- Lower the value, better the prospect?
- The levels correspond to minor league levels (e.g., 1=AAA, 2=AA, 3=A and lower)?
- No Chris Carter? (The Oakland one)
Lawr's Top 250
-
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 1574
- Joined: January 3rd, 2009, 12:09 am
Lawr's Top 250
Like what I see so far - three quick questions though:
These are my views based on my own opinions and observations - your mileage may vary.
"KNOW THY LEAGUE" - the Forum Funklord - 4/13/2009
Fantasy is managing stats ... roto is managing teams
"KNOW THY LEAGUE" - the Forum Funklord - 4/13/2009
Fantasy is managing stats ... roto is managing teams
Re: Lawr's Top 250
first thx.
and, exaclty. when i first started theorizing this, i realized success at a young age was a key indicator. so, instead of weighing the ultimate factor on a high number, i use the age as a base, and geared the remaining formulas down (eg, the lower the skill set rating, the better) and did the same for level of play (so, someone who played the whole season in A would get a 3, while someone who played the whole season at AAA would get a 1).
dunno why chris carter missed. age is critical. but, if you look closely, the difference even between #1 and #250 is not that much. buster posey missed too. and, i used to search out such players and give cred for say playing in the majors. but, no more as the numbers usually proved to be a clear barometer.
and, exaclty. when i first started theorizing this, i realized success at a young age was a key indicator. so, instead of weighing the ultimate factor on a high number, i use the age as a base, and geared the remaining formulas down (eg, the lower the skill set rating, the better) and did the same for level of play (so, someone who played the whole season in A would get a 3, while someone who played the whole season at AAA would get a 1).
dunno why chris carter missed. age is critical. but, if you look closely, the difference even between #1 and #250 is not that much. buster posey missed too. and, i used to search out such players and give cred for say playing in the majors. but, no more as the numbers usually proved to be a clear barometer.
-
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 1574
- Joined: January 3rd, 2009, 12:09 am
Re: Lawr's Top 250
I can't fault you on your own methodology - but how a 23 year old like Chris Carter and his numbers miss out entirely and older guys like Coughlin, Strieby, Huffman and Roy make it surprises me.lawr wrote:first thx.
and, exaclty. when i first started theorizing this, i realized success at a young age was a key indicator. so, instead of weighing the ultimate factor on a high number, i use the age as a base, and geared the remaining formulas down (eg, the lower the skill set rating, the better) and did the same for level of play (so, someone who played the whole season in A would get a 3, while someone who played the whole season at AAA would get a 1).
dunno why chris carter missed. age is critical. but, if you look closely, the difference even between #1 and #250 is not that much. buster posey missed too. and, i used to search out such players and give cred for say playing in the majors. but, no more as the numbers usually proved to be a clear barometer.
These are my views based on my own opinions and observations - your mileage may vary.
"KNOW THY LEAGUE" - the Forum Funklord - 4/13/2009
Fantasy is managing stats ... roto is managing teams
"KNOW THY LEAGUE" - the Forum Funklord - 4/13/2009
Fantasy is managing stats ... roto is managing teams
Re: Lawr's Top 250
The system uses a set of filters. Unfortunately for Posey, one of the filters is Low-A ball. His performance before he went to Triple-A is not included. I don't have an answer for Chris Carter.
JP
JP