*** VD 12 Commentary Thread ***

[Kevin Seitzer]

I don't know what I'm doing overall but this is fun.

If I had access to more data and more time I think I could put up a better showing next time. The player name handicaps are just wild guesses for me at this point. I know quizy is best but in a relative sense most of the value plays are gone there so the rest of us are left with junk. Is is better to get good junk rather than bad junk or go after the relative differences between great players with common letters vs good players with common names. Who knows?

Fun either way.

In general, freaking out and grabbing slightly bad junk at the scarce letters in order to avoid actual bad junk at the scarce letters is the recipe for finishing in the second division. Last 6-8 rounds, all rules go out the window, but early in the draft that is the surest way to lose.

[hacko]

That's the central question of the draft and there's no straight-forward answer and it also depends on what others are doing. I will say that in my first couple of drafts, it was particularly painful to see how many options were left at letters like C, M, etc while I was figuring out how to fill the more scarce letters. But there's always value to be had -- in some drafts, it does make sense to wait on certain letters. It just helps to have a plan for how you will fill those slots letter. Flying blind is tough. Also, maybe this was bumped, but at some point (many years ago now) someone (probably Johnny) posted a rough scarcity guide to the letters -- sort of a ranking system to which ones are most difficult to fill. Getting beyond the fact that we know QUIZY is the hardest, and OVEN is also very difficult (although within that there are big differences -- E is much harder to fill than O), but which other letters are also very tough, etc. Maybe some can repost it.

Look in the intro to vintage draft thread

[Ken]

In general, freaking out and grabbing slightly bad junk at the scarce letters in order to avoid actual bad junk at the scarce letters is the recipe for finishing in the second division. Last 6-8 rounds, all rules go out the window, but early in the draft that is the surest way to lose.

If you keep talking about grabbing junk I'm going to have to have a chat with Mr. Anthopoulos.

[Kevin Seitzer]

In between grabbing junk, I dug up this old spreadsheet, which shows the history of the picks from the vintage drafts on the old site:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1GhxiDZ2nw-c-hmCHqAV-UHG0jfybGqGW

The VD18-19,14-15,6-9_last_names worksheet is probably most relevant to this draft. It won't have some of the modern players (Upton, Verlander) in appropriate places or at all, but in terms of letter strength it can give a good idea.

[Kevin Seitzer]

You can tell when my twins were born (summer 2009, after VD21) because that was basically the end of my participation in vintage drafting until this one. It looks like I did one more (VD23) and that was it. I don't know how many more of them there were on the old site after I bowed out.

[revo]

First thing I would attempt is to take the career & BY stats and write a formula that translates it into a single number, then do a rank. Some use baselines, like a VBD approach, others use a player rater approach, and I use a point per stat approach. Once you do this, you'll need to weigh BY vs. career, and then add in modifiers depending on the type of draft we're doing. Lastly, start to get a feel for which letters are deep vs. those that are shallow.

Then once you have that down, come up with a strategy. Some have tried category punts that have worked, but I think we've nullified those through the type of scoring method we use. I tend to use a tiering strategy just like you'd use in your fantasy baseball draft. Try to anticipate the runs and make sure you don't squander away advantages.

I find doing all that to be the fun part, so I guess I'm a spreadsheet nerd even if I think I pale in comparison to Johnny & KS. My rankings are less scientific, I would assume, and more "from the gut" (i.e. my modifiers are pulled from the sky and are not scientifically based).

[Ken]

First thing I would attempt is to take the career & BY stats and write a formula that translates it into a single number, then do a rank. Some use baselines, like a VBD approach, others use a player rater approach, and I use a point per stat approach. Once you do this, you'll need to weigh BY vs. career, and then add in modifiers depending on the type of draft we're doing. Lastly, start to get a feel for which letters are deep vs. those that are shallow.

I'm doing that to some extent, but the fallacy of my approach is that the valuations need to take into account relative value (both to position and to "Letter") before they are summed up. If you sum first and then compare you are vulnerable to missing out on categories in a relative sense, and in a multiplication scoring league that problem is magnified.

[heyelander]

It took me about 4 times to get the jest of it

I think I nailed the jest of the drafts my first time through, now the jyst of who to draft when... that still eludes me after like 30 of them.

[revo]

I'm doing that to some extent, but the fallacy of my approach is that the valuations need to take into account relative value (both to position and to "Letter") before they are summed up. If you sum first and then compare you are vulnerable to missing out on categories in a relative sense, and in a multiplication scoring league that problem is magnified.

Yes, you're probably right, but I don't do that -- which is why I tend to fall behind in a category or two without realizing it, I guess. But then again, I won the last VD using last names! I would think if you used modifiers before summing, and basing it on categories/positions, you'd have to constantly readjust during the draft to reflect your current standing.

Using the post- method, I don't adjust. If I have my catchers covered, for instance, I'll just ignore catchers on my list rather than readjust the modifiers.

[Bene Futuis]

I think I nailed the jest of the drafts my first time through, now the jyst of who to draft when... that still eludes me after like 30 of them.

Not sure I get the gist of what you're saying here. Perhaps your jyst was merely a jest.

[Ken]

Not sure I get the gist

Before or after Seitzer grabbed your junk?

[heyelander]

Not sure I get the gist of what you're saying here. Perhaps your jyst was merely a jest.

Ha! It's funny because I'm not just an ass, but also an idiot.

That's whay I get for relying on my auto correct on my phone

[Ken]

That's whay I get for relying on my auto correct on my phone

I feel like that statement stands on it's own regardless of context.

[TS Garp]

Out of curiosity, who are the players who have had more than one BY chosen? I know Honus Wagner is one. Is Ted Williams another? Does anyone ever take 1941 over 1949?

[mjl]

Somebody make me feel bad about how early that last pick of mine was.