Player Evaluation 104 - Overall Rankings

[Jackstraw]

Well, I took yesterday off to make sure that I got my free agent bids in. I also took a little time to work out a way to make some examples. I realize that these are a lot of words, and without pictures they don’t show everything very clearly. I’ve got my website up now so that maybe I can add links with examples. If this link works, it will show you what your modified raw data file should look like. Note that I have trimmed out a lot of the players so this is only an example.



www.b2bjacks.com/EvaluationSheetExample.xls



Today we are going to finish the player evaluation spreadsheet by adding rankings to each of the scoring categories. The ranking system we will use is a rotisserie-style scoring system. Open your modified raw data file and go to the Hitters tab.



1. Insert a column next to BA, R, HR, RBI, and SB. BA should be in column E, R in column G, HR in I, RBI in K, and SB in M.

2. In cell F2, type in =RANK(E2,E:E,1). This formula looks at each piece of data in column E and ranks the entry in cell E2. The better the statistic, the more points that are given. It is exactly how the NFBC is scored.

3. Type the same formula in each of the new columns, changing the column E reference to each of the columns that you are evaluating (for example, G instead of E for runs scored).

4. Double-click the handle on each formula cell to paste the formulas down the columns.

5. Name each of the column headings for the formulas that you entered.

6. To the far right of your data table, in the first empty column you come to, type in “Overall Rank.” Hit Enter.

7. Type this formula in the second row of your Overall Rank column, =SUM(F2,H2,J2,L2,N2). When you hit enter, the overall ranking for the player will appear.

8. Double-click the handle and you are finished with ranking your hitters. You can use the Sort function under the Data menu to sort out who has the best overall ranking. Once you do this, take your evaluation and compare it to an ADP report. You will see many interesting similarities and differences.



Now let’s move over to the starters tab and set up the rankings for the pitchers. There are going to be a few differences in our ranking formula for the pitchers. In most of the scoring categories it is better to have the highest numbers; in ERA and WHIP lower values are better. The format of the RANK formula uses the entry that you want to rank in its column of values. The last number tells how you want the formula to rank the value. In the Hitters tab, the “1” ranked low values with low ranks, high values with high ranks. For ERA and WHIP we need to change that “1” to a “0” so that the higher values get lower rankings.



1. Click on the Starters tab.

2. Insert new columns next to W, ERA, WHIP, K, and SV.

3. Type in the second row of each new column the ranking formula with the appropriate column references. Remember to use “0” instead of “1” for ERA and WHIP.

4. Type in your column headings for each new column, and then double-click the handles to paste the formulas down the columns.

5. In the first empty column to the right of your data table, use the SUM formula to add up the rankings. And then use the Sort function to rank the Overall Rankings. Again, compare this to an ADP report to see how it sizes up.

6. Take the instructions for your starters and do the same thing to your relievers. When you finish, save the file with a new name, like “Simple Ranking.”



This evaluation method is very simple. It does not attempt to project the players, but merely ranks them based on last year’s data. If nothing else, it is a way to calculate the NFBC Fantasy MVP for last year. From this starting point, you can add sabermetric formulas or develop your own methods of projection. What I have tried to do is give you a common starting point based on data that is unbiased. When you pick up a magazine, the evaluations and projections are biased towards whoever made the evaluation or projection. And, no magazine ranks them the same. When you listen to the spin by the pros on the messageboards and radio, their opinion is biased. By taking the time to do your own evaluation of the raw data, you get an opportunity to see for yourself how these guys stack up.



Notice, if you did your ranking correctly, that Prince Fielder ends up 45th. Don’t throw the idea out just because you see an anomaly like that. Sometimes it’s not an anomaly as much as it is a sign of misperception. Once you get your head around using Excel and doing evaluations of the players, you will start to see that there are good explanations for a lot of these “anomalies.” Homework for the night – why did Fielder evaluate at 45th instead of in the top 15 that everyone projected? And why does Jeff Francouer rank 46th?



[ April 07, 2008, 05:08 PM: Message edited by: Jackstraw ]