RotoGuru Baseball Forum

View the Forum Registry


Self-edit this thread


0 Subject: Cheap Litte ESPN Plug

Posted by: blue hen, almighty
- [473133021] Mon, May 06, 2002, 13:14

Even though Jack's Hamburger Stand serves better burgers than McDonalds, people still flock to the Golden Arches because of superior advertising. With that in mind, I'd like to point out some baseball features available at ESPN.com that you may have overlooked, and which might help you in your fantasy sports efforts.

- Sortable Batting: New and improved. In addition to the standard categories, you can find where a player ranks in categories such as Runs Created, Isolated Power, and Pitches Per Plate Appearance.
Who leads the AL in Extra-Base Hits over the last seven days? What catcher has the best walk rate this season?

- Revamped Player Cards: Including the standard stats and scouting report, but now with Batter vs. Pitcher stats, complete splits, and more. How does Gary Sheffield hit against Robert Person? How does Rusty Greer hit against groundball pitchers? How has Eric Chavez done in recent games? What ballplayers were born in Canada?

- Probable Pitchers: Speaks for itself

- Fantasy Add/Drop: What better way to see who's hot and who's not? This page shows which players are being added and dropped by ESPN fantasy players.

- Fantasy Correspondents: Here is where each team is covered in depth specifically from a fantasy angle. Did you know Adam Everett was sent down? Go get Lugo!

- Around The Horn: Notes about both teams for every game, every day. Did you know that Marcus Giles was spiked in the hand?

- Relative Power Index: Are you a fan of schedule strength? Do you question Minnesota's fast start? They're 18-11, but ranked 24th in the RPI.

- MLB Debuts: This page shows you who made their MLB debuts recently. Imagine if you picked up Adam Dunn on July 21 last year

This is only a small sampling of what is available on ESPN.com, and I narrowed the list to
focus on sections Gurupies would value. Your suggestions are certainly welcome, and I hope
you enjoy the site!
1E'ville
      Leader
      ID: 29017810
      Mon, May 06, 2002, 16:24
Here's a good article on burning out young pitchers with high pitch counts at ESPN.
2Pilewort
      Donor
      ID: 1818195
      Mon, May 06, 2002, 16:57
minnesota ranked 24th? Good god, what are the hacks at ESPN smoking these days?
3biliruben
      Sustainer
      ID: 3502218
      Mon, May 06, 2002, 17:30
Could you please point me to the ESPN search engine (no, not the less than useless keyword search), Oh Lord of Moldy Poultry?
4blue hen, almighty
      ID: 473133021
      Mon, May 06, 2002, 17:52
Obviously, Pilewort is not too familiar with how a relative power index works. It's not something "decided" by anyone. It's based on a formula. While the Twins are indeed 20-12, they have played what is by far the easiest schedule in all of baseball. Only the Tigers are within 60 percentage points in Strength of Schedule. Everyone else is over 88 points higher.

The Twins are also overachieving based on their runs scored and allowed. While most teams with 165 runs score and 156 runs allowed in 32 games would be expected to have a record of 17-15, they have a record of 20-12, the extra wins due to a significant amount of good luck. Well, luck does even out as the sample size increases, so look out...
5Pilewort
      Donor
      ID: 1818195
      Mon, May 06, 2002, 20:14
The index is too decided by somebody. And that somebody is the person who decided that the opponant's opponants get was much weighting as the actual performance of the team being indexed.

And that's why the Yankees are ahead of the BoSox in this excercise of liars stats.
6APerfect10
      ID: 133401316
      Mon, May 06, 2002, 20:34
Pilewort, RPI is the same for EVERY sport and ESPN has no control over that. Look at college basketball, or whatever, RPI is the same formula.

25% Own Winning %
50% Opp Avg Win %
25% Opp. Opp. Win %
7APerfect10
      ID: 133401316
      Mon, May 06, 2002, 20:35
SOS is also the same for every sport...
8KrazyKoalaBears
      Donor
      ID: 266182910
      Mon, May 06, 2002, 22:03
I use a different formula which adds in a scoring factor and a home/away factor to the SOS and it still puts MIN at 17th. The fact is that they've played one team with a greater than .350 winning percentage and that was CLE, who is still a sub-.500 team. If you add in the fact that the only games they've won against CLE were games at home, then the team looks even weaker. And let's not forget that they recently lost 5 of 6 on a road trip to the "tough" DET and TAM and are 1-9 in their last 10 on the road.

MIN is far from as great as their record suggests.

9Pilewort
      Donor
      ID: 1818195
      Mon, May 06, 2002, 23:58
This farce of an index bites because who've beaten Minnesota get lots of brownie points because Minnesota has a good record (even though you say they suck), but Minnesota gets half the brownie points for beating those whom they've beat.

Sorta of a double standard there, I'd guess.

Thank god we don't decide pennants and world series based on this charade of sham.
10Pilewort
      Donor
      ID: 1818195
      Tue, May 07, 2002, 01:01

If that's the case, why stop at opponant's opponants? How come you don't throw in opponants' opponants' opponant's winning percentage, the DJ 30 industrials and Jimmy The Greeks social security number?


Considering all teams do not play all other teams an equal number of times, and that there are slight inter-divisional inequities, and that even the best batsmen are prone to prolonged slumps, this SOS factoring in baseball is almost useless to me.

I think there are other power rankings available getting much more to the point. Multiple regression equations which incoroporate a host of data, not simple SOS math. Power Rankings? I assume ESPN uses the term loosely.

Casey Stingle once said you lose a third of your games and you win a third of your games. It's how you play the third third that determines your fate.

I don't think you can say that Divison I college football and basketball teams tend to win a third and lose a third of their games. This 2-level SOS ranking might be useful in college, but despite the modern trends in baseball, I think Casey's statement still holds validity for MLB.
11blue hen, almighty
      Leader
      ID: 27048221
      Tue, May 07, 2002, 01:14
So you disagree that Oakland was one of the best 102 win teams of all time last season?

The Power Rankings are separate. Those are voted on by an ESPN editorial staff.
12KrazyKoalaBears
      Donor
      ID: 266182910
      Tue, May 07, 2002, 01:22
Pilewort, why are you taking these as "Final Word"? They're a rankings system and like any rankings system they usually end up wrong in the end, but usually not by much. Are the college football polls any better? Some say yes, some say no, but how many times have we seen "upsets" based on poll rankings. Far too many times to count.

However, more often than not, the power rankings based on stats hold up well. For instance, my final regular season football power rankings had STL #1 and NWE #3. Show me a "human" poll, or any human that wasn't a NWE fan for that matter, that had that. No way anyone was putting NWE at #3 going into the playoffs.

My final regular season basketball rankings have SAC, SAS, LAL, DAL, and NJN as the top 5 teams. Is it coincidence that they all advanced into the 2nd round? As a matter of fact, 6 of the top 7 in my rankings made it to the 2nd round.

My final regular season hockey rankings haven't played out so well, but that's why they play the games. Still 5 of the 8 teams left in the 2nd round were in the top 8 of the final rankings. And the top 9 teams in the rankings made it to the playoffs.

So in the end, power rankings based on stats usually aren't far from wrong. Can they be wrong? Of course. Just like a very large majority of people expected STL to win the Super Bowl and were wrong. That's why they always play the games.

13KrazyKoalaBears
      Donor
      ID: 266182910
      Tue, May 07, 2002, 01:28
BTW, if MIN is so much better than the position they're in, then how have they lost 9 of their last 10 on the road, including 5 of 6 to DET and TAM? That doesn't sound like much of a great team to me.

And as far as the teams MIN is playing somehow being rewarded because of MIN's winning percentage, they're not. My rankings have the following ranks for MIN's opponents this year:
CLE: 24
KAN: 26
TAM: 28
DET: 29
TOR: 30

In the end, you still have to win some games to make facing "tough" opponents worth anything.

14KrazyKoalaBears
      Donor
      ID: 266182910
      Tue, May 07, 2002, 01:37
Lastly, take away the wins against MIN at home (MIN on the road) and the teams MIN has faced have the following home records:
CLE: 5-7
KAN: 4-10
TOR: 3-12
DET: 4-7
TAM: 5-9

So why is MIN only 6-10 on the road?

And since all the teams MIN has faced are being outscored by their opponents, the least of which is CLE with a -24 run differential, how come MIN is only outscoring their opponents by a +11 run differential? That's the 2nd lowest, behind CIN at +1, of any team over .550.

16blue hen, almighty
      ID: 473133021
      Tue, May 07, 2002, 15:35
KKB, I'm curious about your weights for home and away. Obviously a team has a better chance to win a future game if it's at home, but what does it mean for a past game? Is a team that's .600 home and .400 road better than a team that's .400 home and .600 road?
17KrazyKoalaBears
      Donor
      ID: 266182910
      Tue, May 07, 2002, 16:39
bh, the way my formula is set up, a team gets the following points for home/away factor:

Home Win: 0.4
Away Win: 0.6
Home Loss: 0.0
Away Loss: 0.02

So just using this numbers, if a team is 6-4 at home and 4-6 on the road, then their home/away factor points would be 4.92. If a team is 4-6 at home and 6-4 on the road, their points would be 5.28. So the team winning on the road is slightly better (7.32%) than the team winning at home.

Given the above example records that I used, I would personally say the same thing between 2 teams that are 10-10 and have the home/away records I used. I would always give a slight nod to the team that can win on the road.

18Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Tue, May 07, 2002, 16:46
blue hen - ESPN's transaction listing has been constipated since last Saturday. There have been plenty of transactions since then.

Please see if you can apply some laxative in the appropriate place.
21blue hen, almighty
      ID: 473133021
      Tue, May 07, 2002, 17:51
KKB, I see your logic, but I'm not sure if I agree with it. While it's true that it's hard to win on the road, and teams that can do it should be rewarded, doesn't it fit that since it's easy to win at home, teams that can't do it should be punished?
22blue hen, almighty
      ID: 473133021
      Tue, May 07, 2002, 18:12
*FART*

Apparently, no transactions are being sent by a certain unnamed data source...

SportsLine has the same info
23KrazyKoalaBears
      Donor
      ID: 266182910
      Tue, May 07, 2002, 18:39
bh, very true. I guess when it comes to formulas, there just has to be a value assigned to everything and it ends up that the formula I use gives a slight advantage to winning on the road. In other words, my formula is just saying that winning on the road is a bigger plus than losing at home is a negative, but not by much as shown by the results of the example I showed.
24blue hen, almighty
      ID: 473133021
      Wed, May 08, 2002, 14:26
If you have a formula you like, and you can defend it well enough, post it here or send it to me, and perhaps we'll use it as well.

25APerfect10
      ID: 133401316
      Wed, May 08, 2002, 21:23
blue hen, I'm looking for team stats over the last 7/15/30 days. Can this be found on ESPN? If not is there any way you could work some magic? ;)

Thanks, AP10
26blue hen, almighty
      ID: 473133021
      Fri, May 10, 2002, 15:05
Getting there, APerfect10. It's on the list.
27Razor
      Donor
      ID: 305102622
      Fri, May 10, 2002, 18:25
How about sortable fielding stats? Too much to ask for? It's already in the database, shouldn't be a big deal, no?

Emory update - graduation Monday, which I am participating in. Oscar Winner Alfred Uhry is the keynote speaker. He's the dude who wrote Driving Miss Daisy. We had a bevy of top notch speakers this semester including newly elected Mayor Shirley Franklin, Julian Bonds, Ralph Nader, Spike Lee, Kenneth Cole, and Michael Moore. Loads of construction in progress including a revamping of the UA complex to house something like 2,000 undergrads and grads complete with student activities center and sports facilities. Got another new science building in the works by B. Jones in addition to the new chem building addition and gigantic research building by Dental School. Also got a new Performing Arts Building going up by the B-school. This place is ridiculous.
28biliruben
      Sustainer
      ID: 3502218
      Fri, May 10, 2002, 18:31
How about a couple tix tonight's game? Prove you are worth more than Youngbuck. Too much to ask?

Oh., and about that search engine...
29Pilewort
      Donor
      ID: 91262614
      Sun, May 12, 2002, 04:50
Sunday, May 12, 2002 - 12:00 a.m. Pacific
Major League Baseball
Larry Stone's power rankings

1 Seattle (1)M's relying on their grizzled vets — Pineiro and Franklin

2 Boston (3)Only thing hotter than Bosox is Botox

3 Yankees (2)Never been a more aptly named GM than Brian Cashman

4 San Francisco (10)Two strategies on Bonds: Walk him, or conk him

5 Arizona (4)Spivey is now the ranking Junior in baseball

6 Minnesota (6)Selig's latest plan: Contract Mientkiewicz's name
------------
According to the SOS computer, I guess this guy's name should be Larry Stoned.
30KrazyKoalaBears
      Donor
      ID: 266182910
      Sun, May 12, 2002, 10:42
Larry Stone's Power Rankings

If he's not using a SOS factor, then why does he have OAK (.500, 3-7 in last 10) in 10th and ANA (.543, 13-2 in last 15) in 15th? And are we really to believe that SEA is better than BOS when BOS is about to sweep SEA at Safeco? And if this guy is going to play "hometown" favorites, what other favorites is he playing? Maybe a little "contraction" favorites to MIN and MON? He has MON in 13th, despite being 3-7 in their last 10 (4-9 in their last 14).

Let's compare OAK and BAL, just because I don't see OAK being that high and BAL being that low. Both teams are .500. OAK is 11-10 at home and 7-8 on the road. BAL is 9-9 for both. Very similar to this point. BAL has a +2 differential in runs scored. OAK has a -8. Still quite similar. OAK is 3-7 in their last 10, while BAL is 6-4. OAK's schedule to this point has included TEX, SEA, ANA, NYY, CWS, BOS, and TOR. BAL's schedule has included NYY, BOS, TAM, CWS, KAN, and CLE. All in all, fairly even. So then why does Larry Stone have OAK in 10th and BAL in 20th? Especially if he's not using SOS (which would throw out the teams they've played aspect)? Even more interesting is that the Gleem.net Power Rankings has OAK in 13th and BAL in 14th...

31APerfect10
      Leader
      ID: 39143521
      Sun, May 12, 2002, 12:31
1 Seattle (1)M's relying on their grizzled vets — Pineiro and Franklin

Maybe I am reading that wrong and do not understand the terminology 'grizzled vets' but Pineiro & Franklin have barely thrown over 100 innings.

His rankings are a joke as KKB has pointed out. It appears he has not used SOS but rather last years record!
32biliruben
      Sustainer
      ID: 59434124
      Sun, May 12, 2002, 14:58
Um... Grizzled vets was a joke, I believe. As for the rankings, they mean little a month and half in, no matter how you do 'em.
33Pilewort
      Donor
      ID: 91262614
      Sun, May 12, 2002, 18:02
hey, grizzled vets. I had those at mother's day brunch.
34BillB
      Sustainer
      ID: 25451219
      Sun, May 12, 2002, 19:13
*** burp ***
35KrazyKoalaBears
      Donor
      ID: 266182910
      Mon, May 13, 2002, 08:49
I just got done running the latest Gleem.net Power Rankings. Pretty interesting...

1. BOS: 5.26 (0.454)
2. NYY: 4.52 (0.499)
3. SEA: 4.52 (0.542)
4. SFO: 4.25 (0.492)
5. ANA: 4.01 (0.491)
6. LOS: 3.85 (0.502)
7. ARI: 3.81 (0.475)
8. FLA: 3.74 (0.490)
9. CIN: 3.63 (0.478)
10. CWS: 3.52 (0.487)
11. MON: 3.51 (0.501)
12. TEX: 3.48 (0.500)
13. NYM: 3.36 (0.490)
14. SDG: 3.36 (0.549)
15. COL: 3.34 (0.530)
16. PIT: 3.31 (0.472)
17. BAL: 3.28 (0.511)
18. HOU: 3.27 (0.499)
19. ATL: 3.23 (0.497)
20. OAK: 3.16 (0.572)
21. MIN: 3.12 (0.372)
22. CHC: 3.08 (0.525)
23. PHI: 3.06 (0.521)
24. STL: 2.98 (0.464)
25. KAN: 2.85 (0.519)
26. CLE: 2.80 (0.495)
27. MIL: 2.66 (0.514)
28. TOR: 2.55 (0.562)
29. TAM: 2.37 (0.528)
30. DET: 2.27 (0.472)

The numbers to the right are a teams' opponents win percentage. MIN is the only team whose opponents are under 0.450 and they're at 0.372!!! Their record should be on par with BOS, and yet they're 5-5 in their last 10, all home games. And what's with 181 RS and 181 RA? That's pathetic for a team that's 21-16. They're one of only 2 teams (PIT) over .500 who aren't outscoring their opponents. MIN is also one of only 3 teams (MON 7-8 road, CWS 9-13 road) over .500 that has a losing home or road record, of which they're the worst at 0.375 on the road.

Yes, Larry Stone should change his name to Larry Stoned. Especially when 14 of MIN's 22 wins (or 63.6%) came from games against TOR, DET, and TAM, teams that are a combined 34-73 (0.318).

36Ender
      ID: 52438315
      Mon, May 13, 2002, 09:33
You think his rankeings are a joke, but thought he was serious about "grizzled vets"? ;)
37blue hen, almighty
      ID: 473133021
      Mon, May 13, 2002, 13:34
KKB, how is Boston ahead of Seattle when Seattle has a better record and has faced tougher opponents? And I'm not playing favorites, I am *not* a Mariner fan.

Biliruben, as you speculated, I am better than Youngbuck. I did manage to score a pair of tickets to M's game. For myself. As the commercial goes, "Get yer own, sucka!!!"

Razor, thanks for the Emory update and congrats on your career there. Is this what you meant by sortable fielding?

APerfect10, let me introduce you to my friend named sarcasm.

38APerfect10
      Leader
      ID: 39143521
      Mon, May 13, 2002, 13:41
blue hen, yeah, I've realized those rankings were sarcastic, but the 'grizzeled vets' part, I am stuck on!
39KrazyKoalaBears
      Donor
      ID: 266182910
      Mon, May 13, 2002, 13:53
bh, technically BOS has the better record with a .735 win percentage compared to SEA's .703. However, the biggest reason that BOS is ahead of SEA is that BOS has almost double the run differential of SEA, +83 vs. +47, which is a factor in my rankings (see: MIN). Also, BOS's 3 extra road wins gains them a bit more than SEA's 4 extra home wins as we discussed previously. Lastly, because my rankings add "weight" from recent play from the last 5 weeks (only 20% of total score comes from a team's "weighted" recent play score), SEA is hurt by their 1-5 stretch just a couple of weeks ago, whereas BOS's losses are more spread out which keeps them from taking a big hit in any one week's worth of games.

Personally, I wouldn't expect BOS to have as big of a lead after next weeks rankings because SEA is going on the road and should get some good road wins, while BOS will be playing at home and likely won't maintain their current pace, which means home losses, which brings down a teams score faster than road losses. I also think NYY has a good opportunity to win a lot of games with their upcoming home stretch.

40APerfect10
      Leader
      ID: 39143521
      Mon, May 13, 2002, 14:21
We'll see how Seattle fares at Boston...
41blue hen, almighty
      ID: 473133021
      Mon, May 13, 2002, 15:18
I can see where that comes from KKB. Especially since your tools compare teams for future matchups and such... I'd certainly like to know if a team was really hot recently. However, in the scheme of the whole season, it's a different spin. While I wouldn't want to face a team that's on a ten game win streak, I don't place them ahead of a team that is 10 games ahead of them in the standings.
42KrazyKoalaBears
      Donor
      ID: 266182910
      Mon, May 13, 2002, 15:24
bh, true. As the season goes on, things begin to settle out a bit, however in my Hockey Power Rankings, I ended up with VAN ahead of DET because of how they completed the month of April. Well, DET went on to beat VAN in the playoffs, so that's what caused me to tweak the formula just a bit so that recent play didn't count as much. I moved it from 30% down to 20%, so we'll see how it all works out at the end of this season. Like anything, it's a work in progress, and likely will be for some time.
43blue hen, almighty
      ID: 473133021
      Tue, May 14, 2002, 20:48
Well, I tend to think "Rankings" might not necessarily include recent performance. Just because Detroit won in the playoffs doesn't mean they had a better regular season, necessarily. Or that they were or weren't hotter at the end.
"Rankings" can be based on actual results. "Least want to face rankings" are a different beast.
44Stuck in the Sixties
      Leader
      ID: 12451279
      Wed, May 15, 2002, 10:51
BH, Let's see if you can succeed where the site can't. I've been playing the Virtual GM in baseball. Using the same login info every day since the beginning of basketball season, carrying through to Sunday's baseball. Anyway, I am now unable to log on and the "recover password, etc" is "too busy to process my request". It's a small enough thing but if they don't respond soon, I'll just quit playing. Any ideas about what's going on?
Thanks
Don
45rockafellerskank
      Sustainer
      ID: 24215319
      Wed, May 15, 2002, 11:06
Stuck in the Sixties- I had the same problem w/ ESPN baseball last season. For some reason the cookie wouldn't register correctly on my PC. I dumped all cookies and re-logged in at it worked fine.

rfs ®
46Stuck in the Sixties
      Leader
      ID: 12451279
      Wed, May 15, 2002, 12:10
RFS --Bingo!! Thanks
47blue hen, almighty
      ID: 473133021
      Wed, May 15, 2002, 15:25
Uh, thanks RFS.
48Stuck in the Sixties
      Leader
      ID: 12451279
      Thu, May 16, 2002, 10:59
Cluck, cluck, cluck .... so one of the chicks got there before the hen itself arrived on the scene ... hmmmm
49blue hen, almighty
      ID: 473133021
      Thu, May 16, 2002, 19:26
Are you calling RFS a chick?
50Stuck in the Sixties
      Leader
      ID: 12451279
      Thu, May 16, 2002, 19:28
I've heard he does have a bluish tinge
51rockafellerskank
      Sustainer
      ID: 24215319
      Thu, May 16, 2002, 19:36
Sorry, as much as I'd like to give props to bh for the cool stuff at the ESPN site, I'm afraid he's not my type of bird. I suspect bh is more of a "softball playing girl" type of man.

bh- cool stuff, but you already know that.

stuck- glad I could help.

rfs ®


52blue hen, almighty
      Leader
      ID: 27048221
      Mon, May 20, 2002, 04:32
That's very true RFS. I'm a big fan of women who play softball.
53ProudestMonkey@work
      ID: 40322314
      Thu, May 23, 2002, 15:49
BH, did I miss a major trade or is some one just a big Devil Rays fan?

Sortable Pitcher Stats

54APerfect10
      Leader
      ID: 39143521
      Thu, May 23, 2002, 15:51
You didnt hear about the Schilling & RJ for Ryan Rupe and a player to be named later trade? Where have you been? ;)
55ProudestMonkey@work
      ID: 40322314
      Thu, May 23, 2002, 16:18
No wonder I've been slipping in WWR recently :)
56¤ Mario LeMoose ¤
      ID: 394503015
      Thu, May 30, 2002, 15:50
Cheap, not-so-little Orbitz pop-up is the last straw. I'm changing my browser's "home" page from ESPN.com to something else.

57blue hen, almighty
      ID: 473133021
      Thu, May 30, 2002, 16:41
Nothing I can do about that Mario, sorry.

As for the RJ/sortables thing, it's being worked on with the rest of the stuff above.
58Chris
      ID: 24910517
      Thu, May 30, 2002, 16:59
Wow, in the link in #53, Tom Glavine is a DBack...*shudder*

And what team exactly is "ALS"?
59blue hen, almighty
      ID: 473133021
      Thu, May 30, 2002, 19:15
Exactly, ATL, ARI, and TB are having problems. ALA is team 31, American All Stars. Would that I knew how to fix that...
60Razor
      Donor
      ID: 48540116
      Sat, Jun 01, 2002, 23:02
The designation on Gagne needs to be changed from starting pitcher to relief pitcher. That will change his stats, I assume.
Rate this thread:
5 (top notch)
4 (even better)
3 (good stuff)
2 (lightweight)
1 (no value)
If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time.

If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating.

If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here.

RotoGuru Baseball Forum



Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)

Name:
Email:
Message:
Click here to create and insert a link
Click here to insert a random spelling of Mientkiewicz
Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)


Viewing statistics for this thread
Period# Views# Users
Last hour11
Last 24 hours11
Last 7 days33
Last 30 days99
Since Mar 1, 2007966466