How to create custom auction draft values that are pertinent to my league?

[jonnysunquest]

Hello, I am new to this site but excited to use the features. To this, I have painstakingly added keeper players and their values into the MACK league/team system. Now i am trying to generate custom auction draft rankings/values that account for my 18 team auction keeper mixed league.

When I run the draft guide, I get values that at are just pain whacky. Like a couple $86 players and numerous players at half that value andthe majority of the players valued at -$ valuations.

there is way too much disparity--not even close to reflective of how my league historically values players come draft day. Is 18 teams too many to generate such a report? I have experimented with numerous settings but the valuations never come into a range that can truly assist me.

Any tips? Thanks

[RAY@HQ]

Welcome! Can you post all of your CDG settings here? A screenshot would be great.

[jonnysunquest]

Welcome! Can you post all of your CDG settings here? A screenshot would be great.

thanks for helping...

settings1.JPG

and the categories if needed...

settings2.JPG

[RAY@HQ]

Set bench players to zero unless you pay auction dollars for them.

Negative cats like hitter strikeouts always cause issues. Turn that off altogether and see how the values look. Once you have "good" values with that turned off, then turn it back on at a lower weight, like 0.25 or 0.33. That should be enough to hurt high-K guys without totally skewing the values.

[jonnysunquest]

Set bench players to zero unless you pay auction dollars for them.

Negative cats like hitter strikeouts always cause issues. Turn that off altogether and see how the values look. Once you have "good" values with that turned off, then turn it back on at a lower weight, like 0.25 or 0.33. That should be enough to hurt high-K guys without totally skewing the values.

This seemed to help get the relative parity range more "normalized," but check out the top values and the huge gaps between some top AVAILABLE players. For example:

Votto at $74 (the top ranked AVAILABLE player), Posey at $50, Blackmon at $42. Big gaps.

Also a guy like Dee Gordon is valued at $12 (which in an 18 team league that must filled at 2b seems too low of a value)

If these values seem possible to you, I can accept the wide gaps as the merits of the CDG working its "magic" to reveal valuations that may expose exploitable bargains, and point to over inflated players. Meaning, Votto may not go for $75...but if I get him for $35...I've made a positive value play. In contrast, if I pay $35 for Dee Gordon, it could be a negative ev situation.

Thoughts?

batvalues2.1.JPG



thank you

[RAY@HQ]

When you've got walks as a category, it's not terribly surprising to see Votto off-the-charts high on the list. Similarly, Gordon's SB value is muted in the 8x8 format (plus he's an OBP drag, so he's hurting you in more other categories).

I think your last paragraph is exactly the right way to look at the situation. If you want to try and smooth some of those gaps, you can play with the category weights some more. For instance, you're getting cross-pollination between the BB category and OPS. If you cut the weight on BB to 0.5, that will certainly devalue Votto back to the pack. That's not necessarily a good thing in the sense of pure accuracy. Point being, you have plenty of levers left to pull to play with the values.

[jonnysunquest]

When you've got walks as a category, it's not terribly surprising to see Votto off-the-charts high on the list. Similarly, Gordon's SB value is muted in the 8x8 format (plus he's an OBP drag, so he's hurting you in more other categories).

I think your last paragraph is exactly the right way to look at the situation. If you want to try and smooth some of those gaps, you can play with the category weights some more. For instance, you're getting cross-pollination between the BB category and OPS. If you cut the weight on BB to 0.5, that will certainly devalue Votto back to the pack. That's not necessarily a good thing in the sense of pure accuracy. Point being, you have plenty of levers left to pull to play with the values.

Very good. I like that every little variable is brought into the formula. I just wanted to make sure that I was doing things "properly." Now I just hope (and probably very wishful thinking) that none of my opponents are here