Archive for February, 2010

« Older Entries

More Math from Mass

6 Comments
February 27th, 2010 by Mays
Categories: Fantasy Basics, Other Sites, Theory

I wish I could resist the lure of AJ Mass’s ESPN.com articles, but I cannot.

Mass answers the question I’ve always been wondering: “What happens if you rank fantasy hitters using bizarre, illogical criteria?” His top 10 fantasy hitters:

1 Jacoby Ellsbury
2 Carl Crawford
3 Michael Bourn
4 Albert Pujols
5 Matt Kemp
6 Mark Reynolds
7 Ryan Braun
8 Ian Kinsler
9 Hanley Ramirez
10 Chone Figgins

Now there’s something unusual about that list, but I can’t quite put my finger on it… Mass has already expressed his love for Ellsbury, so I guess it’s not too surprising that he puts Carl Crawford #2 and Michael Bourn #3.

How did this happen? The secret is in the faulty starting assumption:

What we’ve done is very simple. We’ve taken the league-wide totals from last season to create a statistical universe for our players to inhabit. We determined the expected statistical output of the average player, assuming even distribution among the lineup spots. From this, we were able to extrapolate the relative value of each hit, each run scored and so on. In other words, since there were more home runs than stolen bases in 2009, by a ratio in the neighborhood of 7-to-4, the value of each stolen base was about seven-fourths that of a home run, matching the relative frequency of the event.

I’m pretty sure you want to use the totals from a typical fantasy league, not all of MLB. Using the pool of fantasy starters will either get you to SGP or standard scores, either of which should yield a pretty realistic result.

Using the pool of all MLB hitters is just going to give you a mess.

What is Chone Figgins Worth at 2B?

7 Comments
February 26th, 2010 by Mays
Categories: Position Eligibility, Theory

The Seattle Mariners started off Spring Training this week with a surprising infield arrangement — Jose Lopez taking grounders at 3B and the newly acquired Chone Figgins playing 2B.

At this point it just looks like an experiment, but the potential shift has lots of people talking. For fantasy purposes, a 2B-eligible Figgins would be a throwback to his legendary flexibility of years past.

But how valuable is Figgins at 2B? As a 3B in a standard league, I’ve got him at $11. That may seem a bit conservative after his breakout $19 campaign in 2009, but don’t forget about a 2008 where he barely managed to be above replacement level. He’s also making the transition from the Angels to the Mariners, and I don’t see many guys in Seattle that will be able to provide much help for his run totals. He’s hard to predict for 2010, but the best guess is that his true talent lies somewhere in between 2008 and 2009 — maybe about $11.

All of that assumes he only qualifies at 3B for fantasy, though. You might notice that the Price Guide lists a “Total” value and an “Adj. Total.” The former represents a player’s value without regard for position; the latter is after taking position into account. Since the typical 2B is a little worse than the average 3B, a player with equivalent stats will be worth a little more as a 2B than as a 3B. The “League Info” tab of the Price Guide tells you how much each position is adjusted.

To figure out what Figgins is worth as a 2B, all you have to do is replace the 3B adjustment with the 2B one. It turns out that, in a standard fantasy league, Figgins would get a bump from about $11 to $15 if you could put him at 2B.

There’s also some value in a player qualifying at two positions: You gain roster flexibility for off days, and you have more options for replacing an injured player. Those things are tough to quantify, but I’d pay a couple of extra dollars for a 2B/3B. I could easily see a swing from $11 to $18 when everything is accounted for.

Keep in mind that all of this is for a standard league that starts an extra CI and MI. Surprisingly, in a shallow league like the Yahoo or ESPN default setup, there is basically no gain for switching from 3B to 2B. The hypothetical 2B-Figgins is valued at $8, just a slight improvement from the expected $6. With only 10 or 12 starting at each position, the drop-off on 2B is much closer to that of 3B than to SS.

In a situation without a MI slot, I’d be willing to give a little extra for multi-position eligibility. So maybe that original $6 becomes $12 if Figgins is a 2B/3B in Yahoo/ESPN.

Predicting Playing Time

6 Comments
February 25th, 2010 by Mays
Categories: Price Guide, Projections

Not too long ago I posted a link to an evaluation of how various projection systems did in 2009. My takeaway from that article was that the ideal fantasy projections would combine the free, computer-generated forecasts with a by-hand adjustment for playing time.

How might that be done? My first choice for predicting playing time would be Tom Tango’s Community Forecasts, where he recruits large numbers of fans to predict the playing time for players on their favorite team. Unfortunately, when that survey is opened up in late March, it will be too late for lots of fantasy drafters.

So I’ve attempted a different approach in the meantime. I started with the average playing time that resulted when SG simulated 100 seasons using the CAIRO projections. I then made some manual adjustments based on my own guesses for teams’ depth charts (e.g. putting Alcides Escobar as the Brewers’ primary SS over Craig Counsell). I added estimated PA and IP for free agents. Finally, I knocked 10% off of pitchers’ IP and 5% off of hitters’ PA, which scaled them pretty closely to match the existing projections.

If that sounds like I’m just making stuff up as I go along…well, I sort of am. But I think it’s possible to improve on the wisdom of the computers with some subjective (but commonsensical) knowledge. For those who may be concerned with my meddling, I plan on keeping the unadjusted numbers around, as well.

You can see what the composite projections look like with playing time adjustments by selecting 2010 Composite (Adj.) on the Price Guide. I would love to hear input on where these can be improved. My initial concerns will probably be dropping PA for catchers a little bit and seeing about inflating the top tier a little bit.

Pairing Your First Two Picks

4 Comments
February 24th, 2010 by Mays
Categories: Other Sites, Strategy

Good stuff from Grey at Razzball.com on pairing your first round pick with a complementary second rounder:

Hanley Ramirez – Again, you want just about anyone but Tulo, Reyes or Rollins. Ideally, you want a big bat. I.e., not Carl Crawford. Someone that is going to get you 30+ homers. Howard and Fielder will be gone, but A-Gon, Morneau, Zimmerman or even Votto should be there. I’d consider J-Upside, but if I went that way I would definitely want another 30+ hitter sooner vs. later.

I really like the idea of thinking ahead for future picks, especially since so much energy is spent just thinking about the fantasy first round. I don’t think this is even inconsistent with the “take the best available” strategy. With a pairing strategy, you’re not locking yourself in on a certain player for the second round — you have to be flexible at the draft — but you are considering the kind of player you want. It’s hardly a reach to take Adrian Gonzalez over Carl Crawford with your second round pick.

Of course, it’s not strictly necessary to balance power-speed with your first picks. If you start off with Hanley and Crawford, you can fill in some power hitters in later rounds (say a Jason Kubel or Billy Butler). If you wind up with two power hitters early (maybe Prince Fielder and Adrian Gonzalez), you can always mix in some SB-threats later on. Your first two picks won’t put you so far ahead in any category that won’t need any other help in that stat.

But looking for a power-speed-pitching balance early does give you much greater flexibility later on. If I have some of each, I don’t have to reach for Michael Bourn a few rounds early to make sure I get stolen bases. I draft Bourn when he makes sense, and I never have to do anything desperate. Having both power and speed early in the draft gives you the freedom to just draft the best players later.

Dynamic Prices

3 Comments
February 23rd, 2010 by Mays
Categories: Fantasy Basics

I like to think of the Price Guide on this site as offering a snapshot view of player values. It only captures the prices for a moment in time before the draft starts. Once the auction begins, prices also begin to shift higher and lower.

What can cause prices to change during an auction? I see a few possibilities:

A player below replacement level is drafted.
All it takes is someone bringing up Francisco Liriano or Daisuke Matsuzaka, not realizing that these are pitchers who are not expected to match their performances from a few years back. They are valued at a negative amount — below the replacement level for starting pitchers.

Every time this happens, the replacement level at that position moves up one player, and players at that position lose value. Basically, the supply of above-replacement pitchers has stayed the same, but the demand has dropped (as one less team needs to fill a spot).

A team overpays for a player.
The same dynamic deflation happens whenever someone overpays. Now there is less money than expected available, and prices for all players go down slightly.

A team underpays for a player.
The reverse of this has the opposite effect. If a team gets a bargain on a player, they now have extra money that must be spent on remaining players. Extra money drives prices up.

A team fills their roster with money left over.
Typically, any money that isn’t spent at an auction goes to waste. When a team finishes their roster, not only do you have one less bidder in the auction, but their remaining money disappears as well. Both of these factors will deflate prices for the remainder of the draft.

Are there any other factors that cause prices to go up or down during an auction?

LIMA 2010: Bouncebacks

No Comments
February 22nd, 2010 by Mays
Categories: LIMA, Sleepers

So far this year, we’ve examined how LIMA pitchers did in 2009 and looked at 2010’s LIMA candidates. Last week, we broke down the first grouping for 2010, LIMA pitchers who might not necessarily be low investments.

The next group of 2010’s LIMA candidates are pitchers who are primed to bounce back from a down year in 2009: Roy Oswalt, Chad Billingsley, Jake Peavy, and John Lackey.

Here are their ERAs in 2009:

Roy Oswalt 4.12
Chad Billingsley 4.03
Jake Peavy 3.45 (102 IP)
John Lackey 3.83

Fantasy owners tend to have short memories, focusing mostly on a question of “What have you done for me lately?” If people in your league focus only on 2009, these four pitchers may be available for cheap.

In contrast to your typical fantasy owner, projections recognize that players who have an abnormally good or bad year tend to regress back to their established level of performance. That gives some reason for optimism for these pitchers. There’s still risk:

Roy Oswalt is getting old, and his strikeout rate has never been dominant. The 2010 Astros are shaping up as a terrible offensive team that could struggle to get him wins.

Chad Billingsley walks a lot of guys. With a consistent 1.30+ WHIP, the 4.03 ERA of 2009 seems more appropriate than the 3.14 ERA from 2008.

Jake Peavy is leaving the favorable PETCO Park in San Diego where he had put up ERAs in the 2.00’s for several years. He will spend 2010 in a much less-favorable park for the White Sox. Plus, he managed a 4.09 ERA stinker even with the Padres.

John Lackey is now two years removed from the excellent 3.01 ERA year he had in 2007, posting a 3.75 and 3.83 in the past two years. He also moves to a very tough AL East.

No doubt, there’s risk involved with all four of these pitchers. With strong peripheral stats, however, there’s also the possibility of a big payoff in 2010.

CHONE’s Best Bargains

No Comments
February 21st, 2010 by Mays
Categories: Other Sites, Sleepers

Andrew at Fantasy Ball Junkie points out what he finds to be the best fantasy bargains for 2010, according to the CHONE projections:

1. Eric Young
2. Russell Martin
3. David Ortiz
4. Julio Borbon
5. Jeff Francouer
6. Melky Cabrera
7. Delmon Young
8. BJ Upton
9. Magglio Ordonez
10. Jose Reyes

A couple of names (Eric Young Jr., Julio Borbon) also popped up on my SB sleeper list earlier this year. Many of the rest are guys who had a down year in 2009. Even though fantasy owners tend to focus solely on last year’s results, projections remind us that players tend to return to their established level of performance.

That could be good news for those willing to take a risk on Russell Martin, David Ortiz, B.J. Upton, or Jose Reyes.

AJ Argues for Ellsbury in the First Round

5 Comments
February 19th, 2010 by Mays
Categories: Fantasy Basics, Other Sites, Theory

AJ Mass at ESPN explains how Jacoby Ellsbury should be a first round pick this year.

Regarding those who might prefer Prince Fielder or Ryan Howard in the late first round, AJ says:

They might have mainstream public opinion on their side, but you would have mathematics. Allow me to explain why you just can’t let him get past you with, say, the seventh, eighth or ninth pick in the first round and leave open the possibility that he might not make it back to you. You need to take him with that first-round pick.

Well, who am I to argue with mathematics?

AJ’s idea is what he calls “Mass Effect,” a valuation system that makes Ellsbury the #1 overall player in fantasy last year. That’s right: Jacoby Ellsbury, Fantasy MVP.

Did I mention that it ranks Carl Crawford #2, Derek Jeter #5, and Ichiro Suzuki #7? Something doesn’t seem right here…

Well, AJ acknowledges that Mass Effect has “one flaw.” He explains how stolen bases become less valuable throughout the season due to diminishing returns. So to adjust for the changing value of stolen bases, he decides to knock off 50% of the value of each stolen base.

I’m sure he went through some of his extensive mathematics to come up with that 50% figure, since it drops Ellsbury from #1 overall to a much more realistic #10 overall.

Just to recap:

1. Come up with a player valuation system that doesn’t make sense.
2. Instead of recognizing that the system doesn’t make sense, fudge the numbers some so that they look better and yet still fail to reflect reality.
3. Call it “mathematics.”

I love it.

Rick Porcello Takes the Next Step

2 Comments
February 18th, 2010 by Mays
Categories: Projections, Sleepers

I’m confident that Rick Porcello will take the next step in 2010. The real question is whether that next step will be a step forward or a step backward.

After only one year in the minors, Porcello managed this MLB line in 2009:

14 W, 3.96 ERA, 1.37 WHIP, 89 K, 170.2 IP

That’s pretty good for a 20 year-old rookie, good enough for a $5-6 value last year. But the predictions for 2010 are…pretty divided. Let’s take a look at the negatives first:

Rick Porcello takes a step back in 2010.
(CHONE: 5 W, 5.08 ERA, 1.52 WHIP, 69 K, 124 IP)

Someone recently pointed out to me that Porcello’s projection wasn’t showing up on the Price Guide. After a little digging, I found that that wasn’t quite true: Porcello is on the Price Guide for 2010, but he doesn’t rank in the top 250 pitchers that are shown by default. The reason why is nicely illustrated by CHONE’s projection above.

With a 5.00 ERA, Porcello winds up in the -$16 range for standard league. Why the pessimism for a pitcher who finished 2009 with an ERA below 4.00? Most likely it comes from Porcello’s very low strikeout rates over his two professional seasons. With so few strikeouts, there will be lots of balls put in play. More balls in play means more hits and more runs, and that’s going to show up in his WHIP and ERA.

Even without the impact on ERA/WHIP, it’s hard for a pitcher with so few strikeouts to be valuable in 5×5 fantasy. That projected line above presents no redeemable qualities for fantasy.

Rick Porcello takes a step forward in 2010.
(Fans: 12 W, 4.10 ERA, 1.43 WHIP, 110 K, 180 IP)

What the projections don’t know, however, is that Porcello is a somewhat unique pitcher. He’s a first round pick who has shot straight to the majors, which means he’s at least impressed some people — bad pitchers don’t jump from A-ball to the majors.

Mike at THT Fantasy makes a comparison with Ben Sheets. Like Porcello, Sheets was a 1st round pick who wasted little time in the minors. Although he started off his major league career with middling K/9 numbers, Sheets’s strikeout-rates improved and he turned into a very good MLB pitcher. It’s not an exact comparison, but it shows that it’s possible for Porcello to improve.

That’s the sort of thinking that is influencing the fan projections above. There’s a little bit of decline in rate stats, but that’s compensated by an improved K/9.

So what can we expect from Rick Porcello in 2010? I’m not making any bold predictions, but I will say that the potential downside makes him a risky pitcher to draft this year.

ESPN Greasemonkey Script Unavailable

1 Comment
February 17th, 2010 by Mays
Categories: Site News

UPDATE 02/18: The ESPN script is now working. I’m still adding IDs for some minor players, but anyone who is fantasy-relevant should show up.

I just got a heads-up that the Greasemonkey script for ESPN is currently out-of-order.

ESPN switched around all of their player IDs, which broke the script that inserts dollar values onto their league pages.

I’ll need to update the IDs for a thousand or so players to get it back up and running. So if anyone happens to have already compiled a bunch of ESPN player IDs, I’d love to know about them.

I’ll let you know when everything is fixed.

« Older Entries