All Star Break Consensus Ranks: Outfielders

My ideal set of rankings has input from both human and computer sources. In our rankings, we have one set of ranks that are built on projections, meaning that overall our rankings are 25% computer. That’s low for me. But I know that our other three human rankers also use the computer projections to varying degrees, so the number is probably closer to 50% computer, which I like.

But, ostensibly, we have one computer ranker. Jeff Zimmerman uses a proprietary mix of ZiPs and Steamer projections, and then takes the plate appearance projections from our depth charts. Every once in a while a player won’t be updated on the depth charts — human error — but if we stay vigilant, this mix should produce the best computer-generated rankings you can find. The addition of depth chart information can do a lot to undo the biggest flaw in projections: they don’t always know who has the job.

One remaining avenue to deal with with respect to the computer rankings is what to do with the missing plate appearances due to projected injury. Zimmerman has done a lot to advance the state of injury projections, and some of that is now built into the various projections he uses. We know that past DL stints predict future ones, for example. And that age is a heavy factor. But once those PAs and IPs are gone, they can be replaced through the waiver wire.

That opens up a whole can of worms. Are we to give an injured player credit for the player that replaces him? Who will that replacement player be? Are you on weekly waivers, or daily? Do you have an FAAB? That would suggest that late-season injuries are more harmful to your team. Same for head-to-head leagues. Seemingly, we should ding a player for getting hurt a lot. But we should also maybe work on finding some way to replace back some of those missed innings and plate appearances with a replacement level number. We’ll work on that.

As for naming Zimmerman’s column something else, I don’t get it. We all use projections in the pre-season, should we just name our pre-season rankings after the projections we’re using? And even in-season, we’re looking at all the information we can. I’d hate to name my projections swSTR%GB%battedballdistanceBABIPspeed, for example. Jeff Zimmerman does the work, Jeff Zimmerman’s name is on the ranking.

So. Do we have some work we can do? Sure, we’ve been looking at replacement level. We need to make sure our depth charts are all updated going into ranking seasons. These rankings have been gradually evolving since we started them, and they will continue to do so.

But I would say we are well on our way to an ideal set of rankings from an ideological standpoint. At least my ideological standpoint.

I welcome discussion on a theoretical level. Every set of rankings ever is subject to arguments about single players. We won’t eradicate those discussions — they’re fun! — but they are not necessarily germane to the issue at hand.

Thanks for reading!

With the color-coding we hope to highlight the biggest movers. That definition changes as you follow the ranks down the list — players had to move more to register a color change as you near the bottom of the list. These are rest-of-season rankings for 5×5 roto. Jeff Zimmerman’s rankings are a combination of ZiPs and Steamer rest-of-season projections with playing time determined by our depth charts. You can find the projections on every player page and the depth charts here.

Also ranked once were Engel Beltre, Jeff Francoeur, Corey Dickerson, Jeff Kobernus, Endy Chavez, Xavier Paul, Brett Jackson, Scott Hairston, Chris Heisey, Jonny Gomes, Jason Bay, A.J. Pollock and Franklin Gutierrez.