best auction software

[DJRadar]

Looking for suggestions on the best auction keeper software

[Ken]

mine. haha. I bet I'm probably one of only a handful of people who write custom software for fantasy just for their own leagues (non-excel division). Probably a waste of time to go that deep but it's fun.

[revo]

Rotolab

[ThatRogue]

mine. haha. I bet I'm probably one of only a handful of people who write custom software for fantasy just for their own leagues (non-excel division). Probably a waste of time to go that deep but it's fun.

That's impressive, Ken! For several years, one of our league mates designed and used his own custom program, but I think he converted over to RotoLab some time ago.

Pre RotoLab, I used an exhaustive excel workbook with VLOOKUP to pull projections...but nowadays, using RL is sooooooo much easier (for me).

[quoin]

I haven't looked at Rotolab in years but my big frustration with it was that you couldn't do a batch import of your own projections. You're either stuck with BHQ projections or you have to edit them one by one. Is this still the case?

[Gregg]

mine. haha. I bet I'm probably one of only a handful of people who write custom software for fantasy just for their own leagues (non-excel division). Probably a waste of time to go that deep but it's fun.

Is yours easy to use for others not named Ken?

[Ken]

Is yours easy to use for others not named Ken?

probably not

[revo]

I haven't looked at Rotolab in years but my big frustration with it was that you couldn't do a batch import of your own projections. You're either stuck with BHQ projections or you have to edit them one by one. Is this still the case?

Yes it is. Agree, some frustrations with it. My biggest pet peeve was that he changed the way K% is calculated, where before if you edited that % the K total would update (or if you edited the IP the Ks would change based off the K%), but now it's if you change the IP you then have to calculate how many Ks (and BBs) there should be. But I haven't found anything better.

[Ken]

Yes it is. Agree, some frustrations with it. My biggest pet peeve was that he changed the way K% is calculated, where before if you edited that % the K total would update (or if you edited the IP the Ks would change based off the K%), but now it's if you change the Ks or IP you then have to calculate how many Ks (and BBs) there should be. But I haven't found anything better.

My experience with rotolab is from the perspective of a competitor. Every year in a couple local live auctions there are several guys who use rotolab with the default projections. It's obvious who they are, they are always bidding on the same guys. And for the last ~10 years it seems like they typically end up near the bottom of the standings. One of those individuals has adjusted and improved (not sure if he switched off rotolab), but the rest seem to just follow the same patterns every year and follow it right to the bottom. I don't know if that's just me or if it's common across many leagues but it seems to be a recipe for losing in my experience.

[Gregg]

My experience with rotolab is from the perspective of a competitor. Every year in a couple local live auctions there are several guys who use rotolab with the default projections. It's obvious who they are, they are always bidding on the same guys. And for the last ~10 years it seems like they typically end up near the bottom of the standings. One of those individuals has adjusted and improved (not sure if he switched off rotolab), but the rest seem to just follow the same patterns every year and follow it right to the bottom. I don't know if that's just me or if it's common across many leagues but it seems to be a recipe for losing in my experience.

Agree on the competitors. I think all but one or two use it in our 12 Team AL only 5x5.

NL only consisting of the same guys except 2 teams all use it. I am very sure that that the most competitive teams manipulate it or have their own lists to work in conjunction with it.

[Big Tymer]

My experience with rotolab is from the perspective of a competitor. Every year in a couple local live auctions there are several guys who use rotolab with the default projections. It's obvious who they are, they are always bidding on the same guys. And for the last ~10 years it seems like they typically end up near the bottom of the standings. One of those individuals has adjusted and improved (not sure if he switched off rotolab), but the rest seem to just follow the same patterns every year and follow it right to the bottom. I don't know if that's just me or if it's common across many leagues but it seems to be a recipe for losing in my experience.

That’s a “user issue” imo. Projections are all wrong. Everyone’s is. But they can be a guide and are best used as such. Anyone who uses valuations from Rotolab as a hard number is missing the point imo. If Rotolab calculates a persons value at $50 post inflation then they only realize that if (a) the player his their exact projection, (b) the leagues inflation is spread EXACTLY how the user set it within Rotolab and (c) the relative salary weights between hitting and pitching (and then all categories) align exactly with what the user inputted.

A, B and C will never all be true and odds are none of them are. Thus, the auction value from any system is an illusion.

[Ken]

That’s a “user issue” imo. Projections are all wrong. Everyone’s is. But they can be a guide and are best used as such. Anyone who uses valuations from Rotolab as a hard number is missing the point imo. If Rotolab calculates a persons value at $50 post inflation then they only realize that if (a) the player his their exact projection, (b) the leagues inflation is spread EXACTLY how the user set it within Rotolab and (c) the relative salary weights between hitting and pitching (and then all categories) align exactly with what the user inputted.

A, B and C will never all be true and odds are none of them are. Thus, the auction value from any system is an illusion.

Certainly you could be correct. A tool is only as good as the person using the tool makes it. If I try to use my hammer to cut down a tree it's going to be a long day.

And while I agree with you in general on valuations, we all use valuations in some way or another. It just seems like the HQ ones are really bad from my experience. Again though, I've never used them at all because I've tended to succeed in leagues against people using them by using a variety of other sources.

[Big Tymer]

And you might be right Ken. I’ve been using HQ for almost 20 years now (damn, I’m old) but don’t really value their projections any more than the ones on FG (or even BP though PECOTA always seems super bearish). For all I know they are “worse” than the others but can’t imagine with all the advanced modeling these days the mechanics of the valuation models are that different and thus really just comes down to who projects playing time better.

[revo]

Agree with both Ken & Rick. After I get Rotolab, I instantly start to tinker with the projections, all the way up to draft day. Quite frankly, 50% of the BBHQ projections are crapola, not so much as the stat ratios, but the playing time. For instance, you can't project a guy who is durable and routinely gets 550 ABs for 475. Or a SP who routinely pitches 180 IP with 150 IP.

I do find it interesting how many players are using Rotolab, according to the anecdotes here! Merv must be rolling in it!

[Ken]

can’t imagine with all the advanced modeling these days the mechanics of the valuation models are that different and thus really just comes down to who projects playing time better.

I'm not following you on this one. Because of all the advanced modelling there are potentially significant differences in valuations. Some heavily weigh statcast data for example. I'm sure baseballHQ doesnt (what does it use, honestly I've never dug into Shandler's methodology?)