Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

EmbargoLifted

2018 First Rounders Discussion

Recommended Posts

Here's something to think about for all you Stanton in round 1 guys (And I'm far from a hater, look at who started last year's thread and was a buyer)

 

 

Stanton had unequivocally his best year ever.  He almost broke Roger Maris 61 HR season and could have had an argument to be the season Home Run king.  He finally stayed healthy for the year. He had one of his best batting averages, and batting average is scarce.....

 

AND HIS TEAMMATE, DEE GORDON , STILL BEAT HIM ON THE PLAYER RATER

 

Maybe we should argue that current fantasy categories aren't ideal and steals guys are overinflated, but in a standard redraft league I'd probably want Dee Gordon over Stanton. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anuone notice that the Yahoo Player rater is different than the ESPN player rater?  

 

Anyone know why? (and which is better).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KingJoffrey said:

Anuone notice that the Yahoo Player rater is different than the ESPN player rater?  

 

Anyone know why? (and which is better).

 

I'm not sure what algorithms they use, but essentially you're just computing standard z-scores for all the various categories.  But there are some tricky statistical questions.  For example, when a category is several statistical categories above average (say batting average), but done in a smaller sample, how does that get weighted.  Its not strictly appropriate to just multiply by a proportional weight (thats honestly what I do computing my rough estimates, but I don't run a multi million dollar fantasy website).  Other categories are even more difficult.  Our league counts K:BB as a category, and this can be particularly tricky because unusually low denominators inflate the K:BB such that a z-score may think a really super unprecedentedly high K:BB is really only the result of a several walk difference.  Anyway, that's just a few issues. 

 

My sense is yahoo far over-values elite relievers though.  I'm not sure if it is because they haven't properly figured out a good way to downgrade a rate stat that is elite over a small sample, or if its because teams generally add and drop pitchers so that if you played all year with locked rosters, maybe RPs would be that valuable, but with add drops, you end up with a higher volume of SP innings, thus diluting some of their values.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KingJoffrey said:

Anuone notice that the Yahoo Player rater is different than the ESPN player rater?  

 

Anyone know why? (and which is better).

 

Espn is better for player rater. I think yahoo disproportionately weighs in ratio categories and also are based on three outfielder leagues which devaules outfielders. 

 

Espn player rater frequently gets name dropped on non espn fantasy podcasts too like baseball prospectus and fangraphs. Never heard yahoo ratings  get dropped.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, brockpapersizer said:

 

Espn is better for player rater. I think yahoo disproportionately weighs in ratio categories and also are based on three outfielder leagues which devaules outfielders. 

 

Espn player rater frequently gets name dropped on non espn fantasy podcasts too like baseball prospectus and fangraphs. Never heard yahoo ratings  get dropped.

 

 

 

Well, what you're describing doesn't make Yahoo rankings worse; it just means the different rankings are tailored to different sized leagues.  ESPN standard is 10 teams too, and Yahoo is 12 teams so they're different for those reasons

 

And I also disagree:  I see ESPN and Yahoo ownership cited side by side on most fantasy articles, including on Fangraphs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, merlin401 said:

 

Well, what you're describing doesn't make Yahoo rankings worse; it just means the different rankings are tailored to different sized leagues.  ESPN standard is 10 teams too, and Yahoo is 12 teams so they're different for those reasons

 

And I also disagree:  I see ESPN and Yahoo ownership cited side by side on most fantasy articles, including on Fangraphs

 

Ownership is different from player rater rankings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, brockpapersizer said:

 

Ownership is different from player rater rankings.

 

Well that's true.  I don't think that is indicative of a lack of respect for Yahoo's rankings algorithm though.  I just think the more standard default league (particularly among experts) is 10 team with 5 OF, CI/MI, 2 catchers which is what ESPN does.  Its a preference, but I prefer having a standard MLB roster make up and more teams (like Yahoo does).

There's actually 3 issues:  Ownership, pre-ranks (which I like Yahoo better), and the literal ranking algorithm (which I don't think anyone knows precisely what they do under the hood; and since the standard leagues are different its really hard to say which is better or even if they have significant differences)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, merlin401 said:

 

Well that's true.  I don't think that is indicative of a lack of respect for Yahoo's rankings algorithm though.  I just think the more standard default league (particularly among experts) is 10 team with 5 OF, CI/MI, 2 catchers which is what ESPN does.  Its a preference, but I prefer having a standard MLB roster make up and more teams (like Yahoo does).

There's actually 3 issues:  Ownership, pre-ranks (which I like Yahoo better), and the literal ranking algorithm (which I don't think anyone knows precisely what they do under the hood; and since the standard leagues are different its really hard to say which is better or even if they have significant differences)

 

Pre Ranks and Ownership I don't care that much about, but sure... both are on par ( i make my own ranks, so they are useless to me) If you have a preference, I have no problem. Industry recognizes ESPN Player Rater as a better judge of value a player gave in a standard league than any other right now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, merlin401 said:

 

I'm not sure what algorithms they use, but essentially you're just computing standard z-scores for all the various categories.  But there are some tricky statistical questions.  For example, when a category is several statistical categories above average (say batting average), but done in a smaller sample, how does that get weighted.  Its not strictly appropriate to just multiply by a proportional weight (thats honestly what I do computing my rough estimates, but I don't run a multi million dollar fantasy website).  Other categories are even more difficult.  Our league counts K:BB as a category, and this can be particularly tricky because unusually low denominators inflate the K:BB such that a z-score may think a really super unprecedentedly high K:BB is really only the result of a several walk difference.  Anyway, that's just a few issues. 

 

My sense is yahoo far over-values elite relievers though.  I'm not sure if it is because they haven't properly figured out a good way to downgrade a rate stat that is elite over a small sample, or if its because teams generally add and drop pitchers so that if you played all year with locked rosters, maybe RPs would be that valuable, but with add drops, you end up with a higher volume of SP innings, thus diluting some of their values.

Ya my sense is that those RPs that splash a save on an off day, or weird situation, get way over valued on Yahoo ranks. That 1-3 svs really shoots em up the board more than they probably should

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/7/2017 at 11:13 PM, street sharks said:

In my opinion:

 

1. Mike Trout

2. Jose Altuve

3. Paul Goldschmidt

4. Nolan Arenado

5. Bryce Harper

6. Charlie Blackmon

7. Giancarlo Stanton

8. Mookie Betts

9. Freddie Freeman

10. Carlos Correa

11. Josh Donaldson

12. Trea Turner

 

Judge, Votto, Machado, Rizzo, JDM are right in the mix at the end of the round though

 

Purposefully left out pitchers

Am I to believe I can get Bryant in the second round? Could be a fun '18 if so. Hope hope. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dodgers said:

sb's and saves get overvalued on player rater.

 

I might be with you on Saves if you’re in a league where it’s fairly easy to get guys on the wire throughout the year. Then maybe the player rater is less important for Saves. But that also works the other way too. Like in very deep or nl only league, someone like Greg holland was ridiculously valuable.

 

For steals, I think you’re wrong. If you play in roto you know how tough steals are. Steals are incredibly scarce in most leagues. If you’re not independently driving up the price of stolen bases in the past few years you’re either doing it wrong or you play in a league where steals just don’t mater.

 

Its a tough situation because as Baseball becomes more Sabre friendly we realize steals aren’t that valuable in real life , so it seems almost bizarre they mean so much in Fantasy....but they do. In real life you would always take a home run over a steal, like slam dunk. I play in leagues where I rather get a steal than two home runs. Dee Gordon was more valuable to a categorical team that Stanton was this year, seems crazy but it’s true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, brockpapersizer said:

 

I might be with you on Saves if you’re in a league where it’s fairly easy to get guys on the wire throughout the year. Then maybe the player rater is less important for Saves. But that also works the other way too. Like in very deep or nl only league, someone like Greg holland was ridiculously valuable.

 

For steals, I think you’re wrong. If you play in roto you know how tough steals are. Steals are incredibly scarce in most leagues. If you’re not independently driving up the price of stolen bases in the past few years you’re either doing it wrong or you play in a league where steals just don’t mater.

 

Its a tough situation because as Baseball becomes more Sabre friendly we realize steals aren’t that valuable in real life , so it seems almost bizarre they mean so much in Fantasy....but they do. In real life you would always take a home run over a steal, like slam dunk. I play in leagues where I rather get a steal than two home runs. Dee Gordon was more valuable to a categorical team that Stanton was this year, seems crazy but it’s true. 

That SB scarcity works for both H2H and Roto. Feel Turner probably go higher, maybe top 8, the more I think about it. Even at 8 there is still plenty of room for profit. Gordon is also moving up my ratings. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

I think it is much easier to get sb's then hr's. 

 

I mean, this is false. It isn't really a debate thing either. There are less SBs available by a significant margin whether in the draft, on the wire, or across the entire league. I don't even think if you play in a Cincinnati  Reds OF Only league that its' true. (but probably close). We can look at your league or my league, but if you're doing well in roto leagues without one of main guys, you're drafting really or taking advantage of an uncompetitive waiver wire or something.  In my only 10 teamer I drafted Altuve in round 1, had Andrus, and Rajai and was still subpar in steals. (they were all top 13 finishers)

 

When you look at this list of the top steals guys in 2017.... some of these guys were incredibly unplayable for a good portion of the year. Dyson, Buxton, Deshields, Reyes, and Maybin.  If you rostered these guys, you almost surely didn't get all of their steals and they often killed you elsewhere for portions of the year and then even when getting the steals.

 

Important to note for the Betts contingency, that with his unlucky babip year, he was still basically top 10 in steals. 

 

gtTNGS4.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

I always grab many guys that get steals with other stats. I pick up the Merrified types rather then draft Gordon types high. Never seen a league(even my 20 teamers) where Gordon and Hamilton types get picked in the first round. Like Player rater shows Gordon should be if you believe in their system. 

 

 Just because there are more hr's then sb's each year does not make it harder to get sb's. 

 

Well home runs are at an all time high and stolen bases have decline significantly over the last 5 year span. So again, factually it is much harder to get steals than it is Home Runs.  If you don't see that, I don't know what to tell you. 

 

I mean if you can pick up the Whit Merrifield types every year with constiency, thats very helpful. It's tough to do, more so in competitive leagues.  Merrifield wasn't even a pick up in any of my leagues, he was drafted.  There seemed to be plenty of Zimmerman's, Scheblers, Reynolds, and scheblers available.  25 HR was nothing this year. 74 players hit 25 or more home runs. 10 guys got 25 steals. 

 

I never advocated drafting Billy Hamilton in round 1, so betting me  that he won't go in round 1 is kind of irrelevant.  Hamilton is the best steals guy, but also hurts you in every other category, and you obviously want a well rounded guy with your first pick.  

 

Dee Gordon was a more valuable fantasy commodity than Stanton this year, and I think the player more likely to negatively regress is Stanton.  Dee Gordon has 3 out of his last 4 years basically what he's done this year.  Stanton? First year at this level... and he was still below Dee Gordon.

 

Disclaimer again, this is only relative to standard category leagues. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

I did not say Hamilton in round one also. Compared him to guys he beat in player rater. Just because there is more of one thing then another still does not make it harder to get the one with less. If people don't draft all the sb's guys in mlb early like they do with hr guys then it leaves plenty of sb later to grab. I don't believe in player rater values so I will take all those I named in my last post ahead of the sb guys next year and every year. Arenado over Gordon for me every time. If you really do think that system is good then you would take Gordon over Arenado? Gordon wont make my top 20 list I don't think. 

 

Well, I don't base one year's player rater as a rankings for next year. People who go solely based on previous year stats (and it's an alarming amount of people), are generally poor fantasy players.

 

The Player Rater tells you who produced the most value that year, not who will produce the most value next year. I'm not drafting Kluber in the first round at all let alone at #1. I think in a standard roto league, Dee Gordon is a very viable end of first round pick.  Dee was elite in 3 categories, and IMO the 3 hardest categories to acquire. 

 

Again if you're just able to pick up Whit Merrifield off the waiver wire, then sure, bypass Gordon... pretty easy. Most of us don't have that luxury or guarantee.  And I'm still confused as to how you could say SBs are easier to get than HRs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

In 10-12 team leagues(About 8 a year) I have done for 30 years the sb's guys are always out there to get. 20 teamers they are not of course. Even just talking who had more value last year I think player rater is very flawed. Arenado had way more value then Gordon imo. They just give a ton of value in there system to sb's.

Napoli hits 30 Home Runs and his ownership is like 20%.  2017. 

 

We are playing 2 very different fantasy games if you are able to easily get steals off the waiver wire and you're having trouble getting home runs in the year where there were more home runs hit than in any season of baseball ever.   I don't even see how this is a debate really, so I'm just going to stop. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't totally trust player rater. For example according to yahoo player rater Kelley Jansen was #15 overall. The reason is because the z-score method of rating players weighs Kelley Jansen's elite ERA and WHIP several standard deviations above the mean. However Jansen doesn't affect your ratios as much as a starter would because he only throws a couple innings a week. Thus he gets rated far higher than he actually should. Just like other analytical methods, you cannot simply blindly trust player rater as being correct. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

Your league must draft Hamilton and Gordon types over Arenado, Bryant, Rizzo types if all the sb's are gone and hard to find. I will be taking all those top power hitters last year, next year, and all years over the sb's guys. Check draft boards last year and next year to see where they all go. I am sure anyone that took Arenado last year is happy they had him over Gordon and would not go back and change that pick after the season even though player rater shows they should.

 

Strawman is Strawman.  Those players are top players not just because of Home Runs, but they produce in 4 (or even 5) categories.  Billy Hamilton is someone who literally only a plus contributor in Steals and gives you decent runs.  It's much more fair to compare him to someone like a Napoli who will get you home runs and a decent about of RBIs but nothing else.  One is a must own, the other is generally on the wire.

 

Dee Gordon pushes 1st round value because he's elite in 3 categories, and because 2 of the categories are scarce, he's worth considering with the 4 category guys.

 

I really don't even like playing in standard leagues because of Dee Gordon and Billy Hamilton these days, mostly because Hamilton is such a garbage real life player compared to fanasty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ktierne3 said:

I don't totally trust player rater. For example according to yahoo player rater Kelley Jansen was #15 overall. The reason is because the z-score method of rating players weighs Kelley Jansen's elite ERA and WHIP several standard deviations above the mean. However Jansen doesn't affect your ratios as much as a starter would because he only throws a couple innings a week. Thus he gets rated far higher than he actually should. Just like other analytical methods, you cannot simply blindly trust player rater as being correct. 

 

There isn't a lot to trust for me, it's more like... this is what happened. Not "What will happen". It has it's flaws and I'd love to see a better one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

 I bet you had Arenado over Gordon on your list last year. 

 

I did not nor do I next year.  So again, you're wrong. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

I'm not even sure I put Dee Gordon in my prelim top 12 here, just said he's viable at the end of round 1 in standard leagues because steals are declining and home runs are at all time high. It's simple math, player rater not even needed.   All other categories being the same which player is more valuable a 40 Home Run guy or a 20-20 guy?  There is a right answer and a wrong answer. 

 

You keep implying that Arenado is a home run only guy, he isn't. So calling him a Home Run guy compared to Billy Hamilton the steals guy is just a bad comparison.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, brockpapersizer said:

 

There isn't a lot to trust for me, it's more like... this is what happened. Not "What will happen". It has it's flaws and I'd love to see a better one. 

I hear you, but I mean that I don't trust player rater as accurately representing what happened this past season. I don't think the rankings accurately represent the value of players for the pst season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

Very simple.  You say you support player rater yet now you say you would rather have Arenado over Gordon. 

 

At no point in this entire thread have I ever said I would draft Arenado over Dee Gordon. Please stop continuously making things up just to prove a point that isn't even contention.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

. Make a poll and ask others which 2017 player they would rather have last year.

 

You won't see me asking for advice on the Assistant Forum for a reason.  People are dumb. I played in 9 leagues this year and finished no worse than 4th (one league). Worse year than last year too :(.  I played in 2 NFBC leagues this year with 15 teams and well, I won them both.

 

Let me ask you this. Do you think Arenado was a lot more valuable than Dee Gordon last year or was it close?  Because if it's close, I really don't see a point in arguing.  If you think Arenado >>>>>> than Gordon in a standard roto league this year. Then I'll just leave it at that, because I certainly think it was close. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

 

 

Since I directly answered yours will you answer mine? Based on 2017 stats that we know what they are you would rather have Gordon on your team last year over Arenado? And treat them as the first player on our rosters. 

 

I think it's pretty damn close,. Like in this imaginary league we're having that is instantly decided after the draft, I'm easily getting 25 HR guys with 500 AB and getting you some other categories in the teen rounds. Who are you getting in round 15 who isn't killing you elsewhere and getting you steals. Sure, have Mookie over Whit (their PR value is very similar), but Whit is getting drafted as like a top 4-5 round pick in this league at worst and Mookie isn't even a second rounder.

 

Since we know all the stats ahead of time, I hesitantly say Dee Gordon becomes even more valuable  because you dont even have a Whit Merrifield waiver wire add option, because all the breakout steals guys are being drafted because we know the results.

 

Agree to disagree that Arenado >>>> Dee Gordon in 2017 for standard roto. I could see the argument for Arenado maybe slightly ahead, but that's about it.  

 

I like the Player Rater, but don't think it's gospel when things are close.  I do agree its wonky on saves and thats going to be very league dependent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Dodgers said:

I just looked at my keeper cbs league and it is standard 5x5 with obp instead of ba and gordon was 15th overall...so they also give big boost to sbs but nit as much as espn. 

 

Might not even be fair changing the categories. Dee is 14th in average and 74th in OBP, so average is a huge part of his value... and yet he's still 15th. I prefer OBP leagues too, in those leagues Gordon takes a decent drop.  Not to mention guys like Stanton, Bryant, and Judge take an enormous leap forward.

 

The big knock on taking steal guys for me (I'm sure you don't believe me, but I don't like drafting them) is injuries for me. One minor hamstring and they stop running for a while. So much value tied to their legs, that it's risky. To me that's where you get me when you say Dee is not top 20 next year in roto.  But if we know the stats ahead of time, it's much different for me at least. 

 

In my 9 leagues I'm not sure I had any Gordon or Hamilton drafted, maybe 1?  I did trade for Dee in one league that helped me make money. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.