values dont jive

[dickstein]

I may be a little dense, but can I assume the player projections $are based on standard 4x4 ...12 team league... $260 to spend. If so, when this info is plugged into evaluator using 170/90, how does a player ...R Ortiz for example show $13 in one venue and $18 in the other. What am I doing wrong if anything? Thanx

show $13 in one venue and $18 in the other

What do you mean by "venue"?

I'm not sure if this addresses your question, but it might: "There are two widely-used methods for calculating Rotisserie player values -- the SGP method and the scarcity method. The SGP method requires that you first estimate how many of each statistic is required to move one place in the standings, data which can only be gleaned by looking at the results from many leagues. The scarcity method values each category based on the overall pool of statistics in that category.

While the projections spreadsheet has used the SGP method for years, we grappled with how to design the Valuator. Since the SGP method would require benchmarks for many statistical categories, from sources that were not easily available, we opted to go with the scarcity method. That's why the values vary from those in the projections spreadsheet.

Which method is more accurate? If you put the issue out to a group of industry analysts, you'd get quite a debate. I don't know that you'd ever come to a consensus. What's the trade-off for us? We know going in that scarce commodities, such as saves and steals, will be slightly overvalued. You can adjust that yourself if you want. However, in the grand scheme of things, the differences will just be a few dollars, plus or minus. "

Originally posted by Noto@HQ
What do you mean by "venue"?

I'm not sure if this addresses your question, but it might: "There are two widely-used methods for calculating Rotisserie player values -- the SGP method and the scarcity method. The SGP method requires that you first estimate how many of each statistic is required to move one place in the standings, data which can only be gleaned by looking at the results from many leagues. The scarcity method values each category based on the overall pool of statistics in that category.

While the projections spreadsheet has used the SGP method for years, we grappled with how to design the Valuator. Since the SGP method would require benchmarks for many statistical categories, from sources that were not easily available, we opted to go with the scarcity method. That's why the values vary from those in the projections spreadsheet.

Which method is more accurate? If you put the issue out to a group of industry analysts, you'd get quite a debate. I don't know that you'd ever come to a consensus. What's the trade-off for us? We know going in that scarce commodities, such as saves and steals, will be slightly overvalued. You can adjust that yourself if you want. However, in the grand scheme of things, the differences will just be a few dollars, plus or minus. "

Thanks for this explanation. It might be useful to put an explanation link on the Valuator Page. The results that I have gotten appear to be sound, although some posts seem to be indicating that there are "technical glitches". Interestingly, in my 5x5 14 team mixed league (H-2-H), the closers do not appear "overvalued" at all. However, the one dimensional SB players are -- Crawford (4th highest OF), Pierre, Sanchez. I maintain that in a H-2-H format, SB specialists are worth much less. I would be interested in any empirical thoughts on this. One way to truncate the SB specialist valuation is too simply "cap" their contribution at a certain SB level (say 40).

Sorry, I don't have any H2H experience. You might try a separate thread and see if anybody bites.

[WVHogan]

SGP Method

I'll put my 2 cents in! IF position scarcity meant anything I would think players like Piazza and I Rod would have delivered championships to many league owners over the last few years no? I remember these guys going RD1 and RD2 each year for this very reason. So I decided to pull up our 12 year history and NOT ONE TEAM that had drafted these two (including one team that had both of them one year) had ever WON our league or came in higher then 3rd once! INTERESTING I THOUGHT!

[duncanidaho3]

scarcity, thought, projection request from hq

I think that is interesting, But I think there must be something to scarcity, considering the amount of $ you can loose if you don't get a good one in early rounds..

but here is my 1 cent: scarcity is the icing on the cake, not the fillin in the pie. First you go for quality players, then you go for scarcity. choosing between arod and sori in first round: i pick sori, because i LOVE renteria, tejada is good and arod is good. of course the stats are similar.. but you can only fit so many guys on your roster.

My second cent: one thing the $ values never give, is extra for positional versatility.. I think this deserves a premium. Anyone that had an top round infield injury can appreciate how incredibilty valuable multiposition guys are when things turn down. it saved my team last year.

lastly: can bbhq put the scarcity $value in the spreadsheets next to the sgp value? this way we can all get intuition as to what the difference is, and how it changes.