2015 Projections

[jwockenfuss]

Thanks Ray. Good to know the new "benchmarks" will be incoporated into the projections.

[a8caan]

Seems like a lot of players with lower projections in every 5 X 5 category get a higher $ value than those who beat them in every category. Example Mauer is the 4th most valuable 1B, $9 more than Encarnacion?

[Michael@HQ]

Seems like a lot of players with lower projections in every 5 X 5 category get a higher $ value than those who beat them in every category. Example Mauer is the 4th most valuable 1B, $9 more than Encarnacion?

Welcome to the forums.

I'm not following your example at all. Both in the R$ column (which is an AL-only 4x4 value) and in the 5x5 column of the projected statistics, Encarnacion is listed with a much higher dollar amount than Mauer is.

[a8caan]

Below is what I input for my 5X5 league Select Stat Pool:	Projected 2015 Year to Date 2015 Year to Date 2014 Year to Date 2013 Year to Date 2012 Year to Date 2011 Year to Date 2010 Year to Date 2009 Year to Date 2008 Year to Date 2007 Year to Date 2006 Year to Date 2005 Year to Date 2004 Year to Date 2003 Year to Date 2002		Number of Bench Players:
Number of Teams:			Use Fractional $'s?:
Leagues:	AL: NL:		Force Positions (?)
Budget per Team:			Valuation Method (?)	Balanced Top Players Scarcity Middle Players
Offensive Budget:	50% 55% 60% 61% 62% 63% 64% 65% 66% 67% 68% 69% 70% 71% 72% 73% 74% 75%		Minimum Bid(?)

---

Which positions does your league use? Mark scarce positions if using Scarcity valuation method

P	OF	C	1B	2B	SS	3B	MI	CI	UT
Scarce?

[a8caan]

Let me try this way. 5X5 league

Select Stat Pool:	Projected 2015 Year to Date 2015 Year to Date 2014 Year to Date 2013 Year to Date 2012 Year to Date 2011 Year to Date 2010 Year to Date 2009 Year to Date 2008 Year to Date 2007 Year to Date 2006 Year to Date 2005 Year to Date 2004 Year to Date 2003 Year to Date 2002		Number of Bench Players:
Number of Teams:			Use Fractional $'s?:
Leagues:	AL: NL:		Force Positions (?)
Budget per Team:			Valuation Method (?)	Balanced Top Players Scarcity Middle Players
Offensive Budget:	50% 55% 60% 61% 62% 63% 64% 65% 66% 67% 68% 69% 70% 71% 72% 73% 74% 75%		Minimum Bid(?)

---

Which positions does your league use? Mark scarce positions if using Scarcity valuation method

P	OF	C	1B	2B	SS	3B	MI	CI	UT
Scarce?

[a8caan]

Sorry, cutting and pasting doesn't work.

This is the info.

5X5, 12teams, $300 Budget, 70% Offense, Top Players, Scarcity, 25 Active Players

C 2, 1B 2, 2B 2 SS 2, 3B 2, OF 5, UT 1, P 9

Results - 1B

Cabrera $41, Abreu $32, Fielder $29, Mauer $25, A. Gonzalez $23, Pujols $22, Goldschmidt $22, ... Encarnacion $16.

[RAY@HQ]

Not clear what you have enabled for scarcity, but turn that off. Without that turned on, I can't replicate your results. I see EE well ahead of Mauer, as Michael does.

[a8caan]

Try this link to see my results based on the input in my previous post. I turned scarcity off.

http://www.baseballhq.com/members/tools/cdg/pos_dollar_list/?uid=51521

[RAY@HQ]

I really need to see your full input screen. There's something in your inputs that you haven't described here. For instance, are you using OBP instead of BA?

[Snider]

Ray - do you really think Devon Travis will go 0-68 this year? Thank you.

[Michael@HQ]

Ray - do you really think Devon Travis will go 0-68 this year? Thank you.

No, he will not do that. Stephen Vogt's infamous record is safe.

As Ray indicated in the first post in this thread:

• We had 30-40 players with playing time but no projections (it might be less now)
• We'll generate projections and have them up by the end of December.

[Snider]

Michael - Thank you very much for your response. Very helpful to know in a week or so the projections will be more up to date. Great job by everyone.

[Michael@HQ]

You're welcome, Snider (and happy holidays).

[Snider]

Hello and Happy New Year - my question has pertains to projected playing time specifically under the holds category. We play in a 6x6 league so holds are important. As an example you have Joel Peralta from the Dodgers as the only reliever to get holds at 30% and no one else garnering any holds. So under the Dodgers the hold percentage is only 30%. Yet under the Reds you have the full 100% allocated for the set up relievers. In other cases you have over 100% allocated which makes no sense either. My questions are why is this the case and more importantly when do you think you will have each team fully allocated properly at 100%?

Thank you very much in advance for your response.

[RAY@HQ]

Holds are one area of the projections that we don't pay much attention to right now... they're so team-context driven that we really need to let the player movement settle down before we can project non-closer bullpen roles with any confidence. We usually take a good first look at Holds in the latter part of January. So you'll see them firm up in a few weeks.