Projection Accuracy

I don't have lots of time this week to blog, as my baseball minutes are focused on getting the first draft of the analysis on "The Sheets", so we'll keep it short for a few days and hope the Doc pitches in.

Meanwhile, in reviewing the values of our pal Alex Patton (we don't actually know him, but we love him) and Rotoworld, I'm finding a problem. A big problem.

Patton's top 120 pitchers has a total value of $1,849. Rotoworld is at $1,273, and they've got a bunch of zero guys in there. You can't bid less than a buck.

Our target is $1,080, or 12 teams x $90, which is 32.14% of the auction pool, assuming every dollar is spent, which it won't be. Someone's going to finish with $6 or so. I guess you could argue a little higher, but 1/3-2/3 is pretty standard between pitching and hitting, so we've got to be in the right ballpark.

So, Alex, how do you justify 71% more? His bid number, which also has a bunch of zeros, is $1,194, which I guess is in the general ballpark, but the allocation has got to make sense.

That means that many pitchers are worth WAY less than Alex and RW think. I put my numbers in for value and came out about $300 too high, so I started cutting, hard. Gagne from 36 to 32 (Patton says 43). Lidge from 35 to 29 (Patton says 45). Hudson from 29 to 23 (Patton says 35). All down the line with Lowry down from 11 to 6 (Patton says 9). The average cut was over $2. And now there are a lot more 1's.

This means that there is a little less inflation than we think. Accurate values and accurate inflation values are the keys to good performance in the auction. All I can say is watch out for the Pecklers in the first year I retire, because I'm going to really have time to do this as well as to take a little trip to Arizona.