BABS 2017: What’s new, early charts, more

While we all know the inherent beauty that BABS possesses, she readily recognizes that there is always room for improvement. The challenge, though, is to improve while maintaining simplicity. I didn’t want to add complexity to her natural beauty.

In the end, the only changes I made were to provide a bit more consistency and a bit more transparency.

Oh, but first, some ridiculously preliminary 2017 reports. I didn’t want to string along The BABS Report readers much longer without providing something to which you could apply your eBook-learnings. (See? I do grammar good.)

HUGE RED WARNING, IN CAPS, EVEN: There are still tons of playing time rejiggering and rating/ranking tinkering likely over the next two months, so I would suggest not taking these into your early drafts with you. But for the purposes of mock drafting, escapist spreadsheet fun and contemplative navel analysis, these will do just fine:

Preliminary 2017 BABS: VIEW/PRINT | MS EXCEL

For those on a 2017 return trip to BABS-land, here are the changes:

Extreme batting effectiveness

In last year’s Ron Shandler’s Other Book, I wrote: “There is no extreme level for batting average because that stat has way too much variability. Truthfully, the only player who I’d be comfortable assigning a rating of A+ would be Miguel Cabrera.”

First of all, I’ve changed the name of this rating from Batting Average to Batting Effectiveness. While it still represents a proxy for batting average, it is far more encompassing. This change was already apparent in some of my later writings on this site last year.

But the bigger change is that I have relented on an “A+” rating here. I do still believe that there is a great deal of variability, but frankly, there is variability all over the freakin’ place. Similar to the other ratings, “A+” represents the top 10 percent of skill, “AV” the top 25 percent and “a” the top 50 percent.

As it turns out, Miggy is not the only one in this class. In my first pass of the 2017 ratings, five other players also merit the “A+” honor: Mookie Betts, Joey Votto, Daniel Murphy, DJ LeMahieu and Jose Altuve. No real surprises here.

The upside: this sextet gets a bump in the ratings. But there is a downside too. This change ends up filtering these hitters out of their previous Asset Groups. Of the six A+ players, only two – Cabrera and Votto – manage to form their own (P+,A+) group. The other four are each left floating in his own one-man group, unfortunately.

If nothing else, this minor resignation helps to make all the Assets more consistent. The chart now looks like this:

Impact Level   Power   Speed   BatEff    PitchEff   Strikeouts
Extreme         P+      S+      A+         E+          K+
Significant     PW      SP      AV         ER          KK
Moderate        p       s       a          e            k

It’s just more elegant.

Handling the on-base adjustment

After the eBook came out last year, I added a “+” indicator on the Assets side for those players who had a walk rate of over 10 percent, and a “-” indicator on the Liabilities side for those with a walk rate under 5 percent. Then I rated the “+” players at a premium, thereby bumping them to the top of their respective Asset Groups. The opposite was done with the low-walk players.

The intent was to provide more valuable information for fantasy leaguers in OBP leagues. But the end result – similar to adding A+ ratings above – just splintered the pool by creating smaller Asset Groups.

I’ve made a minor change here. The indicator for the positive “+” adjustment has been changed to an asterisk “*” so as not to conflict with the A+ rating. It’s all a bit too much complexity for my liking but I felt that a player with a “A+*” rating was more understandable than one with a “A++” rating.

The larger impact re-sorts all “*” and “-” players back into their native Asset Groups. So, rather than Freddie Freeman (P+,AV*) getting a bump to the top of the (P+,AV) group, he’s ranked by ADP within the entire group, along with pure (P+,AV) players like Nolan Arenado and Nelson Cruz.

This provides us all with larger Asset Groups and many more opportunities to scout for ADP/R$ profit. If you play in an OBP league, you can still easily identify those with an OBP premium and push them up your own draft list as needed.

Ranking Asset Groups

I admit that BABS’ ratings and rankings seem like they dwell inside some secret black box. I’m all for transparency, but BABS, well, she prefers that there be a little bit of mystery.

I pulled back the sheets a bit in The BABS Project, revealing how the major Asset Groups are ranked. At some point, I suspect that BABS will throw caution to the wind and let it all hang out. But not yet.

The reason for all this is not so much modesty but, well, caution. BABS is trying hard to get you comfortable with a non-statistical process – because of everything in Chapters 1 and 2, remember?! – so revealing some of the inner quantitative workings would be counter-productive. You’d be too tempted to break out Excel and mash BABS into little pieces, inflicting all sort of Z-tests, and T-tests and other alphabetical tests too cruel to mention. BABS needs to be protected.

And frankly, I’m not 100 percent convinced she’s nailed this thing yet. Last summer, I wrote that I had manually changed some of the player ratings that looked wrong, only to find that BABS was correct. (e.g. BABS had rated Starling Marte as a “S+”; I had changed it to “SB.”) But at the same time, she is still not locking in on Paul Goldschmidt’s speed and underrating Jose Altuve’s power. Maybe she’ll eventually be correct, but in the interim, my own personal confidence is not quite there yet.

So BABS will continue to keep some of the details under wraps, for now. It’s a process.

 

 

48 Comments

  1. Steve Katzenmoyer on January 20, 2017 at 9:08 am

    I’m thinking of leaving work early to go home and study the rankings…

    First glance, Ron: Colorado OF, to me, seems like Blackmon, CarGo, and Parra. You’ve got Dahl awfully high–and I agree- but you have him slotted as FT. Where will he find 550 AB?

    As always, your writing is thought provoking and insightful. Thanks for making this hobby so much fun.



  2. David Leonard on January 20, 2017 at 9:29 am

    Ah… a breath of fresh baseball in the fantasy football doldrums. How long till pitchers and catchers? 4 weeks!!!



  3. Doug Dunning on January 20, 2017 at 10:09 am

    Just a minor suggestion to the spreadsheet. Could you add a column for League? I find it easier to break out the spreadsheet by league.
    Thanks.



  4. shandler on January 20, 2017 at 11:56 am

    1. Full-time in BABSworld is not 550 ABs. It’s anything over 500 plate appearances.
    2. Allocation of PT is not a fixed expectation. BABS says we should never focus on NOW because NOW is a fleeting reality. Given that we are still 2+ months from Opening Day, nearly 50% of players will hit the DL by October, and Dahl is a very good player, I’m quite comfortable with BABS designating him with an “F”.
    3. Sometime in the next month or so, I will be writing a piece regarding a line you hear repeatedly — “he has no path to playing time” — and show the fallacy of that thought.



  5. shandler on January 20, 2017 at 11:57 am

    Yeah, maybe. If all goes according to plan, the new BABS Database will allow you to produce league-specific reports.



  6. Kevin Burke on January 20, 2017 at 4:14 pm

    Looking at your first analysis of BABS rankings for 2017(which will obviously update as you said) and looking at the last 2016 draft rankings, the risk-averse are probably much more weary scanning the first few rounds for players to target. Which I think only enforces the unpredictability of the final stat lines that BABS tries to tell us. I’ve become very interested in this approach, especially since I like to compare it index investing in the real world.

    What I’m most curious to see is how some of the new rules affect the in-season management of the game, especially the 10 day DL, and how this impacts fantasy baseball on full season leagues and in DFS. I wonder if there will be an uptick in short term callups, or will being able to place players on the 10 day DL actually improve the chances of the player avoiding lengthier stays? And could that possibly lead to better PT predictions/stats or an increase in DL stints/more liabilities? Either way I think it will be an interesting piece to analyze and look forward to see how(if) it has any impact on BABS.



  7. sean gold on January 20, 2017 at 4:54 pm

    Quick Question: (New to BABS, have been an HQ guy since middle school (I’m 26), very excited to try it out this year)—

    Page 59 of the “BABS project” PDF has the table of power. There are 6 rows displaying the different ways to achieve 14 power units. Each of the six rows should have 14 players, however this is not the case. Row 4 has 2 P+, 6PW, 6p, and 2 with no power. This is 16 batters. Each of the other rows has only 14 players. My guess is this row should read 2-5-5-2. The note says “Still good. Adds two extreme skills.”

    If my interpretation is not correct and there is no error then I’m extremely confused.



  8. shandler on January 20, 2017 at 9:11 pm

    That chart is not intended to show different ways to get 14 power units. It’s a series of examples of power configurations. Some have 14 units. Some have fewer than 14 units but are still acceptable (because of a sufficient number of P+ players). And some have fewer than 14 units and are not acceptable (because there would be too few players with no power at all.) The chart is intended to show the different configurations, and why some work and some don’t.



  9. shandler on January 20, 2017 at 9:12 pm

    The 10-day DL will be interesting to watch. I plan to write an article about it in the coming weeks.



  10. David Fraenkel on January 21, 2017 at 2:07 pm

    Ron

    How would you adjust the values for AL or NL only leagues – would the value bands increase, for example, and would the profit opportunities disappear?

    David



  11. shandler on January 21, 2017 at 2:21 pm

    The profit opportunities would not disappear, but they will get compressed. For instance, the (p,AV) Asset Group includes 9 players who could represent some level of profit. Five of the 9 are from the AL, which diminishes the available profit opportunities for NLers. However, as I noted in the eBook, the rankings of these groups are not black-or-white. The (p,AV) group is not significantly different from the (PW,a) group. Looking at the larger group more holistically provides more potential profit opportunities.



  12. Erik DiNardo on January 21, 2017 at 6:45 pm

    quick question..Is there any significance to the order of the list from top to bottom? Saw Dickerson and Altuve next to each other. Im catching on to memorizing the grading system little by little



  13. shandler on January 21, 2017 at 9:46 pm

    Dickerson is at the tail end of an Asset Group that is headed by names like Bryce Harper and Andrew McCutchen. That means his underlying skill is comparable to that pair. That Asset Group (PW,a) is ranked ahead of Altuve’s Asset Group (s,A+) though, as I have mentioned, BABS seems to have some trouble with Altuve’s power and Goldschmidt’s speed. Regardless, Altuve is probably being overrated in most drafts and Dickerson potentially underrated.



  14. James McKnight on January 23, 2017 at 6:28 pm

    I’m down to my last pick, and somehow it’s the utility position. I have speed already, and am considering Brandon Belt, Jung-Ho Kang, Tommy Joseph, Victor Martinez, Nick Castellanos and CJ Cron. This is for a 5×5 league with 10 teams, 21 man rosters, and no changes allowed, just draft a team and check back in October.

    The Baseball Forecaster says about Brandon Belt “UP: 30 HR.” Some nerve they have over there. Last year they said “homerun upside” and the year before “UP: 30 HR.” If I could find the McCutchen issue I think it has something glowing there too.

    Thankfully, now we have BABS so I can ditch that book and see what’s up. BABS has Belt as a P+, a, and an asterisk with no liabilities. What the heck? How about the liability that past positive power metrics have led to HR totals in the teens? I see Brandon Belt as some sort of teacher’s pet that I want to throw stuff at because he’s screwed me over before and apparently none of the experts saw him do it.

    There’s no BABS category for it, but I’ve won money with Victor Martinez. That goes a long way with fantasy owners. Is picking Vmart an acceptable pick, if not an optimum one, considering it’s the last pick and the somewhat close value in the players? Or am I being an obstinate boob who can’t be taught anything? It’s a slow draft so I still have several hours to consider the options. Sorry for the long question, Jim.



  15. James McKnight on January 24, 2017 at 12:47 am

    Wow, I got your response loud and clear. Taking Brandon Belt in round 12 of the FSTA certainly makes it clear where you stand on this. A simple comment would’ve sufficed, but I appreciate the flair of your answering my question with a draft pick. Good luck with your team.



  16. shandler on January 24, 2017 at 1:51 am

    BABS is not perfect, but sometimes you just have to trust her…



  17. funkyjoe on January 24, 2017 at 11:23 am

    I will continue the process of reading through this again and again …and again. Still having a tough time grasping this, especially now with the dollar values in dark green/light green etc. I really want to understand this because I am a big fan of innovation.

    I am in a basic AL 4×4 keeper league.



  18. shandler on January 24, 2017 at 2:40 pm

    Feel free to post specific questions here. The green bans represent true dollar value. Darkest green represent players who potentially could earn in the $30s and up. Medium green are potential $20-29 earners. Light green are earners in the teens. Compare those ranges to what their actual average auction values are to find pockets of profit.



  19. Michael Kuhn on January 25, 2017 at 8:33 am

    Ron, where do i find end of season $values from previous years? Just like your examples in the book (Adam Jones)



  20. Ryan Secan on January 25, 2017 at 9:51 am

    Was reviewing the FSTA draft, and the (admittedly early) 2017 BABS. I’m trying to understand the order of players on the BABS spreadsheet. In the first round, you selected Blackmon (#16 on the BABS spreadsheet) despite the presence of much higher ranked guys still available (Cabrera #3, Votto #4, Turner #6, Pollock #7, Dahl #8, EE, Freeman, Cruz, Martinez, and Carpenter). Now given their ADPs, I can see waiting on some guys (eg you got Votto in round 2 anyway), but why bypass guys with “better” BABS and the same or better liabilities (Cabrera, Freeman, etc)?

    Is this just to make a point to your readers in these drafts (eg don’t sleep on Blackmon, he’s really a first rounder)? Is p/s/AV better than P+/A+ given the rarity of speed? If p/s/AV is better, why isn’t it ranked higher on the spreadsheet?



  21. shandler on January 25, 2017 at 11:02 am

    All the dollar values are from BaseballHQ.com.



  22. shandler on January 25, 2017 at 11:20 am

    Great question. In the early-going, you need to have some strategy for your picks. You can’t just make them in a vacuum. You have to anticipate what the rest of the room might do and plan ahead. Follow along…

    Looking at the list and starting at the top… I knew Betts and Trout would be gone. Next were two 1Bmen, Cabrera and Votto. I did not have to take Cabrera in the 1st round because I knew that Votto was a comparable player (and with fewer Liabilities) who I would likely be able to get in the second round. So Votto became my Rd 2 target.

    Going down the list, Kershaw was gone. Turner was too risky for a 1st rounder. Pollock and Dahl could be drafted later.

    In the next Asset group, Bryant and Arenado were gone. Encarnacion and Freeman were Rd 2 targets and I already had 1Bman Votto lined up for that pick. Then Cruz, Martinez and Carpenter were all later round targets.

    That left Blackmon. I weighed the minor injury risk against all the positives, including the possibility that he might drop to me in Rd 2. I decided that Blackmon/Votto would be the best opening for me.



  23. Shawn Gillon on January 29, 2017 at 9:06 am

    In a league that has both OBP and AVG as categories, how would you adjust the rankings?



  24. Ben Armstrong on January 30, 2017 at 9:01 pm

    Looking at BABS, I am having a little trouble with some of the “possible profit” and “overvalued” players. Specifically, Goldy (PW, AV, *) compared to Donaldson (PW, AW, *) and Rizzo (PW, AV, *) caught my eye. Goldy has an ADP of 6 and Donaldson has an ADP of 11 and Rizzo has an ADP of 12. Given the same assets and liabilities, why would Donaldson and Rizzo be listed as “overvalued” when they are going after someone with the same skill set?



  25. mk on January 31, 2017 at 8:02 am

    In an auction keeper league would you keep Matt Carpenter for $23?



  26. shandler on January 31, 2017 at 11:21 am

    I’d move the players with an asterisk (*) in the OBP column to the top of their respective asset groups.



  27. shandler on January 31, 2017 at 11:29 am

    That (PW,AV) asset group falls just outside the range of $30ish players. So by rights, Goldy should also be noted as overvalued. But he is one of a few players that BABS and I have come to blows on. How does a guy steal 50+ bases over two years and not merit at least an (s)? BABS says no and throws Manny Machado in my face as an example of a player she was correct on regarding overvaluing SBs. Never fight with a girl, my mom always says. So I leave Goldy in his current asset group but defy BABS slightly by refusing to note him as overvalued. Marriage is all about compromise.



  28. shandler on January 31, 2017 at 11:31 am

    Context is everything. In a shallow league (12-tm mixed or less), I’d probably toss him back and hope to buy him for less at the draft. But in anything deeper than that – and assuming a typical level of draft inflation – I think $23 is a very fair keeper price.



  29. Jay Joyce on January 31, 2017 at 1:08 pm

    Ron,

    Holler at ya boy! I took down the crown last year with your help and that sassy BABS. I drafted pretty well, had a nice crop of keepers and made some trades that propelled me to the apex. With all of that being said, it’s come time to start to evaluate my players and who I will be taking with me for a run at a back-to-back title run. I landed some pitchers that have full keeper eligibility, but not sure what to do with them as I have a lot of quality arms. The list as of now; Can only keep 8 regulars and 2 rookies. Which 8 are you keeping?
    Betts – lock
    Areando – lock
    Marte – lock
    Myers – full eligibility and traded for him….BABS not fond of him.
    Odubel
    Fowler – full eligibility
    Piscotty – full eligibility
    Castellanos – full eligibility
    Scherzer – lock
    Price – need to decide
    Verlander – full eligibility
    Carrasco – full eligibility
    Duffy – full eligibility
    McCullers – full
    Rookies
    Contreras
    Moncada

    As you can see I have some major decisions to make in this 10 team h2h OBP league. I dont think I have ever had so many difficult choices in all my years. You thinking balanced or leaning pitching over bats or the contrary?



  30. shandler on January 31, 2017 at 2:00 pm

    If the power shift sustains in 2017, you are going to want to have more high-end pitchers because hitters will be easier to get. Nobody really knows, but you have such good pitchers that it would be tough to let them go. I’d protect Price and Verlander for sure. I’d monitor Carrasco’s health, and if it’s stable, I’d add him. That leaves one slot. BABS likes Fowler a lot but tying up Castellanos is intriguing; that’s another health concern. BABS sees McCullers, Herrera, Myers and Duffy all within 15 ranking slots of each other. If it was me, I’d take Fowler, especially since it’s an OBP league.



  31. Jay Joyce on February 1, 2017 at 12:45 pm

    Ron,

    I also have Edwin Diaz eligible to be kept as a rookie, but I can’t see myself keeping him over Moncada or Contreras.



  32. shandler on February 1, 2017 at 12:47 pm

    Nope.



  33. Chris Mitchell on February 2, 2017 at 10:25 am

    12 team mixed league. Can keep up to 8, 23 starters, 7 bench, 14 hitters, 9 pitchers any roll. Snake draft
    The only 8 I can see keeping on my roster are:
    Turner, Lindor, Polanco, Moncada, Mazara, Syndergard, Tailion and Urias.
    (I am in a major re-build)
    BABS is low on most of them.
    How do You account for keepers and youth in relation to BABS?



  34. shandler on February 2, 2017 at 11:10 am

    It’s all explained in The BABS Project, Chapter 11: BABS in Keeper Leagues.



  35. Jay Joyce on February 2, 2017 at 12:59 pm

    Ron,

    Thoughts on acquiring Pollock and Freeman in a deal where I let go of some of the highly touted Y! players that BABS doesnt like (Duffy, McCullers, Myers) at the cost of letting Price go as well…
    Could end up like this;
    Betts, Arenado, Scherzer, Freeman, Marte, Pollock, Verlander, Carrasco/Fowler, Moncada and Contreras.



  36. shandler on February 2, 2017 at 1:04 pm

    In this case, you’d have to keep Carrasco because you’d be giving up Price. Pollock is a risk, but I might do this.



  37. Thomas Dersham on February 3, 2017 at 1:54 pm

    I have been wavering myself as a Carpenter owner in NL 4×4 (no R) keeper league owning him at $27. I’d assume he won’t go higher so I’d like to see if I can save a few bucks. Ideal?



  38. shandler on February 3, 2017 at 2:00 pm

    Depends upon draft inflation in your league. $27 is about par. Really could go either way.



  39. Thomas Dersham on February 4, 2017 at 10:06 am

    follow up…I know you write that the values you put are based on the earnings the player could make and to look for value in the draft, you also advise each draft will carry it’s own pricing. In my format, seeing how you say Carpenter could be a par at $27 which is a 80% increase on your $15 value in mixed league, I would think finding value is all the more precious and maybe hard to do. I also own Dexter Fowler at $21 which is 200% more than your $7 value. I guess after this rambling, my question is, is there a price to high when you know you need a certain category? SB in a keeper NL only league are a premium with Billy H gone, so is Fowler around $21 more acceptable or too much regardless? I know it depends all on the team built, but with 12 teams fighting for 18 S+ or SB full time players, the prices really get out of line from the start. Am I overthinking or is that all part of the evaluating needs and what I’m willing to pay. Is there a cap on saying “nope that’s just too much.” Thanks Ron!



  40. shandler on February 4, 2017 at 10:30 am

    Yes, you are overthinking it just a bit. Unfortunately, there is no pat answer, mostly because we really don’t know what type of numbers these players are going to put up. Best analogy I can think of… “A major storm is in the forecast, you have a baby at home and you head to the market to get milk (which you absolutely need for the baby) and cookies (because you have a hankering). Your grocer knows all about supply and demand, and jacks up the price of milk to $25/gal and Oreos to $10 for a box. He also raises the prices every few minutes as his supply declines. QUICK -what do you do?” How much is too much is only in the eyes of the beholder.



  41. Thomas Dersham on February 4, 2017 at 12:28 pm

    Kinda figured as much, but wanted to run it by you, thanks for the response and fitting analogy.



  42. Keith Russell on February 7, 2017 at 9:07 pm

    Ron, love the approach. I took Babs to my keeper auction draft last year and she helped me find value and to construct my team. Finding skill value on bench was critical and in season trades for players with skill sets that did not match first half performance helped fuel a run to first title since 96! (Too many 2nd place finishes to count). In a brief look at babs prelim sheet, I was trying to identify differences between asset groups looking closely for speed differential between players. With speed in short supply, my logic tells me I have to assign additional value for players that have skill set and have shown ability to steal 10+ bases and in some cases 15-20 vs similar asset grouped players that will be under 10 more than likely. Example Harper vs Morales in PW, a class or Polanco vs Pujols in p,a class. I have to account for stolen base potential more than ever and believe Babs may be able to get slightly more granular here? Thoughts?



  43. shandler on February 7, 2017 at 9:24 pm

    I wouldn’t get too granular. A player projected for 10ish SBs could hit 13 or could hit 3. They are generally not counted on for steals and so their chances will be left to the fates. I’d rather focus on the skills that ARE projectable, and those are players with at least above average speed, which are going to likely translate to 15-20 or more SBs. Build a core from those and I think you’ll be much better off.



  44. Jason Denny on February 16, 2017 at 12:41 pm

    I am coming back for year two – when oh when will BABS go down the road of application-based 😉 I know it costs more – mark me down!

    Ron – that is just a wish but all good either way. I LOVE the way you do things, your insights and all.

    Thanks!



  45. Jay Joyce on February 17, 2017 at 6:08 pm

    Hey Ron!

    What are your thoughts on me obtaining LeMahieu for one of the guys I am not going to keep? Would you rather have D.J. or Fowler in the OBP setting? Leaning towards keeping Carrasco over Wil Myers, but you might need to sell me on why BABS doesn’t like him and why he’s worth letting go. He cost me Chris Sale last season.



  46. shandler on February 17, 2017 at 10:09 pm

    LeMahieu is nice but who would you be cutting? Would rather have Fowler in an OBP league. Myers has a barely average hard hit ball rate and a groundball tendency so the power may not sustain. Speed might, though.



  47. Jay Joyce on February 19, 2017 at 11:54 pm

    How about going after Archer or Tomas for Myers?



  48. shandler on February 20, 2017 at 8:38 am

    I’d do that.