2016 Pod’s Picks & Pans: First Base

Last week, I brought back the Pod’s Picks series, though renamed it this time since not every player was technically a “pick”. Pod’s Picks and Pans compares my ranking to the consensus (excluding my rank) at each position to determine who I am most bullish and bearish on relative to the rest of the rankers. Thanks to commenter bubba munga, I have calculated the rankings difference using a new method, involving the LN function on Excel. This properly weighs the more significant difference between picks five and 10 versus 35 and 41, despite the latter pair being six picks apart, as opposed to just give in the former.

For the first base position, my Picks will only include those in my top 20 and my Pans will only include those in the Consensus top 20.

Pod’s Picks: First Base

PLAYER	Mike	Consensus	Diff
Chris Davis	4	7	-3
Ryan Zimmerman	20	33	-13
Buster Posey	9	13	-4

I have to admit, I had no idea I was so much higher on Chris Davis than everyone else. After enjoying the mother of all rebound seasons in 2015, it’s fair that fantasy owners question exactly which version of Davis shows up in 2016. The first thing I always do is compare my projections against Steamer, ZiPS, and the Fans to see if I’m overly optimistic. Nope, mine fits perfectly with the rest of the projected lines. So when this happens, I throw up my hands and don’t know how to explain the discrepancy. Clearly it would be foolish to expect another 45+ homers and near 30% HR/FB mark, but even some major regression, Davis is still a top five option. I’m forecasting a decline to 39 homers, which makes him one of the best power bats available.

Finally, a player that makes complete sense. I drafted Ryan Zimmerman in LABR and was pretty shocked how far he fell. Clearly, it’s for health reasons and the fact that he’s already had issues during the spring with his plantar fasciitis, it doesn’t quell our concerns. The rankings were published before that was made public, I believe, though I haven’t further downgraded his playing time projection. But outside of the health questions, I think he’s due for a major performance rebound, coming off a career low BABIP and the second highest strikeout rate of his career. The strikeout rate might normally be a red flag, but his SwStk% was barely above his career average, so I think he improves this year.

I was very surprised to see that even as a first baseman, Buster Posey was my ninth most valuable guy. A lot of that has to do with the significant value his projected .309 batting average provides. Batting average as a category is nearly always undervalued. Of course, you’re not going to play Posey at first base, though in an NL-Only league where replacement level is actually quite similar across all positions, it wouldn’t be such a mistake to play Posey at first.

Pod’s Pans: First Base

PLAYER	Mike	Consensus	Diff
Jose Abreu	6	4	2
Freddie Freeman	13	9	4
Carlos Santana	23	17	6

Two rankings spots really isn’t much, even though this new formula suggests that the difference between my Jose Abreu ranking and consensus is the largest discrepancy! My projections are essentially identical to Steamer, though it’s clear I’m a bit lower on his home run power than the other systems. But one less homer or two shouldn’t make much of a difference. It’s likely the other rankers see Abreu “rebounding” back toward his 2014 level, whereas I feel his 2015 level is closer to his true talent.

Freedie Freeman is an easy explanation. His spring wrist issues caused me to downgrade his playing time estimate and slightly decrease his HR/FB rate. Since he’s already surrounded by a terrible supporting cast, which will hamper his runs batted in and runs scored totals, the wrist issue just makes things worse.

Carlos Santana is an interesting name to find myself bearish on. My projections are nearly identical to all those on his player page. So perhaps this is an example of the opposite effect I described in the Posey blurb above — if a high batting average is undervalued, then a low batting average is not penalized in valuations/rankings enough. That may be the explanation here. Or, the rankers expect Santana to enjoy a more significant rebound toward his 2014 level than I, and the projection systems, expect.