teddy ballgame wrote:Good post. I even do use the O-Ranks a little bit. It's no different than any other cheat sheet you will find. There are obviously problems with it, just like any cheat sheet, but it's just another useful source out there to look at.
The only way I'd find it useful would be if I were in a league where I knew somebody valued it as a resource and I could somehow exploit it. Otherwise, its method of ranking players is a joke, and as bleach said above, ESPN's is far more in line with my thought process, and well, one has to be more accurate/useful.
Position by position it's just as good as any other cheat sheet out there. I rarely see players very far out of order if you sort by position and O-Rank.
I think you meant rank not O-Rank? O-Rank factors in the last 3 years, so guys having a bad season are still way too high...the only time O-Ranks are helpful is during the draft and maybe April while things settle out.
Here are some O-Rank v. Rank examples: M. Young: 26/116 E. Chavez 40/331 M. Ensberg 38/281 Morneau 192/19 J Dye 221/21
Yeah, those are from a while ago. If you sort by position, I doubt many would have argued that Young was the 2nd best SS, maybe even 1st, or that Ensberg and Chavez were in the middle of the pack for 3B when the season started.
Yahoo ranks (NOT O-ranks) are more useful if you use the filter to limit the time period to a month. This makes it a lot easier to see who's currently hot (or not). Sorting by the individual scoring cats is useful also.
So at any rate, does anyone know the actual formula used? Would be helpful as a basis for a little project of mine...I'm trying to develop my own statistical management system using historical data and some econometric analysis to numerically get a measure of "streakiness" and when a player is hot...idea is to use historical data to figure out how clustered a player's production is, how long they stay "hot", etc., then create an engine that will evaluate a team based on these factors to aid in starting/benching/free agent pickup, etc.
They are off, no two ways about it. the thing is, they are off for everybody.
I use them in a relative, rather than absoloute sense. I think its ballpark enough, especially if you use last month, which is pretty much how I use them.
I don't understand the bashing either. So, don't use them then. As long as you throw out relievers and water down the effect of stolen bases, they are adequate. the thing is, those two player types are the hardes to gauge in my mind anyway. Using ranks for basestealers and saves is kind of silly anyway, since every league's economic variance on those categories is too hard to value anyway. At this point, you should be able to do the math yourself to determine if you should take a specialty player yourself. If you need steals THAT bad, you can easily judge how much a basestealer will move you up anyway. sometimes, these players are semi-worthless since if there are three or four teams hording that cat anyway, what's the point? I think the value of those guys fluctuates more than the others. And papelbon is not a top 5pitcher, let alone #4 overall. nathan is number 5, which I think is MORe accurate, because 6 wins are nice. But I think as long as everyone realizes their shortcomings, they are fine to use as a "first cut" method of investigating a trade. Then, if it is close or passes muster, then you look deeper.