"Unqualified" vs. "Strong" Buys Question

[Rick B.]

Hi, all:

I just had a question regarding today's AL Market Watch column. Blalock was rated an unqualified buy in all league formats. Wells was rated a strong buy.

Is there any real difference between an unqualified and a strong buy? Just curious. I love the BBHQ site and am not trying to nitpick.

Thanks!

[RAY@HQ]

I don't think there's a real difference, at least not when I'm using terms like that. Wouldn't want to speak for the specific author, but I would interpret the meanings as virtually identical. As a group, the MW writers have been grappling with the best ways to contextualize our recommendations. Qualifiers like this are one such way of doing so.

[Neil@HQ]

Re: "Unqualified" vs. "Strong" Buys Question

Originally posted by Rick B.
I just had a question regarding today's AL Market Watch column. Blalock was rated an unqualified buy in all league formats. Wells was rated a strong buy.

Is there any real difference between an unqualified and a strong buy? Just curious. I love the BBHQ site and am not trying to nitpick.

That was my Tuesday MW. I used "unqualified" BUY because the previous Market Watch writer had issued a qualified BUY on Blalock. If I remember correctly, he recommend that you "shop" Blalock in shallow mixed leagues.

I use STRONG BUY to mean that there is minimal risk with that player or that there is a reasonably good chance that he exceeds current projections.

Perhaps we should develop some textual descriptions of what a BUY, HOLD, SELL, etc. means? Easier said than done, I suppose.

[PD@HQ]

Re: Re: "Unqualified" vs. "Strong" Buys Question

Originally posted by Neil@HQ Perhaps we should develop some textual descriptions of what a BUY, HOLD, SELL, etc. means? Easier said than done, I suppose.

Especially, as we've seen on other posts in these forums, with the many variants of games that are played.