First off, I'm not saying compensation is complete crap. I just noticed something that threw me off big time. When checking over the 2B/SS/CF compensation scores I noticed my CF Wesley Freeman scored a 70.6 this season while my SS Nolan Arenedo scored a 64.4 this season. If you'd consider those numbers to be the two year average score then Freeman would've narrowly missed Type A status and Arenedo would've missed compensation completely.
I can't remember their exact numbers off hand by I believe them to be something like this:
The fielding percentage is an obvious thing to figure out as to why Arenedo's score is lower. But if you look at his stats his RF was pretty high and made around 100 more plays than he did in 2019 where he posted a good ~.985 Fld %. Freeman stats out wanting $7.5M, but Arenedo starts out wanting $9.5M in arbitration. I'm not asking or even think that it'll come out perfect, but our current scores suggest that Freeman is clearly better and Mogul feels Arenedo is worth a solid amount more than Freeman.
I then noticed that Arenedo's compensation score was better in 2019 with inferior offensive stats and defensive stats that's arbitrary to the individual as to which is better (more errors and more plays or less errors and less plays). Personally I'll take his 2020 season any day over his 2019 numbers.
In the end I think there's too much value placed on fielding percentage. It basically rewards the immobile player over the player that is involved in more plays. I think another thing wrong with the compensation value is that it likely sees all fielding percentages as equal. A .990 Fld% is good in CF, great at SS, but mediocre at 1B. Defense is definitely something to keep in the compensation scores, but I think an alternative way to more effectively calculate who's better than who is needed.
I think a solution could be to break every position down, so that each position has their own compensation. I would keep the Fielding%, but I would add in Range Factor for 2B, 3B, SS, and each OF position, for C I would add in CS%. I wouldn't add in Range Factor for C or 1B because both positions RF is mainly due to recieving a throw.
07-06-2011, 03:58 PM (This post was last modified: 07-06-2011, 03:59 PM by dejota.)
Mogul/contracts/compensation will never agree. Just use mogul's scout score to see who it thinks is better player, the formula's aren't the same as moguls scout score and contracts take into account a lot of things unrelated to compensation so I don't see what conclusion we can draw from their asking prices.
We don't use FP% in our formula. I've attached a copy of my formula's for review if you'd like to look at them. The most important part is you can see my intent in each formula and which stats I emphasized for the different groups.
Arenedo has a higher BA and OBP over the past two seasons along with better defensive vitals. Only considering his group he's a more valuable player IMO. this is just a difference of opinions I think the fact they score so closely highlights the validity of the formulas since at the end of the day they each have different skills but bring very similar value to the table.
(07-06-2011, 03:58 PM)dejota Wrote: Mogul/contracts/compensation will never agree. Just use mogul's scout score to see who it thinks is better player, the formula's aren't the same as moguls scout score and contracts take into account a lot of things unrelated to compensation so I don't see what conclusion we can draw from their asking prices.
We don't use FP% in our formula. I've attached a copy of my formula's for review if you'd like to look at them. The most important part is you can see my intent in each formula and which stats I emphasized for the different groups.
Arenedo has a higher BA and OBP over the past two seasons along with better defensive vitals. Only considering his group he's a more valuable player IMO. this is just a difference of opinions I think the fact they score so closely highlights the validity of the formulas since at the end of the day they each have different skills but bring very similar value to the table.
Check out the formulas.
Ah, makes sense now. I'd instead use OPS to replace HR and OBP and I don't think Runs should be used without RBI. Players who rely on doubles (like Arenedo) get no extra value in the compensation formula when clearly it adds value to the player. Runs/RBI are up to the individual as to whether they actually add value or are just a product of opportunity, but I don't think one can be used without the other.
If you use OPS then power hitters are basically getting a double stat count. DJ and I looked at this a few seasons ago and I think that these formulas are almost always right on.
(07-06-2011, 09:08 PM)AndyP Wrote: If you use OPS then power hitters are basically getting a double stat count. DJ and I looked at this a few seasons ago and I think that these formulas are almost always right on.
Every homerun is counting for their OPS and their HR category. Not to mention it would add to runs and rbi - I can almost guarantee heavy HR hitters would jump up the list faster than we want.
(07-06-2011, 04:13 PM)mattynokes Wrote: Ah, makes sense now. I'd instead use OPS to replace HR and OBP and I don't think Runs should be used without RBI. Players who rely on doubles (like Arenedo) get no extra value in the compensation formula when clearly it adds value to the player. Runs/RBI are up to the individual as to whether they actually add value or are just a product of opportunity, but I don't think one can be used without the other.
