Ranking the Top 50 Yahoo Players - ROTO Style

[jake_twothousandfive]

Great work
It is really cool to see it in this sort of way.

Whats next?
Top 25 Starters and Closers?

I could do that if there's any interest in seeing it. I wanted to see how this went over before I put in the time to rank a lot of players.

[markj11]

You wouldn't even want to see how far ahead Pujols is in a league that also counts OPS, BB, and K. It is almost unfair.

[JMB05]

How does Pujols rank in the middle for stolen bases? My friend Carl Crawford says you list is no good.

His 10 SBs ranks him in the middle amongst these players. Carl Crawford's 40 SBs were the best of the group, netting him 50 points for the category. Pujols was tied for 22nd in this category so he earned 28.5 points.

In terms of SBs, Pujols is obviously behind players like Crawford, Ellsbury, and B.J. Upton, but he's also obviously ahead of players like Fielder, Morneau, Teix, VMart, etc.

Just look at the spreadsheet.

Oh I fully understand what you did. I guess I was too vague. I don't know about other Roto leagues but in my league(s) SB are harder to come by thus more valuable. So a guy having 10 shouldn't be able to score more than half of the total amount allotted in that category when he is 33 behind the leader.

But this is also why Crawford is ranked higher on every other list compiled thus far.

[bigh0rt]

One problem that arises here is it doesn't account, when giving the scores out that the difference between a score of 50 and 49 in SB between Crawford and Ellsbury is 6 SB, while the difference between a score of 46 and 45 between Figgins and Pierre is just 1 SB, etc.

[jaykay123]

Very nice job.

I actually was thinking the same thing as the previous two posters when looking at your chart. However, since the thought has already been raised, how about I put forward a suggestion to addressing it:

Take the top N yahoo ranked players (N = (S=number of bat spots per team) X (T=number of teams)). For each category (HR, SB, RBI, whatever), take the average for that stat over those N players. Now, for each category, the stat associated with each player equals Z=(stat average)X(S-1)+(specific player's stat). Applying your same methodology from the original post on the resultant Z's provides you with a ranking that roughly takes into account scarcity of the category.

If you want to go even further, you can take account the position eligibility of the player too. Maybe perform the same calculation above for each position separately (i.e. using N = (number of 2B's per team) X T). Anyhow, this can go on ad nauseam (and may have already- ).

Of course, I'm not suggesting you do it (although it really shouldn't take too long to do since you already have most of the bones). Just putting a thought out there...

[jake_twothousandfive]

I think some of your are missing the fact that I wasn't trying to create the perfect ranking system. I simply used the basic scoring format found in any roto league.

I'll probably work to improve them in the future (there are some pretty good suggestions here) but I was mostly just curious as to what kind of results a ranking format like this would yield.

[jaykay123]

I think some of your are missing the fact that I wasn't trying to create the perfect ranking system. I simply used the basic scoring format found in any roto league.

yeah, i know. it's just that i thought i'd take the opportunity to geek out.

[JMB05]

I think some of your are missing the fact that I wasn't trying to create the perfect ranking system. I simply used the basic scoring format found in any roto league.

I'll probably work to improve them in the future (there are some pretty good suggestions here) but I was mostly just curious as to what kind of results a ranking format like this would yield.

You did a good job. That being said I had a realization at work yesterday about this thread. Do you own Pujols?

I am a STL Cardinals freak. I love me some Pujols. But I think that this methodology used to create your list was just to make Pujols look that much better than anyone else, rather than to find a good way to compare Roto players.

Am I close?

[jake_twothousandfive]

I think some of your are missing the fact that I wasn't trying to create the perfect ranking system. I simply used the basic scoring format found in any roto league.

I'll probably work to improve them in the future (there are some pretty good suggestions here) but I was mostly just curious as to what kind of results a ranking format like this would yield.

You did a good job. That being said I had a realization at work yesterday about this thread. Do you own Pujols?

I am a STL Cardinals freak. I love me some Pujols. But I think that this methodology used to create your list was just to make Pujols look that much better than anyone else, rather than to find a good way to compare Roto players.

Am I close?

Um no, you're not close.

[jake_twothousandfive]

I think some of your are missing the fact that I wasn't trying to create the perfect ranking system. I simply used the basic scoring format found in any roto league.

I'll probably work to improve them in the future (there are some pretty good suggestions here) but I was mostly just curious as to what kind of results a ranking format like this would yield.

You did a good job. That being said I had a realization at work yesterday about this thread. Do you own Pujols?

I am a STL Cardinals freak. I love me some Pujols. But I think that this methodology used to create your list was just to make Pujols look that much better than anyone else, rather than to find a good way to compare Roto players.

Am I close?

Um no, you're not close.

In fact, that's a pretty rediculous/insulting thing to say.