http://rotopoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/14/comparing-the-categories/ a blog about fantasy sports and fantasy basketball, exploring statistical trends and quantitative analysis Thu, 06 Aug 2009 09:36:16 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 http://rotopoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/14/comparing-the-categories/#comment-127 Give Me The Rock » Roto Weights the Categories for You Thu, 08 Feb 2007 02:38:28 +0000 http://rotopoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/14/comparing-the-categories/#comment-127 [...] RotoPoll didn’t start my thought process with this post, but it’s a good one about how v.... Then, Philthy over at Fantapedia (Your fantasy basketball encyclopedia) has an excellent essay slash dissertation on the value of Turnovers in Roto Leagues. Both of these posts play with something I’ve been thinking about since I was invited to be part of the DroppingDimes Expert’s Leauge. Basically, that thought I’ve been mulling is: Roto is actually pretty great. I’ve written about Roto vs. Head-to-Head before, and if I wanted to look harder, I’m sure I could find something in the archives to show how mean I was to Roto in the past. I’ve always like H2H better before, and I still think it’s probably more fun and better for casual fantasy players (one of the reasons a writer can actually make money writing about Fantasy Football). [...] [...] RotoPoll didn’t start my thought process with this post, but it’s a good one about how v…. Then, Philthy over at Fantapedia (Your fantasy basketball encyclopedia) has an excellent essay slash dissertation on the value of Turnovers in Roto Leagues. Both of these posts play with something I’ve been thinking about since I was invited to be part of the DroppingDimes Expert’s Leauge. Basically, that thought I’ve been mulling is: Roto is actually pretty great. I’ve written about Roto vs. Head-to-Head before, and if I wanted to look harder, I’m sure I could find something in the archives to show how mean I was to Roto in the past. I’ve always like H2H better before, and I still think it’s probably more fun and better for casual fantasy players (one of the reasons a writer can actually make money writing about Fantasy Football). [...]

]]> http://rotopoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/14/comparing-the-categories/#comment-107 rotopoll Wed, 17 Jan 2007 20:13:10 +0000 http://rotopoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/14/comparing-the-categories/#comment-107 Patrick, that's something I've thought about too, for exactly the reason that you mention. I don't actually think it would be that hard either--it's just a simple correlation. Patrick, that’s something I’ve thought about too, for exactly the reason that you mention. I don’t actually think it would be that hard either–it’s just a simple correlation.

]]> http://rotopoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/14/comparing-the-categories/#comment-106 Patrick Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:13:39 +0000 http://rotopoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/14/comparing-the-categories/#comment-106 I'm probably only speaking for myself here, but I'd be interested to look at the correlations (or perhaps another measure of relatedness) between categories to see how they relate to each other. Like looking at individual categories, I think that information would also help for strategy purposes. I'm going to speculate that free throw percentage and blocks are negatively correlated with each other, so trying to build a high percentage free throw and high block team would be a disaster, even though both have small, distinct set of players to target (or avoid). I’m probably only speaking for myself here, but I’d be interested to look at the correlations (or perhaps another measure of relatedness) between categories to see how they relate to each other. Like looking at individual categories, I think that information would also help for strategy purposes. I’m going to speculate that free throw percentage and blocks are negatively correlated with each other, so trying to build a high percentage free throw and high block team would be a disaster, even though both have small, distinct set of players to target (or avoid).

]]> http://rotopoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/14/comparing-the-categories/#comment-104 rotopoll Tue, 16 Jan 2007 06:47:07 +0000 http://rotopoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/14/comparing-the-categories/#comment-104 Also, it might help if you're considering giving up in a category. Looking at the distributions, I think the "best" category to tank is actually points, since it has the most concentration of value in a small group of players (or free throws if you have the guys at the tail end). Also, it might help if you’re considering giving up in a category. Looking at the distributions, I think the “best” category to tank is actually points, since it has the most concentration of value in a small group of players (or free throws if you have the guys at the tail end).

]]> http://rotopoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/14/comparing-the-categories/#comment-103 rotopoll Tue, 16 Jan 2007 06:43:49 +0000 http://rotopoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/14/comparing-the-categories/#comment-103 I think one way it can help is if you're thinking about how you might need to improve, in certain categories, in the future. For example, say your team is doing poorly in the points category. According to the numbers, you're less likely to be able to find someone who can help you in points down the line (all other things being equal), so if you have a chance to grab a guy now, via trade or waivers, maybe you should do it. I think one way it can help is if you’re thinking about how you might need to improve, in certain categories, in the future. For example, say your team is doing poorly in the points category. According to the numbers, you’re less likely to be able to find someone who can help you in points down the line (all other things being equal), so if you have a chance to grab a guy now, via trade or waivers, maybe you should do it.

]]> http://rotopoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/14/comparing-the-categories/#comment-101 Patrick Tue, 16 Jan 2007 03:22:55 +0000 http://rotopoll.wordpress.com/2007/01/14/comparing-the-categories/#comment-101 This is something I've been thinking about - but how do we relate this info to overall player ratings? Isn't this really a step back? For example, Tyson Chandler can't shoot free throws, but he can get a lot rebounds. So how does looking at A and B separately provide more useful information then A + B? This is something I’ve been thinking about – but how do we relate this info to overall player ratings? Isn’t this really a step back? For example, Tyson Chandler can’t shoot free throws, but he can get a lot rebounds. So how does looking at A and B separately provide more useful information then A + B?

]]>