Sorry for the delay, somethings popped up that I had to take care of.
Those who guessed Sheffield were correct, and by a rather large margin. Five tool players get the advantage in this kind of setup, simply because a slow power hitter is the equivalant of punting a category.
what happens if you include pitching? how high does prior mark? how about *cough* bh kim?
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll drown because you forgot to teach him to swim.
[url=http://www.indra.com/8ball/front.html]Invaluable Fantasy Baseball Resource[/url]
matmat wrote:what happens if you include pitching? how high does prior mark? how about *cough* bh kim?
That is where I get to leave off for the follow-up article. Right now the evaluation system I am working on appears to be open ended enough that pitchers should work in fine, its just hammering out the finer details and checking for historical accuracy.
I would guess Gagne would have been the highest rated pitcher. Saves by a huge margin, and his IP were enough to significantly impact WHIP. Plus he racked up K's galore, more than many starters. Absolutely unbelievable year for a closer.
thehat wrote:I would guess Gagne would have been the highest rated pitcher. Saves by a huge margin, and his IP were enough to significantly impact WHIP. Plus he racked up K's galore, more than many starters. Absolutely unbelievable year for a closer.
Without running the numbers I would actually guess that a MR would win. Maybe a Hawkins or Marte since they vultured quite a few wins last season and both got a couple of saves to avoid the last place log jam with all the SP. In some ways the tests simulate fantasy baseball ok since being overly dominant in any catergory is not worth alot. Of course there are some major flaws with it (especially when it comes to pitchers) but it is interesting (at least to me) and serves as a decent comparison for the actual evaluation system I am working on.