Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SGP Denominators for 2004

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SGP Denominators for 2004

    I am curious about the change in the values for Batting Average (BA) SGP in the NL.

    In 2003, Art McGee's values were as follows:

    NL BA SGP = (((1506.4 + Hits)/(5600 + AB)) - 0.269)/.0021


    This year, Mr. Holmes's values are:

    NL BA SGP = (((1520.3 + Hits)/(5450 + AB)) - 0.270)/.0021


    Are Mr. Holmes values correct? This would seem to indicate 14 more hits in 150 less at bats.

    I appreciate your input.

    Thank you.

  • #2
    Calculation Correct?

    Im having problems with the BA SGP calculation. I can't get it to match the Pierre (1.81) or Berkman (1.04) amounts that were posted in the Holmes article. Is there an additional step in the calculation? Do I have a bracket in the wrong spot? I get 5.64 for Pierre and 4.88 for Berkman.

    Any assistance is appreciated.

    Thanks

    Comment


    • #3
      Your calculation

      Your calculation is correct. I believe the calculation is to determine that player's estimated earnings compared to other players.

      His article refers to points in the standings rather than dollar values.

      Thanks.

      Comment


      • #4
        SGP Denominators

        Thanks for the quick reply! Im just curious though that you can arrive at the other SGP points for batting by applying the formulas.

        Anyways...If you are anyone else can show me how to come up with 1.81 Ba points for Pierre and 1.01 Ba points for Berkman I would greatly appreciate it. Also all of Clements SGP points too.

        Thanks again.

        Comment


        • #5
          SGP Denominators

          Sorry--1.04 Ba points for Berkman.

          Comment


          • #6
            The 5450 should be 5600, as in previous years. the correct values should be Berkman-1.61 and Pierre-2.36.

            Sorry for the error.

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks

              No problem--Thanks for following up.

              Comment

              Working...
              X