2025 Ottoneu Tiered Rankings Intro

Do you ever sit down to read something and think, “wait, I have read this before”? If you get that sense of deja vu while reading this article, it’s because – for the most part – I am repeating what I wrote last year. It is once again a new year and once again time to dive into my Ottoneu tiered rankings and once again I first need to introduce my rankings. Then, over the next few weeks, hopefully concluding before the cut deadline on 1/31, I’ll roll out individual positional rankings.

As I did last year, I am going to structure this introduction as an FAQ.

Why do you do tiered rankings instead of just ranking 1 through whatever and sticking with that? Are you scared to put a stake in the ground?

Well, yeah, kind of? But it’s mot because I am scared to be wrong, it is because I know my own limitations (and that of humans in general) and the fact is, I can’t clearly and distinctly separate every single player from every other player. Right this very second (SPOILER ALERT!), I have Corbin Carroll ahead of Julio Rodriguez, but both in my $36-$44 tier. That ranking does mean that given a choice between the two, I would currently take Carroll. But in general I think they are both in that tier of OF, along with some other names. If you like one more than the other, great.

But I also don’t think you can ever just straight rank guys, because there is so much context missing from that ranking. In a later tier, I have Jesus Sanchez and Jordan Walker. Can I put one ahead of the other in a ranking? I can, and I will. But they are so different. Walker has a lower floor and a higher ceiling. If you need sure-production, he isn’t as good a bet. If you want to take a risk, he is a lottery ticket that could pay off. In one auction, I might pick Sanchez; in another, Walker. Hence, same tier.

So when you criticize my rankings, just keep in mind that I don’t feel super strongly about the numeric rankings. I feel more strongly about the tiers.

Ok, so what are these “tiers” and what do they mean, anyway?

Last year, I tested something new and I kind of liked it. I used the same set of tiers ($0, $0-$1, $1-$2, $3-$5, $6-$9, $10-$14, $15-$20, $21-$27, $28-$35, $36-$44, $45-$54, $55-$65) for every position. If a player is in the $3-$5 tier, I would not want to pay $6 for him, but I would gladly go over $2. If he is in the $28-$35 tier, I might think he is a $30 player and not go to $32 or $33, but I definitely wouldn’t go to $36. Pretty simple, right?

You say it is simple, but the three lowest tiers overlap. Can’t you count?

Good eye! Yes they do overlap and yes I can count. But, like last year, I wanted to avoid pretending there was too clear a distinction between $0 and $1 players or even $1 and $2 players. There are more than 480 rosterable players and only 480 roster spots, so at the margins, you will have some players that might be worth $1, but don’t get auctioned, and that is okay. Here is how I interpret those tiers:

• $0 – I won’t roster this player
• $0-$1 – I can see rostering this player, and they probably should be rostered in some leagues, but there they won’t fit on every roster or be picked up in every league.
• $1-$2 – These players probably should be rostered.

You always talk about projections? Did you just let Steamer put these players in order and then take credit?

No. A little, maybe. Not just Steamer though. But, well, kind of? Here is my process:

1. I pull every player in the Ottoneu universe into a spreadsheet.
2. I then filter out anyone who meets ALL of the following criteria:
   1. Not rostered in any of three Ottoneu Slack Community mock auctions I looked at
   2. Rostered in less than 4% of Ottoneu leagues
   3. Has a value below $0 based on Depth Charts projections
   4. Is outside the top 125 prospects on a consensus ranking I created based on rankings I like to use
3. For the remaining players, I assign each a position (C, 1B, 3B, MI, OF, U, SP, RP)
4. I create a sheet with all remaining players and with columns for position, value from Justin Vibber’s Surplus Calculator, two different values for different valuation methodologies I used, average price from those mock drafts, and prospect ranking
5. I put each player into a tier – yes, I create tier BEFORE rankings – using all of those columns, plus other data (likely role, how I feel about their depth chart projection, etc.) as inputs
6. I go back and rank players within each tier and make corrections to tiers if I find a player who I know longer think belongs in the tier I originally assigned.
7. I review the full rankings for the position, make player notes, and adjust rankings and tiers as I go.

I didn’t see any mention of inflation. Does that mean these rankings are only good for first year leagues?

No. The tiers themselves definitely apply more directly to first year leagues, but they are directionally still right for future leagues, you just need to apply inflation. If a player in the $28-$35 tier is on your roster in a 4th year league at $37, they are probably a pretty solid keeper.

Are these only good for FanGraphs Points Leagues?

No. They are constructed based on FGPts scoring, but they can be applied to other formats:

• For SABR Points, hitter rankings are the same, but pitchers are a little less valuable and RP are a little more valuable relative to SP.
• For 4×4 leagues, the value curve is a little flatter (the top guys are not AS valuable) but the order is pretty similar; though homer-prone pitchers take a bigger hit.
• For H2H leagues, pitchers who go deep into games are more valuable and RP who throw multiple innings are more valuable, while catcher-value is more playing-time dependent. Move up any C who is going to play less catcher but will DH or play 1B and stay in the lineup for 140+ games.
• For 5×5, you can get a sense of who I like, but I wouldn’t rely too heavily on theses. It is just a different game. There are other standard fantasy rankings on this site and you can use those for 5×5.

How do you handle multi-position players?

I rank every player at one spot – the spot where I think they are most valuable. I also rank 2B and SS together as a single ranking because a) so many players qualify at both and b) with the MI spot, I find that neither position is meaningfully more valuable than the other. So any player who qualifies at C is ranked at C. Any player not ranked at C but with MI eligibility will be ranked at MI. Then I’ll rank OF, then 3B, and finally 1B/Util.