CDG Question

[Astros34]

I was setting up the CDG earlier this week for my custom league. We use standard 5x5 adding losses and OPS so I needed a custom list. Unfortunately, it appears the only way to get a list (that I can find) separates hitters from pitchers and I think relievers are even separate.

Is there any way to generate a composite master ranking without separating the hitters and pitchers? I realize the stats won't work out on that list but that's ok. I'm trying to rank my players for a Yahoo draft and it's a pain trying to jump around between the lists on my computer.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RAY@HQ]

The output always separates hitters and pitchers. It doesn’t separate sp and RP though.

If you want a merged list, go with the grid view or dump the full CSV list to Excel. You can merge the lists there.

[Astros34]

The output always separates hitters and pitchers. It doesn’t separate sp and RP though.

If you want a merged list, go with the grid view or dump the full CSV list to Excel. You can merge the lists there.

I thought of a CSV dump late last night but haven't tried it yet. Thanks!

[rosborne]

Ray - any chance of splitting SP & RP in the future (ottoneu scoring)? Thanks.

[RAY@HQ]

Definitely on the enhancement list, yes.

[Astros34]

Now I'm trying to make sure I'm inputting parameters correctly as I'm getting some screwy results using CDG the best I can figure. Our league is head-to-head with twelve categories; best total in each category gets a "win." So we can be anywhere from 12-0 to 0-12 each week. Categories are HR-RBI-SB-Avg.-OPS for hitting and W-fewest Losses-K-SV-WHIP-ERA for hitting. The bugaboo is getting the fewest losses category accounted for; the best I could figure was net wins (W-L) counted twice.

I'm also having issues optimizing some of the other settings. It's a straight draft. We roster 11 hitters (4 OF, C, 1b, 2b, ss, 3b, IF, UT) and nine pitchers (3 SP, 3RP, 3 flexible). How should I set offensive budget %? Should I set 10 bench spots or 15 or something else? Since we only have 21 roster spots at what should I set the team budget? I assume ranking via dollars is the best way to go. I did a couple of trial runs and got some really screwy results between pitchers and hitters, i.e. one way I had no starter higher than around 25 or 30 and changed the offensive budget and got something like 10 of the top 15 being starting pitchers.

[RAY@HQ]

OK, key here is to walk before you run:

- keep the Net Wins out of the calcs at first, until you're sure everything else is right.
- keep bench spots at zero at first, same reasoning. You definitely don't want 10-15 bench spots. And if you're a straight draft, bench spots and budget won't really matter anyway.

[Astros34]

OK, key here is to walk before you run:

- keep the Net Wins out of the calcs at first, until you're sure everything else is right.
- keep bench spots at zero at first, same reasoning. You definitely don't want 10-15 bench spots. And if you're a straight draft, bench spots and budget won't really matter anyway.

Is ranking by $ the way to go in using CDG for a straight draft?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RAY@HQ]

Yes.

[Astros34]

OK, key here is to walk before you run:

- keep the Net Wins out of the calcs at first, until you're sure everything else is right.
- keep bench spots at zero at first, same reasoning. You definitely don't want 10-15 bench spots. And if you're a straight draft, bench spots and budget won't really matter anyway.

How can I ever be sure if things are "right" or even "wrong?" Weird results in the CDG could just be from our categories.

[RAY@HQ]

Well, the tool does what you tell it to do. But in the end, esp. if your league is long-standing, you're the ultimate arbiter of whether the values look "right" to you. There are always more levers to pull until you get to that point.

[Astros34]

It's a new league, so I don't have anything to go on. Sorry! The thing that really seems to much things up is the LOSSES catefory, which can't be selected if $ is the currency, and there's too many rate stats to fudge things with points. Would middle relievers be more valuable in this context since they're less likely to absorb a loss (or are they??) and should do well in rate stats? The old LIMA strategy?

[RAY@HQ]

Yes, I think I'd be more interested in relievers in that format. Wins are devalued too, so the weight swings away from the big-IP guys a bit.

[Astros34]

Yes, I think I'd be more interested in relievers in that format. Wins are devalued too, so the weight swings away from the big-IP guys a bit.

I seem to have a pretty good list except the closers (and middle relievers, too) seem whompered; to wit, Jansen is #49 ($15), Kimbrel 55 ($14), Chapman 94($9), Iglesias 116 ($8) and the next four coming in at $7 then five at $6. I can't see this format lowering their value that much (if at all), can you? Devenski is a non-closer valued at $7 (projected for 5 sv) as are Robertson and Givens. Andrew Miller is $9. ADP on those four are all 205 or higher.

FYI top ten are:

Trout
Altuve
Blackmon
Stanton
JDMartinez
Arenado
Keyshawn
Votto
Freeman
Kluber


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RAY@HQ]

Rankings sound reasonable to me.