setters Kinsler and Michael Young did an extraordinary job and any time a player’s value is so reliant on other’s doing their job, he must be considered a risk. In addition, Hamilton’s “injury-prone” label has vaporized after a single healthy season. I am not saying he is not a good story and even better player, I am only saying he carries a bit of risk for a top-10 pick, when there are other similar and safer players available.
Brandon Inge – Inge is becoming a sexy pick based on his catcher eligibility but the likelihood of increased playing time is not necessarily a good thing as his power has waned since knocking 27 out of the yard in 2006, to a point his batting average is a greater liability than his homers are an asset.
PITCHER PANS
Francisco Rodriguez – K-Rod is being drafted as the second best closer, even though his peripherals are not top-5, and maybe barely even top-10. While his K-rate is still excellent, it is declining though his always high BB-rate is staying the same. Do not rank him on 62 saves in 69 chances; instead let someone else draft last year’s numbers while you fortify your hitting or starting pitching.
Roy Halladay – Doc’s outstanding 2008 season was the direct result of his highest K-rate since 2001 combined with his greatest number of innings since 2003. In order to return value this season, he is going to have to repeat his success last season, and the odds are he will regress in terms of both performance and innings.
Gavin Floyd – A fortuitous hit rate buoyed Floyd’s 2008 season, masking usual high preponderance of homers allowed. Many look at John Danks and Floyd as a duo that both took great strides last season. While Danks’ success was real, Floyd’s was largely good fortune.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Monday, January 19, 2009
Mock me if You Will -- Todd's Epiphany
I recently had an epiphany. Actually, it was something I pretty much knew, but am finally willing to admit, or better stated accept. The difference between the skilled fantasy gamer that does well, sometimes really well, but also has times where they struggle and those gamers that are always in contention boils down to one thing, and it is not luck -- it is preparation.
By preparation, I am not talking about having rankings and depth charts average draft positions. I am not talking about reading about each player, deciding in a vacuum if they are a breakout or bust candidate. I am not talking about knowing the next-in-line closers for each team. What I am talking about takes the aforementioned information to the next level and best might be describes as fantasy baseball game theory.
What I mean by preparation is knowing the machinations of the player pool inside and out, so you are best able to react to every scenario confronted in your draft or auction. This goes beyond just having a set of projections and dollar values or rankings by your side. The goal of a draft or auction is not to get the maximum value possible from each pick. The goal is to amass the maximum value at the end of the draft or auction, and distribute this value in such a way to maximize rotisserie points. This entails knowing the player pool backwards and forwards, so you know how to deal with every situation, regardless of the picks of your opponents. The 30, or 60, or 90 seconds between picks is not sufficient to formulate this reaction unless you have been faced with a similar situation previously. Without this past experience in your memory bank, while you may be able to discern the manner you want to proceed, you will likely not have sufficient time to identify the ideal player to carry out your plan. Or perhaps you settle on “value” and figure you will be able to balance everything else later. The point is, continued deployment of either or both of these methods will ultimately result in a squad constructed with less value than if you were fully prepared.
The fully prepared player will be ready under any circumstance. They will be able to recognize the current landscape of the player pool and adjust their series of picks accordingly, or they will be able to adjust their strategy on the fly to take advantage of an unexpected player of high value. There is a purpose to each pick beyond “best player available.” They are setting up future picks in an effort to maximize the OVERALL quality of the team.
Truth be told, I have been discussing the above for several years, this is nothing new. The epiphany is even though I may have had a hand in every projection and wrote or edited every profile we have produced recently, that is nowhere near enough ammunition to take on a league of NFBC gamers or Tout Wars cohorts, not to mention the sharks in my local league. And simply adding the ADP from our good friends at Mock Draft Central to my arsenal was not sufficient. I have been naïve, kidding myself that I can compete in this manner. In a vacuum, I will put my player-by-player analysis up against anyone’s. ANYONE’S!!! But that does not render me a solid gamer, capable of competing against the best every time. It means if things fall right, I have as good of a chance as anyone to win. But if they don’t, I am ill-prepared to have all my bases covered and will have a weaker team than I otherwise could have constructed.
So how do I plan on becoming adequately prepared? Three words – mock, mock, mock. There is no better way to become intimate with the player pool and all its permutations than to go through the process of assembling a team. This way, you will be faced with a variety of different scenarios in terms of what players are taken in terms of position and categorical contribution. It isn’t so much knowing who will go when, an ADP will tell you that. It is more a matter of being able to react to positional or categorical runs – do I jump in or will there be someone available later? It is a matter of being forced to at one time or another dissect every player’s potential contributions in terms of how they can help your team. So when you are doing “the real thing”, you will immediately recognize the situation and know exactly which players you can select, as opposed to what was described above, recognizing the situation but not knowing the best player to now take, or taking the “best player available” and trusting that you will be able to use that value later.
For the purpose of really getting a handle on the player pool, a slow mock is preferred as that affords you the time to really analyze the situation and find the best player to carry out your plan. But obviously, one can only do so many slow mocks so relying on multiple regular mocks, with a minute or so between picks is necessary. The drawback is the time constraint. But the more mocks you do, the less this becomes a hindrance as you become better at thinking on the fly. But what I really suggest you do is after the draft is complete, go back and decide if the strategy you deployed was optimal? Did the draft proceed as you expected after the curveball thrown in the early rounds? Were the players or types of players you anticipated to be available actually there for you? And if not, was there a flaw in your thinking that you can correct and better combat next time? THIS is the sort of post-mortem analysis that is most beneficial, as you are no longer constricted by a ticking timer. If you do conclude your thinking was flawed, go back and decide on what player you “should” have drafted. Or go back and decide if you really made the best possible selection at each turn. Doing this means you are familiarizing yourself with the player even more. The more times you look at a player in context to what your team needs, the better you will be able to recognize this intuitively when it counts.
Though a mock obviously implies you are preparing yourself for a draft, this is quite applicable to the auction format, at least in terms of knowing the player pool like the back of your hand. There are some significant differences in terms of dynamics with a draft an auction. In a draft, the players leave the board roughly in order of value and are relatively similar in order from draft to draft, while there is no rhyme or reason to the order in an auction and it differs every time. In addition, in a draft, you do not have access to every possible player you feel can help whereas in an auction, you at least have a shot at everyone. This means you cannot familiarize yourself with a bunch of auction scenarios like you can draft scenarios. However, in an auction you are not confronted with the same constraint of a time clock, so you can think about the strategy as players you do not want are being auctioned off and then have the experience of having looked at the player pool extensively in mocks, as opposed to having to both formulate the strategy and find the players necessary to carry it out.
Suffice it to say I will become a regular at www.MockDraftCentral .com in the coming days and weeks. For those not familiar with the service, it is an outstanding site dedicated to mock drafting. The java platform is easy to use and you can export the results to a spreadsheet for a post mortem. You can plan a private mock or join a public one. And you may recognize one of the options for projections to generate predicted standings.
By preparation, I am not talking about having rankings and depth charts average draft positions. I am not talking about reading about each player, deciding in a vacuum if they are a breakout or bust candidate. I am not talking about knowing the next-in-line closers for each team. What I am talking about takes the aforementioned information to the next level and best might be describes as fantasy baseball game theory.
What I mean by preparation is knowing the machinations of the player pool inside and out, so you are best able to react to every scenario confronted in your draft or auction. This goes beyond just having a set of projections and dollar values or rankings by your side. The goal of a draft or auction is not to get the maximum value possible from each pick. The goal is to amass the maximum value at the end of the draft or auction, and distribute this value in such a way to maximize rotisserie points. This entails knowing the player pool backwards and forwards, so you know how to deal with every situation, regardless of the picks of your opponents. The 30, or 60, or 90 seconds between picks is not sufficient to formulate this reaction unless you have been faced with a similar situation previously. Without this past experience in your memory bank, while you may be able to discern the manner you want to proceed, you will likely not have sufficient time to identify the ideal player to carry out your plan. Or perhaps you settle on “value” and figure you will be able to balance everything else later. The point is, continued deployment of either or both of these methods will ultimately result in a squad constructed with less value than if you were fully prepared.
The fully prepared player will be ready under any circumstance. They will be able to recognize the current landscape of the player pool and adjust their series of picks accordingly, or they will be able to adjust their strategy on the fly to take advantage of an unexpected player of high value. There is a purpose to each pick beyond “best player available.” They are setting up future picks in an effort to maximize the OVERALL quality of the team.
Truth be told, I have been discussing the above for several years, this is nothing new. The epiphany is even though I may have had a hand in every projection and wrote or edited every profile we have produced recently, that is nowhere near enough ammunition to take on a league of NFBC gamers or Tout Wars cohorts, not to mention the sharks in my local league. And simply adding the ADP from our good friends at Mock Draft Central to my arsenal was not sufficient. I have been naïve, kidding myself that I can compete in this manner. In a vacuum, I will put my player-by-player analysis up against anyone’s. ANYONE’S!!! But that does not render me a solid gamer, capable of competing against the best every time. It means if things fall right, I have as good of a chance as anyone to win. But if they don’t, I am ill-prepared to have all my bases covered and will have a weaker team than I otherwise could have constructed.
So how do I plan on becoming adequately prepared? Three words – mock, mock, mock. There is no better way to become intimate with the player pool and all its permutations than to go through the process of assembling a team. This way, you will be faced with a variety of different scenarios in terms of what players are taken in terms of position and categorical contribution. It isn’t so much knowing who will go when, an ADP will tell you that. It is more a matter of being able to react to positional or categorical runs – do I jump in or will there be someone available later? It is a matter of being forced to at one time or another dissect every player’s potential contributions in terms of how they can help your team. So when you are doing “the real thing”, you will immediately recognize the situation and know exactly which players you can select, as opposed to what was described above, recognizing the situation but not knowing the best player to now take, or taking the “best player available” and trusting that you will be able to use that value later.
For the purpose of really getting a handle on the player pool, a slow mock is preferred as that affords you the time to really analyze the situation and find the best player to carry out your plan. But obviously, one can only do so many slow mocks so relying on multiple regular mocks, with a minute or so between picks is necessary. The drawback is the time constraint. But the more mocks you do, the less this becomes a hindrance as you become better at thinking on the fly. But what I really suggest you do is after the draft is complete, go back and decide if the strategy you deployed was optimal? Did the draft proceed as you expected after the curveball thrown in the early rounds? Were the players or types of players you anticipated to be available actually there for you? And if not, was there a flaw in your thinking that you can correct and better combat next time? THIS is the sort of post-mortem analysis that is most beneficial, as you are no longer constricted by a ticking timer. If you do conclude your thinking was flawed, go back and decide on what player you “should” have drafted. Or go back and decide if you really made the best possible selection at each turn. Doing this means you are familiarizing yourself with the player even more. The more times you look at a player in context to what your team needs, the better you will be able to recognize this intuitively when it counts.
Though a mock obviously implies you are preparing yourself for a draft, this is quite applicable to the auction format, at least in terms of knowing the player pool like the back of your hand. There are some significant differences in terms of dynamics with a draft an auction. In a draft, the players leave the board roughly in order of value and are relatively similar in order from draft to draft, while there is no rhyme or reason to the order in an auction and it differs every time. In addition, in a draft, you do not have access to every possible player you feel can help whereas in an auction, you at least have a shot at everyone. This means you cannot familiarize yourself with a bunch of auction scenarios like you can draft scenarios. However, in an auction you are not confronted with the same constraint of a time clock, so you can think about the strategy as players you do not want are being auctioned off and then have the experience of having looked at the player pool extensively in mocks, as opposed to having to both formulate the strategy and find the players necessary to carry it out.
Suffice it to say I will become a regular at www.MockDraftCentral .com in the coming days and weeks. For those not familiar with the service, it is an outstanding site dedicated to mock drafting. The java platform is easy to use and you can export the results to a spreadsheet for a post mortem. You can plan a private mock or join a public one. And you may recognize one of the options for projections to generate predicted standings.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
The Information Pyramid
Recently, several readers have contacted me and asked how I approach mock drafts. Do I take them seriously? Do I try my best? Do I experiment with new strategies? Do I purposely not reveal my real favorites as I know others that I will be competing against can see the results?
Honestly, I try my best each and every draft, basing each pick on the body of knowledge I have AT THAT TIME. That friends is the key, AT THAT TIME. My level of preparation on December 1 is by no means comparable to where it is on January 17, and my level today pales to what it will be come March.
This feeds into what I like to call THE INFORMATION PYRAMID. While this concept may not sit well with everyone, including my fantasy brethren, I have been around along enough to strongly feel it is real.
I believe there is a small number of sources that are primarily responsible for the entire body of information provided to the fantasy community. For lack of a better word, let's call this virgin information and is atop the information pyramid. This information can be in the form of projections, rankings, values, strategies, etc., and most importantly, the theory and principles used to generate this information. What defines this top-level is the emanation of unique information, based solely on internal principles, without the guidance of outside assistance. Don't get me wrong, not every single nugget of information produced by this top level is completely unique. Not so humbly using myself as an example, my valuation process is a meld of "public" theories and principles. I have put them together in a unique fashion, but to call it "my valuation method" is hyperbolic. On the other hand, some of the strategic work I have done is absolutely unique and in fact emulated by others.
The second level of the Information Pyramid takes this virgin information and distills it. Hopefully what they do is take the principles and theories described by the upper level and apply their own interpretation before disseminating. At minimum, they are influenced by the upper level. What defines this level is that while most often they generate their own work, it is based upon, or at least influenced by the work of others.
The third level is composed of people like the 120-something (and hopefully many more) registrants for this site and are active on the message board and other similar forums. They take the above information, discuss it, analyze it, critique it, denigrate it, etc. Most distill it and formulate their own opinions much like the second level did with the first. What distinguishes this level is that while the top two levels are primarily information providers, this level is primarily an end-user. But they are a very important element in the pyramid as they really help "spread the word."
The fourth level is strictly an end-user. They too may season the above information to taste, but some simply take it as verbatim and draft "their" team. The difference is they keep to themselves and have no public presence at all.
The manner this Information Pyramid affects mock drafts is it takes time for the virgin information to be distilled and distributed to the masses. In December, the extent of information available is limited. Projections are not completed. The 2008 season has not been fully analyzed so 2009 strategies have not been fully developed. All this takes time, beginning at the top of the pyramid. The second level lags a bit and the third level follows.
So what happens is the early mocks and such done in December are based largely on unrefined information, before 2009 number crunching is fully complete. For a spell, this imperfect information is treated like the virgin information. The further you go down the pyramid, the more the information is considered to be pure. Eventually, the top level generates their actual 2009 information, the second level does their thing, etc.
The end-result is a mock in December will have significant differences than a mock in February and March, as December perceptions become February reality, either for the better or worse. I can guarantee you that the ADP of Evan Longoria and Dustin Pedroia will steadily decline from now until March as their perceived value is replaced by the more conservative views of the top tier.
I would like to close by stating I am by no means passing judgment on any of these levels, they are all integral components of the information matrix. Heck, I am actually a member of all four levels myself. I only bring it up to help explain the thought processes of early mocks. In addition, please do not interpret this in terms of different levels of expertise as that is by no means the case. In fact, there are myriads of niche experts at each level.
That said, very soon we will be 'pitching' our pay product and will probably reference that it is better to get your information directly from the source and not second hand. To quote a good friend of mine, "experts do so gloat, they just call it marketing."
Honestly, I try my best each and every draft, basing each pick on the body of knowledge I have AT THAT TIME. That friends is the key, AT THAT TIME. My level of preparation on December 1 is by no means comparable to where it is on January 17, and my level today pales to what it will be come March.
This feeds into what I like to call THE INFORMATION PYRAMID. While this concept may not sit well with everyone, including my fantasy brethren, I have been around along enough to strongly feel it is real.
I believe there is a small number of sources that are primarily responsible for the entire body of information provided to the fantasy community. For lack of a better word, let's call this virgin information and is atop the information pyramid. This information can be in the form of projections, rankings, values, strategies, etc., and most importantly, the theory and principles used to generate this information. What defines this top-level is the emanation of unique information, based solely on internal principles, without the guidance of outside assistance. Don't get me wrong, not every single nugget of information produced by this top level is completely unique. Not so humbly using myself as an example, my valuation process is a meld of "public" theories and principles. I have put them together in a unique fashion, but to call it "my valuation method" is hyperbolic. On the other hand, some of the strategic work I have done is absolutely unique and in fact emulated by others.
The second level of the Information Pyramid takes this virgin information and distills it. Hopefully what they do is take the principles and theories described by the upper level and apply their own interpretation before disseminating. At minimum, they are influenced by the upper level. What defines this level is that while most often they generate their own work, it is based upon, or at least influenced by the work of others.
The third level is composed of people like the 120-something (and hopefully many more) registrants for this site and are active on the message board and other similar forums. They take the above information, discuss it, analyze it, critique it, denigrate it, etc. Most distill it and formulate their own opinions much like the second level did with the first. What distinguishes this level is that while the top two levels are primarily information providers, this level is primarily an end-user. But they are a very important element in the pyramid as they really help "spread the word."
The fourth level is strictly an end-user. They too may season the above information to taste, but some simply take it as verbatim and draft "their" team. The difference is they keep to themselves and have no public presence at all.
The manner this Information Pyramid affects mock drafts is it takes time for the virgin information to be distilled and distributed to the masses. In December, the extent of information available is limited. Projections are not completed. The 2008 season has not been fully analyzed so 2009 strategies have not been fully developed. All this takes time, beginning at the top of the pyramid. The second level lags a bit and the third level follows.
So what happens is the early mocks and such done in December are based largely on unrefined information, before 2009 number crunching is fully complete. For a spell, this imperfect information is treated like the virgin information. The further you go down the pyramid, the more the information is considered to be pure. Eventually, the top level generates their actual 2009 information, the second level does their thing, etc.
The end-result is a mock in December will have significant differences than a mock in February and March, as December perceptions become February reality, either for the better or worse. I can guarantee you that the ADP of Evan Longoria and Dustin Pedroia will steadily decline from now until March as their perceived value is replaced by the more conservative views of the top tier.
I would like to close by stating I am by no means passing judgment on any of these levels, they are all integral components of the information matrix. Heck, I am actually a member of all four levels myself. I only bring it up to help explain the thought processes of early mocks. In addition, please do not interpret this in terms of different levels of expertise as that is by no means the case. In fact, there are myriads of niche experts at each level.
That said, very soon we will be 'pitching' our pay product and will probably reference that it is better to get your information directly from the source and not second hand. To quote a good friend of mine, "experts do so gloat, they just call it marketing."
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Todd’s View on Scarcity
One of the most oft talked about fantasy baseball concepts is that of scarcity, usually positional scarcity but also statistical scarcity. It is at this point I usually get on my soapbox, waxing poetic about the multiple connotations of the term scarcity. I thought I would try something different here and talk in general terms about the concepts related to scarcity, but not actually use the term.
How to adjust a player’s value or ranking based on the position(s) they qualify is a hotly debated topic with respect to valuation theory. There are two general viewpoints. The first is that value should be assigned independent of position. If a league has 168 roster spots allocated to hitting, and if in order to legally fill all the spots, one has to roster a player outside of the top-168, that player returns “negative value”. Okay, I’ll say it, that player’s position is commonly referred to as a scarce position. The other stance is that the draft-worthy player pool should be composed of ample players to legally fill all the allotted roster spots, with draft-worthy being defined as a player returning positive value. Long-time readers know I espouse the latter. I believe that sufficient players to fill all roster spots should comprise the draft-worthy pool.
The argument used to support the former view is that the same stat line should result in the same value, irrespective of position. Obviously, I disagree, and here is the simplistic example I like to use to demonstrate why. Let’s say we are playing a home run derby league. The rules are we each need to choose one player from POOL A and one from POOL B. You have the first pick, who do you want?
POOL A: Red 45, Blue 40
POOL B: Green 20, Black 10
If you truly believe the all stats are equal regardless of position, then Red should be your choice, as he is the most valuable since he hit the most HR. My turn, I will pick Green. That leaves you Black for a total of 55 HR. I get Blue and guess what, I win with 60 HR. What happened?
The point that proponents of the first viewpoint miss is not all of Red’s or Green’s HR are useful. What if I presented the pools as follows?
POOL A: Red 5, Blue 0
POOL B: Green 10, Black 0
Now you obviously select Green first. Well, this is how I feel the original stats should be considered. At minimum, I am guaranteed 40 HR from POOL A and 10 from POOL B. The first 40 HR from POOL A and the first 10 from POOL B are not useful. I do not want to assign value to that which is not useful, and I certainly do not want to pay for it.
What if I now extend this example to include 6 pools? And what if instead of POOL A, POOL B etc., I called them catcher, first base, second base, etc.? This is why I am comfortable contending that a home run from a catcher is not necessarily worth the same as a home run from another position. Each stat at each position is not equal to that of the same stat at the other positions; an adjustment needs to be made. This adjustment is the determination of the USEFUL stats at each position. So what I am comfortable saying is a USEFUL homer from a catcher is worth the same as a USEFUL homer from a second baseman, or whatever.
The repercussions of only valuing useful stats is the exact same stat line for say a shortstop and an outfielder may be worth different amounts, depending on the level of useful stats each contributes, which is based upon the performance of the last player drafted at each position, akin to Blue and Black above. Let’s say a shortstop hit .300-30-100-35-120. For kicks, we’ll call him Hanley. Now say an outfielder named Grady hit the exact same thing – who was more valuable, Hanley or Grady? The answer is there is not enough information available, as you need to also know how the last draft-worthy shortstop and outfielder fared. Anecdotally, most figure the last shortstop is not as good as the last outfielder, rendering Hanley a bit more valuable than Grady.
Let’s bring this discussion more into the realm of actual player pools. Using the concept of scarcity discussed herein, most consider the position of catcher to be the scarcest, followed by second base and shortstop. But you know what? If you use last year’s final stats and calculate values for a 15-team mixed league with standard 14 man hitting rosters (leading to 180 draft-worthy players) without positional considerations to compute useful stats, you can legally fill all 15 team’s hitting lineup with the top 180, with the sole exception of catcher. So while even though you should still use positional considerations to get useful stats as the exact line of each position is a bit different, an argument can be made that scarcity does not exist, save for catcher except in leagues with fewer than 15 teams in the mixed format and 7 or 8 in the single league format. For the record, we predicted this phenomenon before last season, in part due to the early recognition of this by site user viper.
How I plan on applying the above to my drafts and auctions will be fodder for future blog entries and Draft Kit essays. But first, I would like to discuss, at least in a general sense, some of the other connotations of the term scarcity. One such use is to describe a position that has a bounty of talent at the top end, but a large drop-off to the dregs at the back end. Another is to refer to a position that in total, the cumulative value of the draft-worthy pool is significantly lower than the other positions. So please visit again soon, as I will try to get those written later this week. If you have not seen it yet, there is a pinned thread in each message board forum that I will update when a new blog entry is posted.
How to adjust a player’s value or ranking based on the position(s) they qualify is a hotly debated topic with respect to valuation theory. There are two general viewpoints. The first is that value should be assigned independent of position. If a league has 168 roster spots allocated to hitting, and if in order to legally fill all the spots, one has to roster a player outside of the top-168, that player returns “negative value”. Okay, I’ll say it, that player’s position is commonly referred to as a scarce position. The other stance is that the draft-worthy player pool should be composed of ample players to legally fill all the allotted roster spots, with draft-worthy being defined as a player returning positive value. Long-time readers know I espouse the latter. I believe that sufficient players to fill all roster spots should comprise the draft-worthy pool.
The argument used to support the former view is that the same stat line should result in the same value, irrespective of position. Obviously, I disagree, and here is the simplistic example I like to use to demonstrate why. Let’s say we are playing a home run derby league. The rules are we each need to choose one player from POOL A and one from POOL B. You have the first pick, who do you want?
POOL A: Red 45, Blue 40
POOL B: Green 20, Black 10
If you truly believe the all stats are equal regardless of position, then Red should be your choice, as he is the most valuable since he hit the most HR. My turn, I will pick Green. That leaves you Black for a total of 55 HR. I get Blue and guess what, I win with 60 HR. What happened?
The point that proponents of the first viewpoint miss is not all of Red’s or Green’s HR are useful. What if I presented the pools as follows?
POOL A: Red 5, Blue 0
POOL B: Green 10, Black 0
Now you obviously select Green first. Well, this is how I feel the original stats should be considered. At minimum, I am guaranteed 40 HR from POOL A and 10 from POOL B. The first 40 HR from POOL A and the first 10 from POOL B are not useful. I do not want to assign value to that which is not useful, and I certainly do not want to pay for it.
What if I now extend this example to include 6 pools? And what if instead of POOL A, POOL B etc., I called them catcher, first base, second base, etc.? This is why I am comfortable contending that a home run from a catcher is not necessarily worth the same as a home run from another position. Each stat at each position is not equal to that of the same stat at the other positions; an adjustment needs to be made. This adjustment is the determination of the USEFUL stats at each position. So what I am comfortable saying is a USEFUL homer from a catcher is worth the same as a USEFUL homer from a second baseman, or whatever.
The repercussions of only valuing useful stats is the exact same stat line for say a shortstop and an outfielder may be worth different amounts, depending on the level of useful stats each contributes, which is based upon the performance of the last player drafted at each position, akin to Blue and Black above. Let’s say a shortstop hit .300-30-100-35-120. For kicks, we’ll call him Hanley. Now say an outfielder named Grady hit the exact same thing – who was more valuable, Hanley or Grady? The answer is there is not enough information available, as you need to also know how the last draft-worthy shortstop and outfielder fared. Anecdotally, most figure the last shortstop is not as good as the last outfielder, rendering Hanley a bit more valuable than Grady.
Let’s bring this discussion more into the realm of actual player pools. Using the concept of scarcity discussed herein, most consider the position of catcher to be the scarcest, followed by second base and shortstop. But you know what? If you use last year’s final stats and calculate values for a 15-team mixed league with standard 14 man hitting rosters (leading to 180 draft-worthy players) without positional considerations to compute useful stats, you can legally fill all 15 team’s hitting lineup with the top 180, with the sole exception of catcher. So while even though you should still use positional considerations to get useful stats as the exact line of each position is a bit different, an argument can be made that scarcity does not exist, save for catcher except in leagues with fewer than 15 teams in the mixed format and 7 or 8 in the single league format. For the record, we predicted this phenomenon before last season, in part due to the early recognition of this by site user viper.
How I plan on applying the above to my drafts and auctions will be fodder for future blog entries and Draft Kit essays. But first, I would like to discuss, at least in a general sense, some of the other connotations of the term scarcity. One such use is to describe a position that has a bounty of talent at the top end, but a large drop-off to the dregs at the back end. Another is to refer to a position that in total, the cumulative value of the draft-worthy pool is significantly lower than the other positions. So please visit again soon, as I will try to get those written later this week. If you have not seen it yet, there is a pinned thread in each message board forum that I will update when a new blog entry is posted.
Between You, Me and the Firewall...
One of the major reasons for electing to relaunch Mastersball was my building frustration with respect to writing about topics for years, and either having the material buried behind a firewall or lost in the shuffle. Before I go on, trust me, there will be a plethora of quality material contained in the Draft Kit we will make available soon (details on the way), I am talking more about some general philosophies, processes and approaches that I see discussed publicly all over the Internet. As mentioned, I have been writing and speaking about a lot of these for longer than most have even been playing the game so I relish the opportunity to bring these out from behind the firewall and present them in a readily accessible manner.
Previously, the manner I presented much of this material was "I'm right and you're wrong and here's why, moron". Perhaps the most important lesson I have learned over the years is that in most instances, there is no absolute right or wrong, the best case scenario is better or worse, with the majority of issues having neither right nor wrong, but different approaches.
That said, when I present these topics in the coming days and weeks, in my heart of hearts I believe the opinion I share is right, or perhaps better stated as best. But while reading, please keep in mind that in most cases, it is indeed an opinion or personal preference. I will do my best to explain my reasoning, in an effort to lend credibility or validate said opinion.
Something else I have learned is sometimes what I consider to be right or best, others consider to be wrong. As such, I welcome comments and will gladly engage in discussions concerning anything I pose on these pages. In fact, I encourage such discourse. So please feel free to comment directly on the blog piece, or preferably, start a thread in the appropriate message board forum and we will have some fun.
Now please excuse me, I have an essay on scarcity to write.
Previously, the manner I presented much of this material was "I'm right and you're wrong and here's why, moron". Perhaps the most important lesson I have learned over the years is that in most instances, there is no absolute right or wrong, the best case scenario is better or worse, with the majority of issues having neither right nor wrong, but different approaches.
That said, when I present these topics in the coming days and weeks, in my heart of hearts I believe the opinion I share is right, or perhaps better stated as best. But while reading, please keep in mind that in most cases, it is indeed an opinion or personal preference. I will do my best to explain my reasoning, in an effort to lend credibility or validate said opinion.
Something else I have learned is sometimes what I consider to be right or best, others consider to be wrong. As such, I welcome comments and will gladly engage in discussions concerning anything I pose on these pages. In fact, I encourage such discourse. So please feel free to comment directly on the blog piece, or preferably, start a thread in the appropriate message board forum and we will have some fun.
Now please excuse me, I have an essay on scarcity to write.
Friday, January 2, 2009
OK Todd, what's next?
Good question.
As most of you know, the forum is up and running. And if you didn't know, you do now.
As explained, we will continue to add functionality to the site. Most of it will just appear. The next major phase will be getting set up with a mechanism to accept payment for our paid subscribers. Gary and I are finalizing the exact nature of this content and will be making an announcement with respect to what, how much and when soon.
What is for certain is we will be offering a Draft Kit complete with player projections, player profiles, values and rankings along with a detailed outline of our projection and valuation methodology. We will also be writing several strategy essays and player pool analysis pieces. We will do our best to spread the wealth amongst all the most popular formats including auction, draft, mixed, single, points and head to head. We will also provide our annual NFBC primer, which actually transcends simply use for the NFBC competition. The Draft Kit will be released in phases, with the target date (read -- not set in stone) of February 1 for projections, profiles, values, rankings and the description of methodology. The projections will be updated at least once a week through the first week of April.
For those wondering, we will have a customizable automated value calculator with the kit, though I cannot promise it will handle anything more than the most common categories. Last year, I introduced a version for extra categories and non-conventional categories, but I did so without adequately beta-testing it and with all that is going on, I cannot promise it will be released in 2009. BUT -- along with the Draft Kit, we will include a set of customized values specific to your league. We won't provide these with every update, but we will do our best to make sure you are able to properly manage your keeper team by providing a set when you need to declare keepers and another set based on the projections updated nearest to your draft. I apologize to those that play leagues that use non-conventional categories, but at this point you are in the minority and presently it would be an inefficient use of time to spend on the multi-AVC. But like I said, trust me, we'll have you ready for your 10x10 league with K/9, BB/9 etc.
In-season, we will fluidly update the projections and provide year-to-date values.
All the rest of our content will be free, either in the form of a newsletter (details to follow), blog entries, forum discussion or articles that will likely be posted at our companion site, Creative Sports.
For the next few weeks, I will be as active as possible on the boards though blog entries will slow a bit as we will be pounding away at the Draft Kit. Once the season starts, blog entries will pick up.
With respect to the forum, please do not expect a response from Gary or myself for every post. We are hoping to build a community such that there is free discussion and everything posted gets answered. We'll do what we can, especially when it comes to the more theoretical or philosophical questions, but I just don't have the time to say whether I like Luke Scott better than Jose Guillen for your utility, though I would more than likely share HOW I would go about making a decision like that in general terms.
Now for a little surprise. The Draft Kit is not for me, it is for you. As such, we would like your input as to what you would like for content. I am not talking about a weekly article for the season, we just don't have the manpower for that. YET. I am talking about an essay that will help prepare you for your draft and/or auctions. I will start a thread in the forums and we will do what we can to cover your topic(s).
As most of you know, the forum is up and running. And if you didn't know, you do now.
As explained, we will continue to add functionality to the site. Most of it will just appear. The next major phase will be getting set up with a mechanism to accept payment for our paid subscribers. Gary and I are finalizing the exact nature of this content and will be making an announcement with respect to what, how much and when soon.
What is for certain is we will be offering a Draft Kit complete with player projections, player profiles, values and rankings along with a detailed outline of our projection and valuation methodology. We will also be writing several strategy essays and player pool analysis pieces. We will do our best to spread the wealth amongst all the most popular formats including auction, draft, mixed, single, points and head to head. We will also provide our annual NFBC primer, which actually transcends simply use for the NFBC competition. The Draft Kit will be released in phases, with the target date (read -- not set in stone) of February 1 for projections, profiles, values, rankings and the description of methodology. The projections will be updated at least once a week through the first week of April.
For those wondering, we will have a customizable automated value calculator with the kit, though I cannot promise it will handle anything more than the most common categories. Last year, I introduced a version for extra categories and non-conventional categories, but I did so without adequately beta-testing it and with all that is going on, I cannot promise it will be released in 2009. BUT -- along with the Draft Kit, we will include a set of customized values specific to your league. We won't provide these with every update, but we will do our best to make sure you are able to properly manage your keeper team by providing a set when you need to declare keepers and another set based on the projections updated nearest to your draft. I apologize to those that play leagues that use non-conventional categories, but at this point you are in the minority and presently it would be an inefficient use of time to spend on the multi-AVC. But like I said, trust me, we'll have you ready for your 10x10 league with K/9, BB/9 etc.
In-season, we will fluidly update the projections and provide year-to-date values.
All the rest of our content will be free, either in the form of a newsletter (details to follow), blog entries, forum discussion or articles that will likely be posted at our companion site, Creative Sports.
For the next few weeks, I will be as active as possible on the boards though blog entries will slow a bit as we will be pounding away at the Draft Kit. Once the season starts, blog entries will pick up.
With respect to the forum, please do not expect a response from Gary or myself for every post. We are hoping to build a community such that there is free discussion and everything posted gets answered. We'll do what we can, especially when it comes to the more theoretical or philosophical questions, but I just don't have the time to say whether I like Luke Scott better than Jose Guillen for your utility, though I would more than likely share HOW I would go about making a decision like that in general terms.
Now for a little surprise. The Draft Kit is not for me, it is for you. As such, we would like your input as to what you would like for content. I am not talking about a weekly article for the season, we just don't have the manpower for that. YET. I am talking about an essay that will help prepare you for your draft and/or auctions. I will start a thread in the forums and we will do what we can to cover your topic(s).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
