Those that took our
advice on UMA last season, likely capitalized on the
devaluation of pitchers. Fortunately for us the same situation
is developing in many drafts across the country. This
devaluation on the top end also causes a devaluation of the
breakout type pitchers. Let's take a look at the concept of
valuation between hitters and pitchers using updated data.
First we'll look at the argument on why Hitters deserve more
value than Pitchers: 1. Hitters are more predictable than
Pitchers. True...but let's try to quantify how much more
valuable. Below are a series of charts showing how reliable
each position's players are in replicating production from
one year to the next. The baseline for this analysis is
fantasy value based on a typical 5x5 league that starts (1
C, 1 1B, 1 2B, 1 3B, 1 SS, 1 MI, 1 CI, 1 UT, 6 SP, 3 RP). The 3 columns
show the % of players at each position that came within
20%/35%/50% of their previous season's fantasy value.
The last column shows, how much value the top 50% of each
position lost the following season. And yes, with few
exceptions, the top half of
players at each and every position will lose value the
following season. The goal is to minimize that loss among
the top 1/2 and get undervalued players to make up that
difference. Let me start off by saying that the
results you see on a yearly basis are less than a valid sample size on a
position by position basis. We are looking at the typical
number of starters at each position, and to see that the top
1/2 of 1st baseman (12) in 2006 lost 54% of their value, one
must keep in mind that a couple of season ending injuries
can adversely affect the whole group. We'll get a clearer
picture when we combine the last 3 years in accumulation
(down further below), while also combining all of the
hitters and compare them to pitchers as the sample sizes (N)
will then be considered satisfactory. We are also going to
ignore relief pitchers for this exercise.
In observing the first year (2006
compared to 2007) of this study we see that the top half of
a typical league's Starting Pitchers didn't fair too poorly
against other positions (25% loss in fantasy value).
The top half of 3rd baseman, Shortstops, and 1st baseman all
lost more value. If you are wondering why catchers only lost
a pedestrian 16% of value, consider that we are only looking
at a small set (the top 6 in this case) and outside of the
top 2 or 3, most catchers have minimal value. So in essence
there isn't much room to fall.
In observing the second year (2007
compared to 2008) of this study, outside of 1st baseman, we
see the top 1/2 of Starting Pitchers losing a very similar
amount (-37%) of fantasy value to the other positions.
In observing the third season and the
most recent (2008 into 2009), we see a bigger disparity
between Starting Pitchers and other positions. Only third
baseman lost more value that the top half of pitchers. Which
bodes well for the hitter over pitcher argument. But let's
now look at the 3 year average (below) which increases the
sample size, giving us a more valid and rounded indicator.
In observing the 3 year average: The
top half of Starting Pitchers (36 each season from
2006-2008, 108 in total) lost 36% of their value the following
season. While the top half of position players (78
each season from 2006-2008, 236 in total) lost 28%.
Hmmm....suddenly we are starting to see that there really
isn't as big of a disparity on pitcher predictability as we
might have thought. 36% percent loss, verses 28% loss, an
8% incremental difference. Now let's look at the augment on why
pitchers deserve more value: 2. A starting
pitcher's contribution factor offers 21% more incremental
value than that of a
hitter. Follow me here with some simple starting roster math: 14 hitters
/ 9 pitchers is the typical split in most formats. 14
hitters for 5 rotisserie hitting categories, 9 pitchers for
5 Rotisserie pitching categories. Of those 9 pitchers, 6 are
typically starting pitchers with 3 dedicated to the relief
role. Closers typically log 1/3 the innings of a starter, so
it would take 3 closers to contribute the same way as a
starter in terms of Wins/WHIP/ERA/K. So in total there
are essentially 7 full role positions on the pitching side
that contribute to 5 scoring categories. If we exclude
Saves, we have 7 theoretical pitchers that contribute to 4 categories
(4/7= .57), or on average each of the 7 pitchers
contributes 14% (1/7) to each category. 14 hitters contribute to 5 categories
(5/14 = .36), or on average each of the 14 hitters
contributes 7% (1/14) to each category. In other words it's a lot easier for a
pitcher to influence one of the scoring categories than is
it for a hitter...a lot easier. Using the simple math factor
(.57 - .36 = 21%). Thus each pitcher's
contribution factor accounts for 21% more incremental value than that of a
hitter. This is an argument on why pitchers
should be evaluated at a higher valuation than hitters. Now let's
compare the two arguments: 3. Comparing 1 & 2: All we are trying to do is
intuitively determine what a pitchers weight should be
verses that of a hitter. To recap, 1. The top half of the
typical fantasy roster's Hitters produce 8% more value than
the top half of Starting Pitchers. Which means that they
are easier to predict and offer
slightly less risk. The 2. Starting Pitcher's slot offers
21% more
incremental
value than that of the hitter based on the limits of
the starting rosters. Using simple deduction, then top tier
pitchers should be valued at least as equally as top tier
hitters, if anything the analysis leans more towards pitchers being more valuable
(21% verses 8%). I'm not saying that we should combine the
two as the 2 percentages are from different origin, but
clearly the lack of predictably on the pitcher's side (8%
less) is not enough to offset the impact that each starting
pitcher has on a typical fantasy roster (21% more). So how is it that pitchers are being
discounted so greatly?!? The forces of
an open market determined by consumer sentiment. And we know
that consumer sentiment in the market place and fundamental
value are sometimes two completely different topics.
My favorite financial lesson in graduate school was learning
about the
Dutch Tulip trade of the early 18th century. A
relatively worthless commodity trading at insane prices. In
a less extreme scenario, hitters are being overvalued at the
expense of pitchers without fundamental
justification. And it's my obligation as your fantasy
advisor to bring this to your attention, and offer a plan to
capitalize from it. The best part is that the plan is already calculated
for you in our player projections software. What makes our
software unique are the algorithms that produce truly custom
results based on your
specific league setup while also also computing the true value of
players. For those who play in a
serpentine draft, you will see the Average Draft position of these
players verses our
VAM ranking. In some cases, you'll be able to
determine if you should wait a round before capitalizing. As an
example, it's the 7th round and the Top 100 VAM ranking within the
software is recommending a pitcher who has a 10th round ADP, it
might be wise to take a chance and wait another round or two
before selecting the player. Last year, in one of my drafts, I
snagged Felix Hernandez in the 7th round. The community was
drafting him (ADP) in the 8th round, and VAM was recommending him
in the 6th round. Not only did he produce like a 1st round talent,
but I also saved an additional round for another talent. For those in auction leagues, we compute the Expected
Auction Value ($EAV) or Inflation adjusted Value
(INF$). Similarly, these valuations may be slightly above what
the market perceives as value for starting pitchers. It will be in
your hands to capitalize on the market's weakness and possibly
acquire the talent at a discount. An example would be a
pitcher which the software computes to have an EAV$ of $20.
The live auction is nearing a final bidding of $13, you perceive
the value and jump and grab the player at $14. A $6 bargain. Last
year, in some of my drafts I picked up Brandon Webb for $20, Dan Haren for
18, James Shields for 15, Felix Hernandez
for 16, Chris Carpenter for 11, Clayton Kershaw
for 10, and Ubaldo Jiminez for 5. Webb of course was a bust
due to the injury, but despite his selection my pitching was
dominant in every league I played in....so much so that it carried
these teams into the playoffs. This isn't to say that I don't pay for hitting, because I do...
to the tune of 68-70% of my auction budget....but premier
starting pitching at Walmart pricing should be embraced! Anthony A. Perri Statistician and Publisher - Fantistics
PS - To see the impact that each player will have on your team scoring
setup, built into the player projections software is an Impact grid:
