Mastersball Fantasy Forum

I play in an NL only 11 team 5x5 league $260 cap. Based on last year's auction results I'm ranking 150 hitters and 103 pitchers at a 60/40 ratio.

I followed the valuation process outlined on this site. I started with my pitchers and the total value of the 103 pitchers in the positive player pool came out to $718. However, the money I have allotted for pitchers is $1144. This discrepancy is because every starting pitcher has negative replacement values in the S and HD categories while every relief pitcher has negative WQS (Wins + Quality Starts) replacement values. (The other two categories are ERA and WHIP). How can I remedy this situation so that I have a zero-sum economy with the sum of my positive player pool totaling $1144? Should I just multiply every pitcher's value by 1144/718 to make up the difference?

For instance/another issue, Jameson Taillon is worth $3.84 in WQS, but loses $2.79 of that because he will not be earning any HD or S this year. Then because his ERA and WHIP are slightly above baseline (multiplied by 163 innings), his overall value comes out to -($2.82), but he will of course be valuable in my league. Meanwhile John Brebbia is valued at +$2.85 by virtue of putting up baseline HD and S while having a better than average WHIP and ERA over 44 IP, but he will certainly not be picked up in the auction. So even if I do just multiply by 1144/718, I'm still having an issue of too many relief pitchers and not enough starters in my positive player pool.

Any ideas for me?

Without knowing exactly what you've done I can't say for sure, but the answer is not multiplying by that factor. There is something wrong with your setup.

I followed the steps found here http://www.mastersball.com/products/Pla ... uation.pdf. Short of me sending you the EXCEL file I guess we'll never know what I messed up.

But at least theoretically, I'm confused as how the $1144 will all be accounted for in the positive player pool. My replacement values stabilized around 6.6 WQS, 9.8 HD, 0.9 S, -0.4 Extra ER, 1.1 Extra BB+H. So any 5th starter who will earn 7 or more WQS will have part of the WQS money (1/5 * 1144) allotted to him, but due to probably a 5.00 ERA will not be part of the positive player pool. Plus any reliever in the positive player pool with less than 7 WQS will carry a negative dollar amount in that category. How is the money lost from those back end starters and relievers brought back into the economy? Or am I doing something fundamentally wrong?

I hesitate to do this, especially for a non-Platinum member since I can't do this for everyone -- but send your sheet to todd at mastersball dot com.

However, to answer your question, a pitcher can earn a positive amount in a category, but still be negative overall, while the total of that category remains correct.

Why 150 hitters, 103 pitchers and 60/40? You should be running numbers for exactly enough players to be on the active rosters.

What's the exact roster composition?

What are the exact five categories?

Thanks.

We have a 23-man active roster: 13 hitters (2 C, 1B, 2B, SS, 3B, CI, MI, 5 OF) + 9 pitchers + either a U hitter or an extra pitcher. Based on last year's auction, 7 of the teams used a utility hitter while 4 chose a 10th pitcher. 11*13 + 7 = 150 hitters and 11*9 + 4 = 103 pitchers.

I summed the actual salaries spent on the opening day active roster for each team and 60% of the total $ went to hitters while 40% to pitchers. I know convention is 67/33 or 69/31, but I figured I'd go with how my league actually spends their money.

One more - what are the exact categories?

WQS (wins + quality starts), WHIP, ERA, Holds, Saves

AVG, NetRn (Runs - HR), HR, RBI, SB

Actually figured that out -- there was a column with another calculation that was throwing me.

Scoring that favors relievers requires some common sense/logic when setting replacement - getting there, been awhile since I did this

Probably that part where I summed the WQS + HD + S for the initial sort. There was something in the article about doing that (except the example was 4x4, so it said to do Wins + 2*Saves) so that the closers wouldn't get lost.

Yeah, makes sense. My default sort to get things back in order is ERA, seems to work.