Recency Bias

Post Reply
DOUGHBOYS
Posts: 13088
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 6:00 pm

Recency Bias

Post by DOUGHBOYS » Sat Feb 29, 2020 11:20 am

Recency bias.
Why do all the terms experts come up with sound a little negative? As if everything we do each year as drafters is not up to standard.
If recency bias was a murderer, we would all be dead.
We ALL have recency bias.
Our drafting of players and KDS is mostly built by recency bias.
It's a term to make an expert feel smart, while in practice, makes them idiots.

A year ago, Jean Segura was being taken in drafts during the first six rounds.
Marcus Semien after 10 rounds.
This year, it's the opposite.
Semien was terrific last year. Segura was not.
They've exchanged places on draft boards. So what?
Recency bias has changed their positions. Big deal.
If wanting to buck that recency bias, put Segura ahead of Semien in your rankings.
Uh huh, I didn't think so. :D

Recency bias is really a stupid term.
As if the latest information should not be adhered to any more than past history.
In an age where we want the latest information right up to the last minute, recency bias asks us to not put too much stock in that latest news.
Bullshit.

Cody Bellinger is being taken in the first round. That would be because of recency bias.
His year before was worse than both his previous year and last year.
He has had two good years. One, so-so.
We tend to go with 'What have you done for me lately' and lately, Bellinger has been great.

Our drafts are formed by recency bias.
First rounders leave if not having another good year. And after great years, other players enter the first round to replace them.
It's the way our fantasy world works.
Always has.

Recency bias is tempered by drafters. Look at Jose Ramirez. Ramirez in other years would have dropped like a rock in other years.
This year though, speed has a place in drafters hearts.
Ramirez year was deemed a failure, even though he was a 20-20 player.
Savvy drafters know that the only thing he did wrong was not hit for the high average of years before.
This limited three categories. Batting Average, RBI, and Runs.
But he certainly wasn't a detriment in any category but batting average.

Pete Alonso leads baseball in homers and is not in the first round.
Again, this is smartness among drafters. Recency bias would have him in the first round.
Alonso had no past. We can only measure him by his most recent year.
Smart drafters tempered his recent performance.

Every year that a player plays, means something.
We have a takeaway from it.
Each of us does something different with that information.
The last information we receive may supersede previous information.
Is that recency bias?
JD Martinez has transformed from a crappy hitter to a good one.
Do we even consider now the hitter he once was? Of course not. That would be foolish.
Recency bias is a stupid way of saying that we consider later data more than former data.
Guilty.

Sometimes experts just don't get it.
Recency bias has a place. Ans all of us, even those experts that came up with the stupid term, use it.
It is how we use recent performance in drafting opinions that really count.
Each of us perceives the latest performance in different ways.
Much as each drafter perceives every player differently than other players.
Recency bias?
Look away. There is nothing to see here.
On my tombstone-
Wait! I never had the perfect draft!

Post Reply