Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 31

Thread: Custom Draft Guide Question

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    1,445

    Default Custom Draft Guide Question

    When I run CDG for an AL only, 5x5, 9 team league with a standard lineup, using a $260 budget, 67% budget and Top Players valuation method with Force Positions checked, the $ values for catchers are very different from those generated when I do not check Force Positions. For example, Sanchez is $38 and Perez is $21 when Force Positions is checked vs. Sanchez at $20 and Perez at $7 when Force Positions are not checked. All other positions show only a discrepancy of a few dollars between the two reports. Is this correct and if so, why is there such a wide variation of $ values for catchers only?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    24,822

    Default

    I'm going to guess that you have 2 catchers per team, so 18 catchers at least will be rostered on auction day in a 9-team league. I'll assume a standard 23-man roster per team with 14 batters and 9 pitchers.

    Look at the version when you don't check Force Positions. What's the dollar value of the 18th best catcher? It was a negative number, maybe not exactly minus $18, but something close to that.

    Is that correct? Some fantasy players like those dollar values, and if it helps them build a better team, then that's great.

    By checking Force Positions, the software in essence says that's not correct. Within the context of your league, the 18th best catcher is worth $1. Always. The reason is that the replacement level for catchers is much lower than it is for other batters. The software adds a constant to all catchers until the 18th best catcher is the 126th best batter (9 x 14) and then allocates dollars based on those adjusted values. The result is that catchers are more valuable than before the Force Position box is checked but that other players are worth less. The total dollar amount allocated to batters worth $1 or more should be identical.

    That said, an $18 difference is enormous. You might double-check your settings to make sure everything is right. Even if that's correct, I'm going to guess that the difference will shrink to $2 - $5 by the time we hit opening day (when playing time estimates are more accurate and we know who is on the opening day rosters).

    Typically, only catchers gain value when Force Positions is checked. The replacement level for other batters tends to even out due to positions such as corner infield, middle infield, and utility.
    “26 percent of major league pitchers used in 2017 had undergone Tommy John surgery." -- Jon Roegele

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Quincy, MA
    Posts
    44,570

    Default

    That's the perfect answer from Michael. I'm going to bookmark it.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    1,445

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael@HQ View Post
    I'm going to guess that you have 2 catchers per team, so 18 catchers at least will be rostered on auction day in a 9-team league. I'll assume a standard 23-man roster per team with 14 batters and 9 pitchers.

    Look at the version when you don't check Force Positions. What's the dollar value of the 18th best catcher? It was a negative number, maybe not exactly minus $18, but something close to that.

    Is that correct? Some fantasy players like those dollar values, and if it helps them build a better team, then that's great.

    By checking Force Positions, the software in essence says that's not correct. Within the context of your league, the 18th best catcher is worth $1. Always. The reason is that the replacement level for catchers is much lower than it is for other batters. The software adds a constant to all catchers until the 18th best catcher is the 126th best batter (9 x 14) and then allocates dollars based on those adjusted values. The result is that catchers are more valuable than before the Force Position box is checked but that other players are worth less. The total dollar amount allocated to batters worth $1 or more should be identical.

    That said, an $18 difference is enormous. You might double-check your settings to make sure everything is right. Even if that's correct, I'm going to guess that the difference will shrink to $2 - $5 by the time we hit opening day (when playing time estimates are more accurate and we know who is on the opening day rosters).

    Typically, only catchers gain value when Force Positions is checked. The replacement level for other batters tends to even out due to positions such as corner infield, middle infield, and utility.
    You're assumptions are correct regarding positions on the roster.

    When I don't check Force Positions, the 18th catcher is minus $9, when I check Force Positions, the 18th catcher is $2 (with three $1 catchers also listed...does this mean something is not calculating correctly?).

    All settings are correct (parameters the same for both lists except Force Positions, if that's what you mean by correct.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Quincy, MA
    Posts
    44,570

    Default

    Yeah, having 3 guys at $1 isn't a problem. Nothing about what you're describing seems like a problem with the tool to me. It's just a reflection of how the catcher pool works in your league. Doesn't mean I would pay the "force" values, but you're getting a better understanding of the issues with the C position, which is a good thing.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    38

    Default

    I like baseball HQ but I really wish some of the answers were in basic english That we would understand. I have been asking for years for a simple you tube video navigating thru the site and how to use instead of assuming that we all know. Some of the projection tools and MAC feel like unless your an excel guru, you wont know how to maximize. Not too long ago Ray posted an article in which he discussed parts of the site that were not utilized. Maybe thats the reason. Just my two cents.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Buffalo, NY
    Posts
    1,445

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RAY@HQ View Post
    Yeah, having 3 guys at $1 isn't a problem. Nothing about what you're describing seems like a problem with the tool to me. It's just a reflection of how the catcher pool works in your league. Doesn't mean I would pay the "force" values, but you're getting a better understanding of the issues with the C position, which is a good thing.
    Thanks Ray and Michael!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    24,822

    Default

    My basic English answer would be to check the Force Positions box and trust the software to compute the dollar amounts. Not everyone likes that adjustment though, which is why it's a check box for which the user has control.
    “26 percent of major league pitchers used in 2017 had undergone Tommy John surgery." -- Jon Roegele

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    24,822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RAY@HQ View Post
    That's the perfect answer from Michael. I'm going to bookmark it.
    Thanks, Ray.
    “26 percent of major league pitchers used in 2017 had undergone Tommy John surgery." -- Jon Roegele

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Quincy, MA
    Posts
    44,570

    Default

    We do have videos on the way to illustrate how to use the tools. Coming in january.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    4,243

    Default

    I have a cheap Wilson Ramos in a league, a 12 team one catcher 5X5. Without checking Force Positions he’s at minus $3. With Force Positions he jumps to something like $11. Huge swing.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    3,361

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveL View Post
    I have a cheap Wilson Ramos in a league, a 12 team one catcher 5X5. Without checking Force Positions he’s at minus $3. With Force Positions he jumps to something like $11. Huge swing.
    But, from previous discussion, I would expect the 12th catcher in your league to be worth $1 ( forced positions) . Its not so much the swing, as it is forcing the last catcher to be $1.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    27,149

    Default

    My advice: do it both ways and then come up with your own valuation. These numbers aren't carved into stone. Individual judgment should also be factored into the decision-making.
    "What we need in the United Stated is not hatred; what we need in the United States is not violence and lawlessness but is love, and wisdom and compassion toward one another and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer within our country, whether they be white or whether they be black." -- Robert F. Kennedy, April 4, 1968, from a flatbed truck in Indianapolis, as he informed the crowd of the death of Martin Luther King, Jr.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    4,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Whistler View Post
    But, from previous discussion, I would expect the 12th catcher in your league to be worth $1 ( forced positions) . Its not so much the swing, as it is forcing the last catcher to be $1.
    The difference, or "swing," is a direct result of forcing the replacement-level catcher to be worth $1. When you don't use Force Positions, you assume that the contributions of a player are equally valuable regardless of position. When you use Force Positions, you assume that the value of each player's contributions is relative to the value of the replacement player.

    I just ran CDGs for 15-team mixed, standard 23-man roster, with and without Force Positions. Without Force Positions, Welington Castillo is the worst catcher with a positive value; he is the 12th best in the pool, with a R$ value of $0. His projected stat line (43-18-56-1-.263) is pretty similar to those of Starlin Castro (56-13-60-3-.262), $1, and Jordy Mercer (59-13-62-1-.252), $-1. His stats are similar so his R$ is similar. However, with Force Positions, Castillo's R$ is calculated relative to the replacement-level catcher, Stephen Vogt (29-11-39-0-.247). Vogt's R$ is $1, so Castillo's zooms to $10. (Without Force Positions, Vogt's R$ is $-9.) Castro and Mercer, and every other hitter, gets knocked down about $1 so that the formula can allocate extra dollars to catchers.

    In both cases, Castillo is worth $9 more than Vogt. Don't-Force-Positions says, "If Castillo were an outfielder, you'd only pay a buck, so don't pay more than a buck for him." Force-Positions says, "Someone is going to have to roster Vogt, and they can't pay less than $1 for him, so $1 is what they should pay. And in a world where Vogt earns $1, you should pay $10 to get Castillo, because he's that much better than Vogt."

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dunedin, FL within 5 miles of Jays and Phils spring training
    Posts
    986

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PHIL@HQ View Post
    My advice: do it both ways and then come up with your own valuation. These numbers aren't carved into stone. Individual judgment should also be factored into the decision-making.
    Exactly. My own preference is not to force positions. If I'm in an NFBC-style draft and considering a catcher vs an OF, I want to see numbers that illustrate their pure value. Then I'll decide how much I'm willing to give up to get a catcher in that round.
    2016 Winner of 4 NFBC $150 Draft Champion Leagues (total of 6 entered)

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    254

    Default

    Using the thread...
    Is it possible to add the function to remove duplicates only showing the primary position in the CDG grid?
    On a selfish level...
    I turn on the eligibility, so it displays the player has multiple eligibility, but I find the player in 2, 3, etc...columns as showing the position a little deeper by tier than in reality.
    I have also forgot to cross out or highlight the player in all the applicable tiers leaving me to believe I still had depth somewhere I did not.
    I’ve used it since 2011, so it’s obviously not a huge factor.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    254

    Default

    Wow, this was for the “CDG additions” thread. I’ll move it if necessary. Making a mess here


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Old England
    Posts
    429

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JonE View Post
    His stats are similar so his R$ is similar.
    Although the above was written about catchers, I am very confused about the results of my CDG for a standard 5x5 league for what are, IMHO, fairly similar players. Taking Runs/HR/RBI/Sb/Avg splits on a balanced valuation with no forced positions:

    Player A is 80 / 28 / 87 / 3 / 259
    Player B is 62 / 18 / 72 / 4 / 272

    Both are 3Bs yet Player A is valued at $11 while Player B is $4!

    I can see that Player A is forecasting better results in more categories, yet I don't quite understand why he is almost three times the total value.

    Incidentally, for those of us who like that sort of thing, Player A's MM rating is 60, Player B's is 70.

    Am I missing something fairly obvious?

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    4,286

    Default

    I don't think those are as "similar" as you think. 30% more R, 56% more HR, 21% more RBI -- that's a lot of additional value.

    I also wonder how many ABs the players have. Player B's higher average is worth less if you get fewer ABs from him. The value of BA is pretty high in the HQ formula and it's easy to overlook, even for longtime readers such as you and me.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    24,822

    Default

    Adding to JonE's response, realize that the dollar allocation doesn't exactly claim that Player A's projection is roughly three times as valuable as Player B's projection is. Instead, the dollar allocation is saying that the distance between Player A's projection minus the replacement level is roughly three times as great as the distance between Player B's projection minus the replacement level.
    “26 percent of major league pitchers used in 2017 had undergone Tommy John surgery." -- Jon Roegele

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Old England
    Posts
    429

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael@HQ View Post
    Adding to JonE's response, realize that the dollar allocation doesn't exactly claim that Player A's projection is roughly three times as valuable as Player B's projection is. Instead, the dollar allocation is saying that the distance between Player A's projection minus the replacement level is roughly three times as great as the distance between Player B's projection minus the replacement level.
    Ah, now that is a very good point. That makes significantly more sense to me now. Thanks for that.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Old England
    Posts
    429

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JonE View Post
    I don't think those are as "similar" as you think. 30% more R, 56% more HR, 21% more RBI -- that's a lot of additional value.

    I also wonder how many ABs the players have. Player B's higher average is worth less if you get fewer ABs from him. The value of BA is pretty high in the HQ formula and it's easy to overlook, even for longtime readers such as you and me.
    Thanks JonE. I see your point although I would add that if I hit 1 HR and you hit 2 HRs then you would be offering 100% more HRs than me; which shows that while percentage differences are informative, they only paint part of the picture.

    Both are projected at over 500 ABs although one, as you might have guessed, is just at that age where decline starts to set in.

    I'm comparing Kyle Seager with Evan Longoria, and the surprise was confirmed when I checked their $ values over the previous two years. 2016 CDG gave me Seager at $14, Longoria at $10, for 2017 the split was $16 and $10, and now while Seager has stayed in double-digits, Longoria has plummeted to $4.

    Can AT&T Park have that much effect on his output? Maybe it will!

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    4,286

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Penfold View Post
    Thanks JonE. I see your point although I would add that if I hit 1 HR and you hit 2 HRs then you would be offering 100% more HRs than me; which shows that while percentage differences are informative, they only paint part of the picture.
    Sure. But both 1 HR and 2 HR are still below replacement level. Once you put it in terms of replacement level, 30% more output can lead to 275% increase in price.

    IOW: Michael put it much better.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Old England
    Posts
    429

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JonE View Post
    Sure. But both 1 HR and 2 HR are still below replacement level. Once you put it in terms of replacement level, 30% more output can lead to 275% increase in price.
    Very good point, I keep forgetting to apply "replacement level" to my thought-process.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Any updates on the videos you mentioned ealier in this thread?

Similar Threads

  1. Custom Draft Guide Question
    By Steve NY in forum HQ Tech Support
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-22-2014, 01:29 PM
  2. Another Custom Draft Guide Question
    By RDeschain in forum Editorial HelpLine
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-15-2013, 05:04 PM
  3. Custom Draft Guide Question
    By jncole in forum Editorial HelpLine
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-06-2008, 07:46 PM
  4. Another Custom Draft Guide question....
    By JB_Yardwork in forum Editorial HelpLine
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-07-2007, 01:29 PM

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •