Draft Inflation

[crapshooter]

How do I figure draft inflation? I know I have seen it on this site somewhere in years past but can't find it now.

[RAY@HQ]

(Total League Salary - Total Frozen Salary)

divided by

(Total League Salary - Total Frozen Projected Value)

[jwillh9181]

players with negitive projected value??

For players with negitive projected value shoudn't you use a value of 0 in figuring out the leagues inflation number??

john

[helloneumn]

Who would keep a player with negative value?

[jwillh9181]

relpy

a bunch of dummies in my league

[helloneumn]

Clearly. As to your question, I let Rotolab calculate the inflation for me, but I guess I'd be inclined to keep the negative value as negative.

[timg]

I think the right thing to do is to put the value at $1. Freezing a player who projects to have a negative value effectively takes the last $1 player out of the pool of draftable players -- that is removes $1 of value from the player pool.

Who would keep a player with negative value?

More than one owner will freeze McClung at $1 this year even though his BBHQ projected value is negative. A couple of years ago I was quite pleased when someone bought Kenny Rogers when he had a BBHQ projected value of something like -$6. I suppose your question was tongue-in-cheek, but it is worthwhile to point out that we don't al luse the same set of projections/values.

[crapshooter]

So after I do the figuring and division I come up with 1.24.
How do I use this figure now?

[JonE]

I think the right thing to do is to put the value at $1. Freezing a player who projects to have a negative value effectively takes the last $1 player out of the pool of draftable players -- that is removes $1 of value from the player pool.

I see what you mean; if Ryan Church is the last $1 hitter and someone buys a -$1 loser, then no one will buy Church, and Church's value should be taken from the pool. However, it is also true that taking a negative player out of the pool strengthens the buying power of the remaining dollars. Mathematically, then, I'm inclined to say that you should take out Church's $1 AND add back the $1 that the loser originally "took out" of the valuation pool. It doesn't matter much at the -$1 level; more so at the -$6 level.

More importantly, I think that the practical applications of this are infinitesimal, because ultimately you cannot change values at the penny level. (A player worth $1.17 inflated from $0.96 is still a $1 player.)

So after I do the figuring and division I come up with 1.24.
How do I use this figure now?

The inflation figure tells you the amount that you should expect prices to be inflated at this particular moment. At this moment, when inflation is 1.24, if you want to own a $30 player, you should expect to pay $37 (30 * 1.24). If, during the auction, inflation goes up to 1.40, the $30 player's going price rises to $42; if inflation descends to 1.16, his going price should be $35.

Should you actually pay $37? Ultimately that depends on your choice. If you froze 22 players and all you have is $37 and one slot to fill, then you should try to get the best possible player for $37. It doesn't matter whether he is projected to earn $42 or $28, if he is the best player on the board you need to pay what it takes to get him. Since you probably did not freeze 22 players, you have more choices to make. Some people argue that you should never pay an inflated price. I think that every owner has to pay some inflation somewhere, though it would be better to pay $33 than $37.

[timg]

I see what you mean; if Ryan Church is the last $1 hitter and someone buys a -$1 loser, then no one will buy Church, and Church's value should be taken from the pool. However, it is also true that taking a negative player out of the pool strengthens the buying power of the remaining dollars. Mathematically, then, I'm inclined to say that you should take out Church's $1 AND add back the $1 that the loser originally "took out" of the valuation pool. It doesn't matter much at the -$1 level; more so at the -$6 level.

More importantly, I think that the practical applications of this are infinitesimal, because ultimately you cannot change values at the penny level. (A player worth $1.17 inflated from $0.96 is still a $1 player.)

You are correct, technically you would remove the last player in the draftable pool, now there is new last player who is actually worth more than $1 (maybe by pennies). When you rescale (or revalue) based upon that player being the last draftable player, things will change a bit. You are also right that the difference is likely so small as to be insignificant.

The important part is that it doesn't matter whether the player taken is worth $0, -$1 or -$10. Whichever it is, it still just takes the last $1 player out of the draftable pool.

Tim

[PD@HQ]

Some people argue that you should never pay an inflated price. I think that every owner has to pay some inflation somewhere, though it would be better to pay $33 than $37.

If you don't pay inflated price, your dollars become more and more worthless (or less and less worthful?). It does you no good to have the fattest wallet at the draft when all that is left is $3 players.