Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Weekly SP matchup ratings -- Everyone is a "sit?

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

  • Weekly SP matchup ratings -- Everyone is a "sit?

    Am I reading it wrong, or is nearly every SP recommended as a "sit" this week?

    Given the listed standard of +2 or higher as moderate start candidates......every pitcher is a recommended "sit" except Rich Hill and Madison Bumgarner.

    Or am I reading it wrong?

    http://www.baseballhq.com/members/to...kly/weeklyprob
    US Senate staff fantasy league champion: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2013, 2016
    Runner-up: 2003, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2015
    WTF?: 2002, 2011

  • #2
    The standard changed. See the big red note in Daily Matchups article.

    Comment


    • #3
      Ray, since this is the umpteenth one of these you've fielded, maybe you should consider adding the big red note to the top of the 8-day planner for a while?

      Comment


      • #4
        I did finally change the descriptive text on the Matchups home page. Duh.

        I'll add links to the two new articles (Opening Day, and today's) as well. Thanks for the suggestion.

        Comment


        • #5
          Looks good. But you should also update the Today, Tomorrow, and 8-day pages, because those still specify the old criteria (+2 is a moderate start, -0 is a sit), and they still link to the 2012 how-to-use-the-matchup-report article. Personally, I have the 8-day page bookmarked, so I always bypass the Matchups home page; I suspect others do too.

          Comment


          • #6
            Oh, good call. I can't update those pages myself, will get techies to do it.

            Comment


            • #7
              I am still a little confused. Not that long ago (around 4/21 or so), a "strong start" was >0.5, and a wildcard was -0.5-0.5. Now (starting somewhere around 4/23) it appears the strong start is >1.0 and wildcard is -1 to 1. Did I miss an explanation of the change? I'm looking at todays Matt Cain at -0.75, and am wondering about the grouping between -0.5 to -0.1.

              Comment


              • #8
                We estimated it at -0.5 to 0.5 while we were waiting on the research to be completed. We only left that in place for a few days before changing to -1.0/1.0 based on the research, which was officially rolled out in this week's followup research piece.

                In general, 0.0 is the midpoint and "the more positive, the better", so 0.75 is better than 0.50. But for purposes of drawing a breakpoint, we set it at 1.0... that's essentially where you're likely to get a PQS-3 or better, as Ed discussed in this week's research piece.

                Comment


                • #9
                  bad pitcher - good pitcher

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X