"Know Thy League" meets CVRC

[viper]

I play three 10-team leagues [AL-only and NL-only] where IP replaces Ks. All the other categories are normal for 5x5 leagues. We also have no bench which does impact the auctions.

These league have two owners who totally ignore mRs, Setup guys and closers. They are all SPs. Additionally, even the best of the non-closers will go for $2 max. The normal mix is 65-70 SPs, 14 or 16 closers and the few rest being $2/$1 non-closers.

Replacing the K column with IPs is easy. The problem is that those quality non-closers seem to have significant impacts on the projected dollar values. Also, intuitively I feel that having two teams only picking Sps would have an impact.

Can I remove the total file of pitchers from the 150-200 normally used down to maybe 100-110 without impacting the integrity of your replacement concepts?

Since the top SPs "always" go for $4-$8 more than CVRC values in year's past, is there a way to factor that in? I have previously tried using a 1.3 factor for IP and a .7 for Saves but that doesn't help all that much.

I guess my 2011 posting has started.

[Todd Zola]

All we can do is "trick" the CVRC into artificially producing values that match what your league does. If you feel more comfortable doing that, I can probably do some tweaks on my end to customize a CVRC to pump up high end values.

But, doing this sort of shows a lack of understanding what the CVRC is producing and how to use it. You need two value to best plan your strategy. Value-in-a-vacuum, which the CVRC provides, and market value, which is what the league is willing to pay. You lose the "VIAV" by having the role of the CVRC try to mimic the market. You know what people would pay IF THEY USED THE SAME PROJECTIONS YOU DO, but that's about it. And if you already know that top pitchers go for $4-$8 more, you already know the CVRC will tell you.

And FWIW, in any format, the high end players are always going to go for more than dollar valuation systems set for prices.

But, post the league parameters and I can see if I can figure out a way to have the CVRC produce values closer to your market value.

[viper]

I agree with the VIAV concept and that is what I ended up doing last year. I am one of maybe two who drafts MRs with the purpose of improving ERA & WHIP.

Meaningful League parameters:
$260 auction - total redraft every year
10 teams
categories are W, SV, IP, ERA & WHIP
no bench - only reserves are DLed players and players sent to minors during season. You cannot draft a player already assigned to minors.
weekly lineup
Sunday FAAB

Know Thy League parameters:
for NL-only version there are two big Philly fans who have a slight draft bias
for AL-only version, there is one big Yankee fan who has a slight draft bias
even though we are a Washington based league, there is no Nats bias
two teams will not draft a closer or primary setup man - they draft all SPs
two teams essentially sit out the first 20 players offered
I am one of two teams that will end up with 5+ $1 players - at least one will be a pitcher

[Todd Zola]

Got it -- I am hammering out profiles. After they are done, I will focus on some of the CVRC questions, should be early-mid Feb.

[aburt19]

I am also in a 10 team AL only league where a couple of owners will draft alll starters, even if they are lousy starters
from the Royals. My experience has been the decemt starters, not just the top starters, go for higher prices than the CVRC
would show. A starter that CVRC shows as worth $10 will normally go for $11-$12 (no inflation). Relievers that are not
closers always go for values below what the CVRC says, other than those that have a chance to be a closer due to
the current closer's role being shaky.

In order to get a starter, I've had to adjust the values of middle relivers and starters to adjust to the realities of the
league. Daniel Bard may show a value of $7, but he won't go for more than $3-$4 and may go for less. I hadn't thought
of changing the category weights to take care of this. Instead I just take the middle relievers and lower the prices. I
normally end up with $25-$30 that I spread among the top 15-25 starters.

It's not scientific, but it seems to work. Without it, I would never get a decent starter for the value listed on the CVRC.

[Todd Zola]

There is a quote somewhere by kjduke from last spring that sums this up better than I ever could -- I'll do some searching and hopefully come up with it.

[Todd Zola]

ok, here it is. This came from a discussion on HR v SB, but can be applied anywhere

Code: Select all

What it comes down to is where you believe you can get the stats you need. If you think you can get SBs late, that reduces the value of a SB during the draft (however, the value remains constant across all positions). Likewise, if you believe you can get power late, power is devalued and SBs have greater value. Herein lies the critical distinction between intrinsic value and market value, and to address some of Todd's earlier comments on value ...

The intrinsic value of a SB or HR is not reduced because of the draft dynamic --- the intrinsic value is that value which is contributed toward achieving a goal (points in league standings). The market value, however, can and often will be reduced based on the draft dynamic (i.e., if you can get SBs late, their market value is lower). As a professional portfolio manager, I am trying to acquire the greatest intrinsic value that I can when buying stocks while paying the lowest possible price in market value; same thing we're all trying to do in fantasy baseball. But if you are referring to both intrinsic value and market value as just "value", you'll confuse the hell out of yourself and everyone else.

KJ actually introduces a 3rd "definition" of value: intrinsic value.

INTRINSIC is how much value a stat has to YOUR team.
VIAV is what the CVRC spits out, and is value assigned according to percentage of available stats
MARKET is what the league pays

People want the CVRC to estimate INTRINSIC and MARKET. My honest gut reaction is I don't think we should try to do that, I learned a long time ago

1. The customer is always right
2. When the customer is wrong, see #1

Obviously, I am not saying anyone is wrong. And I KNOW you guys are smart enough to realize you will need the human touch and not just rely on adjusted numbers spit out by the CVRC, so I am more than willing to figure out a way to have it mimic INTRINSIC and/or MARKET.

[aburt19]

I guess what I am saying is that I know that I'm paying more than a starter is "worth" in a perfect world where everyone
values players at actual value. I hope that I make that up when I get a couple of middle relievers at $2-$5 less than what
CVRC says their value is. I still have the actual CVRC value as a starting point, but I adjust on my draft sheet that I use
at the auction.

[Todd Zola]

I guess what I am saying is that I know that I'm paying more than a starter is "worth" in a perfect world where everyone
values players at actual value. I hope that I make that up when I get a couple of middle relievers at $2-$5 less than what
CVRC says their value is. I still have the actual CVRC value as a starting point, but I adjust on my draft sheet that I use
at the auction.

Understood.

You have a feel for the INTRINSIC value of each stat or category to you as well as a feel for how to acquire as much INTRINSIC value at or below what the league sets its MARKET VALUE.

The CVRC is a starting point, or a means of defining relative rank of players.

I think I know what I am putting "Under the Microscope" for tomorrow

[viper]

this is the only place where you can find conversations like this. It is why Mastersball is the best of sites.