Comments on: Diverging from ADP

By: Ryan

Ryan — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 22:10:39 +0000

The problem with using reliability scores is that for higher picks, you want somebody with high reliability (you don’t want to get burned with a bad season), but with lower picks, low reliability can be good if it means that there’s both a chance of a breakout, and a chance of complete failure. This is because in most leagues, you don’t have to take the downside–just drop the player and pick up somebody for free.

By: Mays

Mays — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 23:53:02 +0000

@Nick: Incorporating the reliability scores into the values is a very interesting idea; I like it a lot. Let me play with that a little.

By: Nick

Nick — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 05:04:51 +0000

Following up on my last comment, using 2009 marcels and a standard league, CC Sabathia and Johan are both valued at $41 with a reliability score of .84

Wright and Hanley are both valued at $38, with reliability scores of .88 and .87, respectively.

Not sure exactly how to best handle the reliability numbers, but if we multiply the player’s value by their reliability score, it definitely brings the hitters closer in value to the pitchers (although the pitchers are still “worth” slighly more).

By: Nick

Nick — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 04:55:18 +0000

Regarding risk and projections, I know that Marcel contains reliability scores and PECOTA has a beta score, but I’m not sure exactly how they are incorporated into the projection numbers themselves.

Tango commented on Razzball (http://razzball.com/2009-fantasy-baseball-projections-chone/) that Rudy needed to include reliability scores into his point shares calculations, so perhaps there should be an additional “risk” adjustment.

By: rwperu34

rwperu34 — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 04:41:14 +0000

Here’s what it looked like heading into last season;

Group A+-None
Group A-None
Group B+-Mauer, McCann, Martin, Posada, Martinez
Group B-None
Group C+-none
Group C-Soto, Napoli
Group D-Towles, Salty, Iannetta, Doumit, Montero

Much more polarized.

By: rwperu34

rwperu34 — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 03:06:27 +0000

Good point on the projections. I’ll have to ponder that.

Here’s what my grid would look like at catcher right now;

Group A+, Superduperstar, $50+
Group A, Superstar, $35-$49
Group B+, Star, $25-$34
Group B, Above Average, $18-$24
Group C+, Average, $11-$17
Group C, Below Average, $6-$10
Group D, Fringe/Upside, $1-$5
Group F, Fringe, $1
Group P, Prospect

For 2009 catcher would look like;
Group A+-None
Group A-None
Group B+-Mauer, Martin, McCann
Group B-Soto
Group C+-Iannetta, Napoli, Doumit
Group C-Posada, Martinez, Wieters
Group D-Salty, Clement, Montero, Flores
Group F-Shoppach, Snyder, B.Molina, Teagarden, Towles
Group P-Santana, Salome, FLowers, Arencibia, Marson, Anderson

My league uses OBP and SLG instead of AVG, so Napoli would be a downgrade. My middle class would be Iannetta, Doumit, Napoli, Posada, Martinez, and Wieters. Lot’s of stable players with upside. Then you’ve got Clement, Salty, Montero, and Flores that are risky with upside.

By: Mays

Mays — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 01:32:33 +0000

@rwperu34: It seems like the risk factor should be taken care of by the projections, though. And really, is Santana more risky than any of the first round hitters?

As for catchers, who do you see in the middle tier? I could see any of Mauer, McCann, Martin, and Martinez ending up at the top of the heap at the end of this year. The only guys I like after that are Wieters and maybe Doumit, with not much after them.

By: rwperu34

rwperu34 — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 20:30:14 +0000

I think it might be more of a risk management issue. I prefer to load up on top flight hitting talent because I like safety in my big picks. Since I like to gamble with my late picks, that lines up nicely with avoiding pitchers early and taking them late.

I agree about the catchers. I consult a friend of mine in a standard 5×5 CBS league, and every year, we end up with two of the elite catchers. We are always the best at the position. Our lineup doesn’t look as sweet with the big names at the corners, but every year we are at the top of offense. I think MI also tends to be undervalued in leagues that start an extra MI.

One note on this though. 2009 is an odd year for catcher. There is a bigger middle class this year, which should push the replacement level higher. This is the exact opposite of last year, when you had a couple of elite guys, a couple of upside picks, and then complete garbage. In my preliminary spreadsheet, the difference between catcher and MI is ~1 pt, while it’s typically ~1.5.