Use fantasy points instead of dollar amounts, and you will be on to something.
And factor in the 2002 and 2003 seasons as well, and put more weight on 2004.
Most Accurate MLB Experts Past 4 Years
Moderator: Baseball Moderators
Cornbread Maxwell wrote:Maybe one of you guys can help me out, but as I noted before, I am not sure SD is a good measure for some things. Specifically, is SD a good measure when the sample size is not a normal bell curve?
Can you fellas tell me if I am wrong here?
If you have 4-6 players of similar value at the high end of the range, then 10-12 with a significant drop afterward, wouldnt the mean by which the SD is derived be completely irrelevant?
RugbyD wrote:Cornbread Maxwell wrote:Maybe one of you guys can help me out, but as I noted before, I am not sure SD is a good measure for some things. Specifically, is SD a good measure when the sample size is not a normal bell curve?
Can you fellas tell me if I am wrong here?
If you have 4-6 players of similar value at the high end of the range, then 10-12 with a significant drop afterward, wouldnt the mean by which the SD is derived be completely irrelevant?
You'd like to have a sample size of 30+ to begin with. I haven't run any devs yet but it wouldn't surprise me if some came out in a skewed/lognormal distribution because there are no negative raw value numbers. A double hump might pop up as well, but that would just help in solidifying a VORP/tiered draft strategy for that position.
Cornbread Maxwell wrote:I guess thats my point - if you need to use a sample size of at least 30 then what you are doing is taking all of the starting players in baseball for a certain position - of course this wouldnt be a wise thing to do since in fantasy rarely do you go over the top 15-20 unless you are in a very deep league. Since the sample size is so small, and what you are essentially trying to do is rate the top half of each position, than bell curve calculations (stan. dev.) becomes a bit obsolete. That is why I would endorse a tiered system over using stand dev.
RugbyD wrote:30+ is ideal, but 15-20 will do. Using std.dev is essentially the same as using tiers because all a tier is is a specific range if std.devs from the mean. The distribution just helps establish the appropriate tiers. The 1B/DH, OF, SP and MR distributions would paint the prettiest pictures of course.
Cornbread Maxwell wrote:but the problem is that SD is based on a normal bell curve, and I argue that with a sample size of 15-20 of the best players at a position, there is rarely going to be a normal bell curve.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest