Yahoo! Rankings...

[tinfoilxtouch]

The trendy thing here in the Cafe seems to be bashing Yahoo rankings, along with anyone who so much as looks at them. Now, the "O-Ranks" are subjective and ridiculous, but the in-season Y! ranks seem to be pretty useful.

Everyone needs to understand the difference between evaluating how well a player has performed versus how good a player is. Is Chris Young really the 69th best player in baseball? No. Has he contributed the same numbers you'd expect from the 69th pick in a draft? Yes.

Basically, I think people need to stop freaking out whenever someone uses the word "Yahoo" and "Rank" in the same post. If you are stating Chris Young has been surprisingly effective this season, his 69th rank in Yahoo is solid evidence. If you’re stating Chris Young is an elite pitcher because of his 69th rank, that’s a crazy argument.

[sportsguy138]

sadly many people (especially some n00bs answerin questions in thee draft forum) depend very heavily on those rankings..

[byfrcp]

I agree, while "O Ranks" mean nothing to me the "Rank" tells me where that player stands as opposed to other, and does so effectively. The system is pretty good, because there are something like 4 times as many homers in a season as there are stolen bases, so it gives a certain amount of point for each stat, adds it up and gives you the number that they rank at in the MLB. So the actuall Rank is spot on for anyone looking at a standard 5 x 5 league.

[bleach168]

I prefer the ESPN player rater. There are some big differences between the two and they both can't be right.

[jake_harv88]

The trendy thing here in the Cafe seems to be bashing Yahoo rankings, along with anyone who so much as looks at them. Now, the "O-Ranks" are subjective and ridiculous, but the in-season Y! ranks seem to be pretty useful.

Everyone needs to understand the difference between evaluating how well a player has performed versus how good a player is. Is Chris Young really the 69th best player in baseball? No. Has he contributed the same numbers you'd expect from the 69th pick in a draft? Yes.

Basically, I think people need to stop freaking out whenever someone uses the word "Yahoo" and "Rank" in the same post. If you are stating Chris Young has been surprisingly effective this season, his 69th rank in Yahoo is solid evidence. If you’re stating Chris Young is an elite pitcher because of his 69th rank, that’s a crazy argument.

well put. I've done my fair share of bashing of yahoo rankings but the in season ranks are useful. To add to what you have said here it will also help because it helps show who is over-performing and under-performing. For example Dye is currently ranked 16th. Is he really the 16th best player in baseball, i most definately think not. Although hes a good player this would be a good indication of him over-achieving and it might be a good time to sell high. However this pertains more to the beginning of the season because as the season winds down the ranks will change less and less, but the ranks are a helpful indication of such performances...

[teddyballgamemvp]

If the in-season rankings varied based on the scoring in your league and you used categories that better identify quality pitchers than things like saves and wins, it would be more reflective of how good a pitcher is. Young, BTW, is a Top 30 starter. If he lowers his HR/9, he'll be very good.

[Niffoc4]

As long as you use standard 5x5 cats, the rankings are fine, but in my 7x7 league the rankings stay the same, though obviously the extra categories change where players should be ranked significantly. So, make sure you are aware that the rankings are based on 5x5 stats, and not on your specific situation.

[teddy ballgame]

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.

[bigh0rt]

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.

[teddyballgamemvp]

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.

It's a half-way decent cheat sheet for a draft to start a season. After that, it's garbage and will actually do harm. Willingham was a rookie (48 ABs) entering the year and his O-Rank is twice as good as his actual 5x5 rank-- because of hype.