In mid-March, I listed and discussed the 10 hitters my Pod Projections forecasted for more home runs per 600 at-bats than Steamer. All that means is that I calculated the player’s projected AB/HR ratio from both systems and then extrapolated those projections over 600 at-bats, so I’m isolating the home run rate skill and keeping playing time constant. Let’s dive into the results.
Earlier this week, I reviewed my imaginary cheapie NFBC pitching rosters, including the $9 staff, and the staff composed of pitchers not even bought in auctions. Today, let’s now review the incredible $244 staff I built.
Last week, I reviewed my imaginary cheapie NFBC hitting rosters, including the $14 offense, and the offense composed of hitters not even bought in auctions. Today, let’s now review the incredible $251 offense I built. This exercise was probably even harder, as it’s more difficult to differentiate between top three round values than it is to pick out the best of the worst. Let’s see how this roster ended up performing.
Yesterday, I reviewed my $9 NFBC pitching staff. Today, it’s time to review the pitching staff I constructed from only pitchers who failed to be rostered in NFBC auctions during the month of February.
Last week, I reviewed two fun exercises using the NFBC average auction values (AAV) from early March to build various imaginary offensive rosters, including a $14 squad composed solely of $1 players, and a team constructed from hitters that weren’t even rostered. Today, let’s flip to my various pitching staffs, beginning with the $9 group composed of all dollar guys.
Yesterday, I reviewed the thrilling $14 offense I built with all hitters that averaged just $1 in auction cost in NFBC leagues as of the beginning of March. Today, I review an even tougher challenge — an offense composed solely of hitters who weren’t purchased at all in the seven auctions that occurred in the month of Feb.
One of the more enjoyable exercises I performed before this season was building a $14 NFBC offense, using the contests’ average auction values. The idea was to choose from the 59 hitters that averaged $1 in cost and put together an entire legal offense, filling each required slot. Let’s see how this squad performed, with final FanGraphs calculated auction values included.
Yesterday, I reviewed the eight hitters on my 2021 potential HR/FB rate surger list. Today, let’s once again rely on my xHR/FB rate equation to review my preseason potential HR/FB rate decliners list.
Today, I continue reviewing my 2021 preseason predictions by moving onto my list of potential HR/FB rate surgers. I used my xHR/FB rate to identify and discuss a handful of names that posted actual HR/FB rates well below what my equation calculated as a deserved mark. Since 2020 was a short season, there were a lot more significant gaps between xHR/FB rate and actual HR/FB rate, so there should have been less reliance on both marks given that we had smaller sample sizes to work with.
Yesterday, I reviewed my pre-season post comparing my xHR/FB rate to actual HR/FB rate from 2020, revealing which players sustained those 2020 HR/FB rate gains. Today, let’s now flip to the other side — those players in which xHR/FB rate validated a 2020 HR/FB rate decline. Did their 2020 marks represent a new, lower level of sustained production or did it turn out to be a short season fluke? Let’s find out.
