Bridging the Gap Between Roto & Points

For a few seasons, I’ve only been involved with Roto leagues after starting with points leagues and doing both for a while. I wanted to see how close Roto values translate to point league values. When I evaluate starting pitchers, I focus on just their Roto value and want to see how much of it translates to point values.

I removed Wins, Losses, and Quality Starts from the equation. Those W/L/QS values can be huge factors in some scoring systems but I wanted to see if there were any major differences with the rest of the formulas. While a manager may cut a deserving start short, thereby limiting a pitcher’s strikeout or the weight of their ratios, most of the time Wins, Losses, and Quality starts are out of the pitcher’s control.

For the next step, I create a points system that correlates with Roto values. To do this, I use the 15-team Main Event SGP points from The Process. Here is the formula I ended up with:

RotoPoints = IP * 3 – 1.2 * H – 3 * ER – 1.2 * BB + SO

Looking at this season’s starters with 40 IP or more, here is a comparison of the two values.

That’s damn close while keeping the numbers simple.

Here are the correlations for RotoPoints to the other point systems.

NFBC

IP * 3 – H – 2 * ER – BB + SO

ESPN (same values as NFBC)

IP * 3 – H – 2 * ER – BB + SO

CBS

.5 * SO – BB + 3 * IP – H – ER – HBP

Yahoo

3 * SO – 3 * ER + IP*3 – 1.3 * BB – 1.3 * BB

The RotoPoints value compares closely to the ESPN and NFBC values with CBS and Yahoo not far behind. They aren’t perfect correlations but close enough for in-season comparisons. With all the good and most of the decent pitchers already rostered, the fine line used preseason on who to add doesn’t exist. The top choices are easy to spot.

A pitcher’s core Roto talent (WHIP, ERA, K) correlates with point systems. If someone’s analysis focuses on one system, their analysis applies across other scoring methods.