Like most Americans, I spend way too much time devoted to my two fantasy football teams. The most frustrating part about fantasy football is the fact that everybody that has a team wants to tell you a story about their particular team. I've listed this as one of the most annoying things about sports. Nobody really cares that who's on your team.
A favorite thing of mine to see for each week is the different projections that each fantasy expert has. From there, I like to see the players that different fantasy writers tell you to start and sit. It's entertaining to see how they actually do. Grantland has decided to look at what some of the experts are saying.
I bet, as a stumbler onto this blog, that you're wondering what this has to do with anything. However, I'm going to do a study where I'll try and figure out which projections are the ones to be trusted and which ones aren't or how to make reliable projections.
Brief explanation: I'll be looking at three different sites that project fantasy stats. They are ESPN, nfl.com, and Sports Illustrated. I'll look at them as individuals, averaged together, and a weight that I've been messing around with.
Friday, September 23, 2011
Friday, September 9, 2011
Alliterative Text Designed to show creativity, well not yet.
When Rob Neyer wrote for ESPN, he used to put the list of links on Friday under the heading of Friday Filberts. Well, I can't think of a creative way to put a title for my links. But today, it will be called Friday Fun.
At the beginning of the year, I got into a lengthy argument on the ESPN comment section about whether or nor the Twins would compete this year. Well, I was right. Who know how long it will take to fix?
You can read some of the points I brought up on my old blog, well most of my points where about how terrible I thought (and think) Bill Smith is.
Fangraphs has another take on the Twins.
Sometimes, well actually about 33% of the time, I'll post something that is political in nature. I have a lot of Facebook friends who say things like "we should drug test all those people on welfare, everyone on welfare is a drug user, they're costing the state so much money!" Well, to that I have this to say and also this.
At the beginning of the year, I got into a lengthy argument on the ESPN comment section about whether or nor the Twins would compete this year. Well, I was right. Who know how long it will take to fix?
You can read some of the points I brought up on my old blog, well most of my points where about how terrible I thought (and think) Bill Smith is.
Fangraphs has another take on the Twins.
Sometimes, well actually about 33% of the time, I'll post something that is political in nature. I have a lot of Facebook friends who say things like "we should drug test all those people on welfare, everyone on welfare is a drug user, they're costing the state so much money!" Well, to that I have this to say and also this.
Annoying Things about sports
Here's a quick list of 10 things that are annoying about sports, sportswriting, watching sports, etc. It's not in any particular order. The #1 thing is no more annoying than the #10 thing. Well it's possible that it is to you, it's not necessarily what is meant by this list.
10. Watching sports with somebody who thinks they're better than professional athletes. It makes it even worse when the person saying this has never played beyond the level of where 14-15 year olds play and even more worse when they have never played the sport competitively.
9. Hearing people talk about their fantasy sports teams. The first rule of fantasy sports: Nobody cares about your fantasy team except you.
8. When people think the sports games are too important. People sometimes watch games thinking the outcome is life or death.
7. Hearing or reading sportswriters debate the meaning of the phrase "most valuable". Every damn year. Every damn sport.
6. Hearing or reading sportswriters start off their debates about the phrase of "most valuable" by saying that there's so many articles about what this phrase means.
5. Ultimately unsatisfying results in crowning champions, which happens in every sport almost every year. The biggest offenders: college sports. Joe Posnanski has written about this before, if I find the post, I'll link it on here.
4. Narratives of athletes not matching with the statistics. This is the second most annoying thing to me. I hate when sportswriters will write something similar to such and such hitter can't hit in the clutch (usually Alex Rodriguez) but all the stats indicate that they can or at least don't have problems.
3. Sportswriters who flat-out ignore statistics. This is the most annoying thing to me. There's always sportswriters who will say something that flies in the face of what the statistics say. Then they'll back what they were saying by quoting intangibles.
2. The never-ending money arguments. For whatever reason, fans always decry athletes for making too much money but never stop to think about the billions of dollars that sports owners make that don't make it into the athlete's hands (or ummmm bank accounts, I guess).
1. The lack of accountability for predictions. Sportswriters and analysts at the beginning of each sports season will make predictions not only of how teams will do but players, as well. Often these sports analysts and writers will make predictions that don't make sense like the wins and losses of all the teams not adding up correctly. More likely, they'll ignore simple regression to the mean analysis.
10. Watching sports with somebody who thinks they're better than professional athletes. It makes it even worse when the person saying this has never played beyond the level of where 14-15 year olds play and even more worse when they have never played the sport competitively.
9. Hearing people talk about their fantasy sports teams. The first rule of fantasy sports: Nobody cares about your fantasy team except you.
8. When people think the sports games are too important. People sometimes watch games thinking the outcome is life or death.
7. Hearing or reading sportswriters debate the meaning of the phrase "most valuable". Every damn year. Every damn sport.
6. Hearing or reading sportswriters start off their debates about the phrase of "most valuable" by saying that there's so many articles about what this phrase means.
5. Ultimately unsatisfying results in crowning champions, which happens in every sport almost every year. The biggest offenders: college sports. Joe Posnanski has written about this before, if I find the post, I'll link it on here.
4. Narratives of athletes not matching with the statistics. This is the second most annoying thing to me. I hate when sportswriters will write something similar to such and such hitter can't hit in the clutch (usually Alex Rodriguez) but all the stats indicate that they can or at least don't have problems.
3. Sportswriters who flat-out ignore statistics. This is the most annoying thing to me. There's always sportswriters who will say something that flies in the face of what the statistics say. Then they'll back what they were saying by quoting intangibles.
2. The never-ending money arguments. For whatever reason, fans always decry athletes for making too much money but never stop to think about the billions of dollars that sports owners make that don't make it into the athlete's hands (or ummmm bank accounts, I guess).
1. The lack of accountability for predictions. Sportswriters and analysts at the beginning of each sports season will make predictions not only of how teams will do but players, as well. Often these sports analysts and writers will make predictions that don't make sense like the wins and losses of all the teams not adding up correctly. More likely, they'll ignore simple regression to the mean analysis.
The initial post
The best part about the Major League Baseball All-Star game every year is that a random player will eventually make it onto the roster. Thanks to the rule that every team has to have an All-Star. Actually, the absolute best part about the All-Star game is that years later when a player retires, people will tout for that player's Hall of Fame candidacy by quoting how many All-Star games that player had. But I digress.
In 1999, Ron Coomer of the Minnesota Twins made the All-Star game. Nothing personal against Ron Coomer or anything but he had to be one of the least deserving players to make an All-Star game. His stats for the first half of that season were as follows. .282/.312/.458 with an OPS+ of 110. However, his sOPS+, which makes this relative to the league's OPS for that split was 95. If you're unaware, an OPS+ of 100 is supposed to be league average. Coomer was slightly below average in terms of OPS+ which takes into account the player's home ballpark, as well. This OPS+ would be fine if Coomer was performing at a premium defensive position such as shortstop, second base, centerfield, or catcher. Coomer was playing third base and first base and was doing quite alright at it, for that season Coomer was able to put up 1.0 dWAR (WAR is Wins above replacement) according to baseballreference.com.
This blog's intention is not to poke fun at Ron Coomer. He played at the Major League Baseball level for 9 seasons, something I wish I could do. This blog will try to beat stupididty, inconsistencies in logic, flaws in logic, and downright hypocrisies where it can. It will also discuss sports, movies, books, and basically anything the authors find particularly interesting.
Why is the blog titled Ron Coomer is an All-Star? Why thank you for asking, clumsy literary device. The answer to this question is the phrase Ron Coomer is an All-Star will forever be associated with the authors thinking that somebody did something quite illogical.
In 1999, Ron Coomer of the Minnesota Twins made the All-Star game. Nothing personal against Ron Coomer or anything but he had to be one of the least deserving players to make an All-Star game. His stats for the first half of that season were as follows. .282/.312/.458 with an OPS+ of 110. However, his sOPS+, which makes this relative to the league's OPS for that split was 95. If you're unaware, an OPS+ of 100 is supposed to be league average. Coomer was slightly below average in terms of OPS+ which takes into account the player's home ballpark, as well. This OPS+ would be fine if Coomer was performing at a premium defensive position such as shortstop, second base, centerfield, or catcher. Coomer was playing third base and first base and was doing quite alright at it, for that season Coomer was able to put up 1.0 dWAR (WAR is Wins above replacement) according to baseballreference.com.
This blog's intention is not to poke fun at Ron Coomer. He played at the Major League Baseball level for 9 seasons, something I wish I could do. This blog will try to beat stupididty, inconsistencies in logic, flaws in logic, and downright hypocrisies where it can. It will also discuss sports, movies, books, and basically anything the authors find particularly interesting.
Why is the blog titled Ron Coomer is an All-Star? Why thank you for asking, clumsy literary device. The answer to this question is the phrase Ron Coomer is an All-Star will forever be associated with the authors thinking that somebody did something quite illogical.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)