Are you comparing Alex's bid prices with the prices my projections generate?The answer to Rotoman's first question is yes. I'm interested in what Rotoman's projections equal in terms of Patton $ prices, since that's what I'm using to measure how well or poorly players do.
That's fertile ground for discussion, and I'm glad to see that my projection anticipated Grady Sizemore's struggles thus far, but my bid price for Sizemore (posted on The Guide's website on March 24th, was $38, just like Alex's.
Why would I regress Grady in my projection, but not so much in my bid price? The brutal answer is that our projections are at best rough calculations, and the fact is that a fairly large percent of what is going to happen in a baseball season for players is unknowable.
And another large percent is subject to random fluctuations.
Rotoman answers the second part of his own question, but I feel the need (as I often do) to elaborate.
Rotoman's methodology is similar to the methodology that most touts use, and a large part of that methodology assumes regression to the mean. Rotoman's 2009 projection for Grady Sizemore was 24/70/27/.269 in 650 AB. Those are great numbers, but they assume a 9 HR, 20 RBI, and 11 SB dip from 2008.
As it turns out, this somewhat dour projection looks pretty good on August 25. Sizemore is on pace to finish with a 22/78/14/.245 season. That's even worse than Rotoman's conservative projection and well off of Sizemore's 33/90/38/.268 from 2008.
So why is it that I still feel like Rotoman's projection for Sizemore was too conservative?
Upside - Sizemore entered the year as a 26-year-old OF. He might not be due to get a lot better, but based on Sizemore's age it felt like there was a little upside here.
Market Price - It didn't seem like $29 would get Sizemore. You would either have to bid in the high-30s or let him walk.
It's important to point out - as Rotoman did in his last post about pricing - that his bid limit on Sizemore was $38.
I'm OK with all of this, except for the discrepancies between the $ earned and the bid limits. If I truly believe that Sizemore is only going to earn $29, my bid is probably going to sit at $32. In other words, if I truly believe that Sizemore's stats are going to be worth $29, then $32 is as high as I'd possibly go; even for a player who earned $39 the year before, you don't want to pay too much if you believe you're going to take a loss.
I'm of the philosophy that your $ value should be close to your bid limit (particularly for hitters) so that you're not bidding on players you don't like based on their projections.
2 comments:
The reason I don't think it's important for projected stats to match the bid price, in fact the reason why they shouldn't, is because your bid prices should incorporate the the wisdom of the room.
If I assume Sizemore is going to cost $40 this year, but I'm down on him and project him to earn $29, if I price him at $29 I'm giving myself $11 to spend that doesn't exist. In other words, I'll be budgeting my guys as if $29 will be spent on Sizemore, but when his name comes out I'll have to write $40 next to him, with a big (+11). It throws off the budgeting.
For a player I'm down on I trim a few bucks from my bid prices, so I'm unlikely to get him. I might even write a note that says, Don't spend more than $29.
Otherwise, I'll have way more budgeted for the guys I like and will be seriously inclined to overbid for them, based on all this apparent money I've created to spend on them.
Figuring out what will be spent forces discipline and a more realistic approach to budgeting.
Nice pic...
Post a Comment