As some of you know, we developed our own Player Rater methodology called Point Shares about a year ago. Since then, it’s been one big poontrain….zooming past Statgeek Station. Perhaps it’s because my hat and eyewear aren’t goofy enough?
Anyway, we’ve done some informal comparisons in the past w/ ESPN but – after having a prolonged, dorktastic debate – I decided to take it one step further. I created a test where I pitted our Point Shares against two other player raters: ESPN and RotoTimes. Please, blog, may I have some more?
Part 3 of How Valid is the ESPN Player Rater?
In two previous articles (part 1 and part 2), we’ve laid out alternative views for judging the most valuable player in 2007 5×5 MLB fantasy baseball (we say Peavy) and for pitchers – using and abusing the ESPN Player Rater in the process. Please, blog, may I have some more?
(Part 2 of How Valid Is the ESPN Player Rater?)
If you’ve ever seen the ESPN Player Rater (or, for that matter, other quantitative player rankings for fantasy baseball), you’ve likely asked yourself:
How could there be so many starting pitchers at the top? Please, blog, may I have some more?
Anyone who played ESPN 2007 Fantasy Baseball last year probably had two lingering questions throughout the season:
1) Did the ESPN employees responsible for the database crash that screwed up the first two weeks’ worth of 2007 stats befall a fate worse than Harold “Harass is one word?” Reynolds (rarely insightful on Baseball Tonight but he’s like Peter F*in’ Gammons compared to replacement ex-2B Eric Young)? Please, blog, may I have some more?