|
THT Essentials: Now availableYou can now purchase the Hardball Times Baseball Annual 2013, with 300 pages of great content. It's also available on Amazon and Kindle. Read more about it here.![]()
![]() Derek Ambrosino
Karl deVries Nick Fleder Jeffrey Gross Brad Johnson Moe Koltun Scott Spratt Michael Stein Scott Strandberg Jack Weiland Noah Woodward And here's the full roster. Most Recent Comments
Fantasy Waiver Wire: Week 8, Vol. II (1)
The daily grind: 5-23-13 (5) The Roto Grotto: targeted z-scores (2) Strength of schedule: Adjusting pitcher values (1) The hardest thing (14) Monthly Archives
May, 2013
April, 2013 March, 2013 February, 2013 January, 2013 December, 2012 November, 2012 October, 2012 September, 2012 August, 2012 July, 2012 June, 2012 May, 2012 April, 2012 March, 2012 February, 2012 January, 2012 December, 2011 November, 2011 October, 2011 September, 2011 August, 2011 July, 2011 June, 2011 May, 2011 April, 2011 March, 2011 February, 2011 January, 2011 December, 2010 November, 2010 October, 2010 September, 2010 August, 2010 July, 2010 June, 2010 May, 2010 April, 2010 March, 2010 February, 2010 January, 2010 December, 2009 November, 2009 October, 2009 September, 2009 August, 2009 July, 2009 June, 2009 May, 2009 April, 2009 ![]() All content on this site (including text, graphs, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
THT's Fantasy Archives
Tuesday, February 01, 2011Diamonds in the graphEarlier this winter, The Hardball Times offered prospective fantasy baseball writers the opportunity to compete in a Hardball Times fantasy league. Entrants wrote fantasy baseball articles, the best of which would be chosen as our winner. While we could only choose one winner to play in the league (congratulations, Dave Chenok), we had so many great articles that we have decided to publish some of the best. This is one of those submissions. If you're like me, you probably:
The concept is to help visualize where value picks might be available in each category during your draft and where you might want to consider reaching. If you just want look at the pretty graphs, scroll down until you see them. If you have a hunger for some nuts and bolts, read on, my robot friend. To build such rankings, it's best to convert rate stats (AVG, ERA, WHIP) to counting stats (xH [expected hits], xWH, xER) and generate standard scores for every player in each category to determine their projected values. This article was thorough and relatively easy to interpret for this purpose. It helps to have at least one set of ADP values, and for this example I'll be using those from Mock Draft Central. Once we have these, we'll simply chart them against one another and watch the plot thicken. Since it's a little early to use 2011 projections and ADP, we'll look at what 2010's numbers might have told us if I had thought of this earlier. I have the numbers from last year's sheets that catered to a specific league. Therefore, this example will plot the values of a pool of 108 drafted players for both hitting and pitching (a 12-team league starting nine hitters and nine pitchers) in the standard 5x5 scoring categories. For reference, here are the average projected stats and standard deviation (SD) for each.
![]() As one might expect, most of the projected elite home run hitters reside in the earliest rounds at bottom right, with a number of moderate contributors clustered shortly thereafter. What one shouldn't have expected last year was to find many guys projected to launch more than 22 homers—and almost none projected for more than 26—available after about the ninth round. With only about a dozen guys cresting 30 home runs, power was at a premium. There seems to be a somewhat noticeable slope, with a fairly even distribution on the left side of the graph. Some speedsters who could hurt you in the HR category were still clear early targets, while a projection of 14 home runs or fewer appears to be the cutoff for many players to have gone undrafted. Not surprisingly, RBI appear to follow a pattern similar to homers, though with a more defined slope. After about the eighth round, 100 RBI-potential players were likely nowhere to be found, and value picks were probably scarcer. On top of this, a cutoff of around 50 RBI at -2 SD means there was more opportunity to be hurt here late in drafts. Our R chart (what, not pirate-like enough?) reflects a cutlass-like slope, with very few potentially runs-damaging players being taken early. Despite this, 95-run booty probably could have been had in the fifth round and 90 runs plundered as late as the 12th. After that, however, one should not have counted on much opportunity for parley. Like RBI, the cutoff looks to be around 50, but at -3 SD this would be an even more severe shot below the waterline to your team (aargh, much better). And now, for something completely different...Some significant stolen base contributors could have been ripe for the picking through round 14, with helpful options available throughout the draft. One also could have aimed for the ultra-elite early picks at the risk of putting all one's eggs in the same bucket...or basket...container of your choice. Even some modest contributors could have gone undrafted due to a cutoff above 0 SD; there was less risk to be hurt by late picks here. What risk there was probably related to accumulating enough stolen base producers to safely distance your team from your league mates' without sacrificing too much in other categories. Interesting. The 14 players projected to hit over .300 create a distinct shelf above the first four rounds. Meanwhile, a number of players who could come close to .300 exist through the 20th. It's possible this was one of those instances where one could have gotten better value from knockoffs than spending big on brand names. While there is a bit of a slope to be seen here, there doesn't appear to have been a ton to worry about since our cutoff is right around 0 SD. Similar to steals, I'm guessing any risk was about making sure not to rely too heavily on empty batting average. Because using combined standard scores for starters and relievers via xER weights the value of ERA by innings pitched, this should illustrate a more "true" value. As is often preached among fantasy circles, not many pitchers were expected to go very early, and this graph seems to support this strategy. Projected ERA value varied quite a bit. Some positive contributors should have been free late, and the cutoff was above 0 SD. As we know, there is also greater risk mitigation inherent in better flexibility/more necessity to play match-ups with pitchers. This graph is almost identical to that of ERA. However, projected WHIP value varied even more wildly (pun intended) and the cutoff was just about 0 SD. There was seemingly a hint of more opportunity to do harm with this stat. Here we'll notice a separation between starters and relievers. The cluster at the bottom left is presumably closers, likely to be drafted beginning at the tail end of round six. Most of the remaining dots form a well-defined slope, with a good number suggesting late positive potential. The cutoff here pushes toward the negative again, though, so there probably should have been some urgency to stock up on strikeouts. ![]() Again, we have a visible starting pitcher/relief pitcher separation and noticeable slope. Because of this, one may have been tempted to observe a strategy similar to the strikeout category above. This is where it's handy to know that wins are one of the least predictable stats and to avoid putting undue emphasis here. Last, and possibly least depending on one's preference, are saves. Obviously, only closers and "closers in waiting" are going to have any real positive value here. More than likely we would have fallen either in the camp that drafted them between the sixth and 18th rounds or the camp that waited to take fliers in the last rounds and/or scour the wire. I believe these graphs, customized with your projections and league settings along with current ADP, could be a useful visual aid for 2011 draft prep. If we go so far as to pick out individual dots to identify potential value picks and overrated players, they could be even moreso, but that is a discussion for another time. Posted by Jacob Muskopf at 5:10am The Verdict: Yahoo is endangering fantasy sportsOver the past 30 years, the fantasy sports industry has transformed from a taboo hobby into an American institution. Going from pen and paper to the web has facilitated remarkable growth and prosperity for just about every aspect of the fantasy sports business. It has transformed from being a small blurb in the Sunday newspaper to having hours of dedicated programming on television, radio and the internet. In fact, the fantasy sports industry was one of nine selected by Entrepreneur magazine as being insulated from the current economic recession. With more than 28 million Americans playing fantasy sports and the industry generating more than $3 billion in revenue, it seems like the fantasy sports industry is impervious to anything. However, the keys to the industry’s success are keeping its current participants playing and appealing to new potential customers. Yahoo is one of the biggest fantasy sports entities in the world, providing several services and products that have been the standard of the industry since starting on the internet almost 20 years ago. Yahoo has historically been very creative and innovative in its fantasy sports commissioner services, offering highly customizable features and a variety of bonus services. However, it is one of Yahoo's newest features that prompts this article. It is so disturbing, I immediately thought it could be the beginning of the end for fantasy sports as we know it. No, I am not saying the business and industry will crumble tomorrow or that millions of people will stop playing. But the industry has been infallible and continually prosperous, so at some point the law of averages will catch up and a downward trend will set in. It just has to at some point, right? This Yahoo product could be that impetus. I don't intend for this article to be a “gloom and doom” scenario for all of fantasy sports. The current NFL labor strife and the league's uncertainty are the biggest threats today to most of the fantasy sports industry. My point is that Yahoo’s newest service could change the way people perceive fantasy sports and the way they play it. People participate in fantasy sports for myriad reasons: enjoyment of sports, common activity and socializing with friends and family, desire to win money and prizes, hobby, distraction from work and home, etc. While it is competitive in nature, it is still all in good fun because there is nothing at stake other than bragging rights and some money (usually an amount people can afford to lose). I am a staunch advocate for innovation and creativity in fantasy sports. I run Fantasy Judgment and seek to convince the world that having a dispute resolution service as part of a fantasy league is an absolute necessity. When new products, services or features are added to fantasy league host sites, I usually embrace them as a symbol of progress. But I have my limits. So after that lengthy introduction, what am I talking about? Recently, I got an email from a friend who is a student at New York Law School and runs a great blog called The Sports Tomato. The email directed me to a page about Yahoo’s fantasy baseball products called “What’s New.” As of January 2011, Yahoo has added a feature called “Manager Rating” to its fantasy products, specifically baseball. According to Yahoo: "Manager Ratings will enable you to rate other managers in your league (Positive, Neutral, or Negative) and provide a short comment about your experience playing with them." Okay, that might not sound so bad on its face. The next few paragraphs are taken directly from Yahoo: Why should I rate other managers in my league? You may be thinking that I am overreacting and wondering how this will contribute to the possible downfall of the fantasy sports industry. You may think I am jumping to conclusions and refusing to give this new feature a chance. You may even think this is the greatest new idea since OPS became an acceptable statistic. Well, you may be right on any of those accounts. But what if you’re not? Here is an analogy: Yahoo is Skynet. Skynet is the network of computers in the "Terminator" movie series that gains control over all machines and electronics to destroy the human race. Once Skynet gained control of the government's military and defense programs, it launched nuclear bombs at all targets, prompting retaliatory strikes and causing the deaths of billions of people. Essentially, Skynet was the puppet master as it sat back and watched humans destroy themselves. Here, Yahoo is pulling the strings of fantasy sports players by giving them the means of attacking each other with the ratings system. Granted, there will not be an exchange of nuclear weapons or mass genocide, but the point is that the wheels have been set in motion for people to take the competition to whole new level. People who play fantasy sports have their own style. Some people spend six hours a day reading material on websites and magazines when preparing for a draft. Some people like to make trades every week and send out proposals to other league managers on a daily basis. Some people like to play in keeper leagues where they trade off current talent in exchange for future potential talent. Some people simply stay quiet and have no interaction whatsoever with other league members. As long as people pay their entry fees, they are entitled to run their own teams any way they want as long as they stay within the rules of that league. Styles and personalities may clash, but people generally accept that not everyone operates the same way. Giving people the means to write commentary about other league members that becomes a permanent mark on their Yahoo profile is destructive. That is not to say that a negative comment on someone’s manager profile is going to inhibit his ability to buy a car or apply for a job. But this scenario can completely change the dynamic among league members, including people who know each other and those who do not. This is what frightens me into thinking there could be a slippery slope. Once people have motivation and justification for attacking each other in this forum, the very fabric of fun competition becomes unraveled. Playing fantasy sports is a hobby, not a career. As much as people enjoy doing it, no one is playing fantasy sports as their sole source of income. So the ability to retain people in fantasy sports leagues is somewhat delicate because there is no reliance on it for survival or well-being. Avoiding the irritation of dealing with negative ratings or comments could cause people to just stop playing fantasy sports. There is enough stress in life with family, work, and health; there is no place in most people's lives for added stress and degradation in a hobby. I don't know the numbers, but a certain percentage of fantasy sports players join public leagues comprised of people they do not know. There are typically no restrictions to doing this. However, if people have negative feedback in their profiles, they could be prevented from joining public leagues—in other words, blacklisted. At the very least, owners in a public league would not welcome a person with such negative ratings. Why would someone give a negative rating in the first place? There will always be that one person in a fantasy league who has something to say about everyone and everything. If a league member felt another owner made bad trades, it could lead to a negative rating. Failure to respond to a trade proposal could do the trick as well. How about missing a deadline to activate a player or take an injured player out? The appearance of indifference or incompetence is another motivation to ding someone. What about just doing it to be spiteful? There are multiple reasons why someone would leave negative feedback. So what is the big deal? It sounds quite childish, but the natural reaction would be to return the favor and leave negative feedback or comments about the other person. And then where does it end? This permanent scarring of one member profile is not going to ruin anyone’s life—I acknowledge that. But it can taint the reputation of someone who tried to join public leagues with people they don’t know. It could influence others in the league to treat someone with a negative rating badly. It could lead to the league commissioner not welcoming that person back to the league the next year. It could lead to the disintegration of relationships, as well as the league itself. It could lead to a mutiny if the league commissioner does not rule on issues or trades appropriately, and then his fellow league members leave negative comments, thus, in effect, giving the commissioner a vote of no confidence. Overall, it can lead to personal, internal battles among league owners that cause major rifts within a league and shift the focus from fantasy sports to middle school pettiness. Instead of trying to win games and defeat your opponents by drafting better teams, making effective trades, and making intelligent decisions with your roster, people would devolve into teenagers trying to sabotage each other. This is not like eBay where feedback and ratings are truly important because you are dealing with buyers and sellers whose reputations are necessary to instill confidence when choosing to do business with them. There are also protective measures in place with eBay to ensure that proper payment is made and that delivery of products is completed. In fantasy sports, there are no guarantees or assurances that leagues will be run smoothly and fairly, or that everyone involved will always do the right thing. Granted, companies like LeagueSafe.com and FantasySportsMarket.com provide financial protection for league fees. However, most people and most leagues do not take advantage of such services. That is why the Supreme Court of Fantasy Judgment strongly advocates that people play fantasy sports and join leagues with people they know. There needs to be some trust factor involved, especially when dealing with money. If people typically played in leagues with people they know to some extent, there is no need for any type of permanent feedback or commentary. I do give Yahoo credit for continuing to develop new ideas and concepts. But I don’t think Yahoo realizes the slippery slope that this new feature could create. Once you change or alter the focus of fantasy sports’ competitive nature, you give people the detonator to their own fantasy bomb. Yahoo at least does encourage alternative forms of dealing with issues between league members before permanently writing negative feedback (although it neglected to suggest third party dispute resolution such as Fantasy Judgment). But irrespective of that, I hope people are circumspect about choosing to use the "Manager Rating" feature. The Court’s verdict is that Yahoo users should resist the temptation to comment on their fellow fantasy players in any manner. Just go win and let that speak for itself. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||