Comparing Chad Young’s C Rankings to Other Sources

Last week, I posted my catcher rankings for Ottoneu FanGraphs points leagues, but those are, of course, not the only rankings out there. There are other formats, there are values created by other analysts and more.  Before moving to the next position in my rankings, I wanted to take a moment to look at where other values might differ from mine at catcher, and why.

Compared to the Surplus Calculator

Justin Vibber and I use similar approaches to derive our values, but we do not make the exact same assumptions and so our values can differ. Arguably the most interesting lesson from our differentiation is that small changes in how you develop values can lead to meaningful differences in player values. I covered this briefly last off-season.

But we can still look player-to-player to see if there are differences to act on. To start, my catchers, overall, have $262 in value spread over 29 players; Justin’s Surplus Calculator values have catchers at $202 over 20 players – basically, I put my replacement level for catching meaningfully lower than Justin, which means I will value catchers more highly than he does, on average.

This is despite the fact that I put less money towards hitters ($2,828 vs. $2,883) and spread it over more hitters (261 vs. 211). I don’t enforce a hitter/pitcher budget split (Justin does) instead choosing to set a dollar value per point above replacement and value apply that dollar value to every player regardless of position.

So while my hitter values on average are lower than Justin’s, I put more value on catchers. To be transparent, this has me re-evaluating my catcher values and wondering if I should make some adjustments, but for now, I am comfortable with what I have.

Having said that, here are the players where we vary the most: I am higher than Justin on William Contreras and Sean Murphy. For Murphy this is a break from projections – my value on Murphy purely based on Depth Charts projections would be very similar to Justin’s $9, but I nudged him up to double digits. This is almost entirely assuming a trade. Murphy had a 122 wRC+ last year with a .331 wOBA; he projects for a 118 wRC+ and a .326 wOBA. The thing is, wRC+ is park-corrected but wOBA is not. Three other players had a 122 wRC+ last year and qualified for the batting title, and their wOBA’s were much better: Rhys Hoskins (.345), Andrew Benintendi (.342), and Christian Walker (.344). Because wRC+ is park-adjusted, a trade should have limited impact on Murphy’s 118 projection but should change his wOBA to be more in-line with other players who have similar wRC+ and aren’t playing in Oakland. I am willing to overpay the projection now based on the assumption he gets traded before the season.

For Contreras, I am honestly not sure why we are so far apart. Here is what I see: 1) The third best P/G projection per Depth Charts (5.14, behind Alejandro Kirk at 5.72 and Will Smith at 5.32. 2) The second best 2022 P/G (5.62, behind big brother Willson at 5.69 and tied with J.T. Realmuto). 3) A high number of PA thanks to time at DH and maybe other spots. The raw numbers – last year and projected – really suggest he should be even higher than I have him, but I felt I had to hedge a bit, given the lack of track record.

I am lower than Justin on MJ Melendez. This, like Murphy, comes from a bit of a projection adjustment. Surplus Calculator has him at $20 and my values based purely on projections have him pegged at almsot $19. But I think the projection is too optimistic. Steamer is projecting a .339 wOBA for a guy who posted just .311 in 2022. The talent is there for that kind of improvement, but I am not comfortable banking on it. Melendez will be a favorite target of mine, because of that upside and a relatively high likelihood of reaching it, but caution is also warranted.

Compared to 4×4

I am not planning to publish a full set of 4×4 values/rankings, but I will share, position by position, some players who I value higher or lower for that format. As with the last section, I’ll start by noting that my 4×4 values put far more value on bats than arms, relative to my FanGraphs Points values. I am digging into why – and that may drive some changes to my process – but at first glance it appears to be because there are enough pitchers with decent rates that the replacement level for pitchers just isn’t that low.

Regardless, I can still share some thoughts on catchers who are relatively more or less valuable in 4×4. The biggest gainers are the power hitters – Cal Raleigh and Salvador Perez standout – because the skill they bring rises in value in 4×4. Catchers are not typically guys who score a ton of runs anyway, and good power alone can a) create some runs, b) increase SLG, and 3) result in big HR totals. That immediately makes those guys valuable in 4×4, even if their OBP is weak.  There is a noticable relationship between HR among C and increased value in 4×4 relative to FanGraphs Points.

At the other end of the spectrum, the players who lose the most relative value are mostly the rookies. Kirk actually loses the most value in raw dollars, but not much as a share of his expected value – he is still C1. But after him, you get names like Bo Naylor, Gabriel Moreno, Logan O’Hoppe, Francisco Alvarez and Yainer Diaz. These guys lose value primarily due to playing time. With relatively few PA, they project for relatively few HR and R, plus relatively small impact on OBP and SLG, which just makes it hard to accrue value in roto.

As an example, just off the projections, Alvarez is valued at $6.50 in 4×4 and $9.70 in FanGraphs Points over 317 PA. If I assume 60% more PA (and therefore 60% more AB, H, BB, etc.), his 4×4 value goes up to $16.90; in FanGraphs Points it goes up to $15.50. The extra 190 PA have way more impact on his 4×4 value. This mostly happens because filling the replacement level C in 4×4 hurts you more than a replacement level C in FanGraphs Points. Given the impact a bad catcher can have on your rates, it is entirely possible that using a replacement level C for those 190 PA will be worse than not using those PA at all – the impact on the rates could outweight the extra R or HR you hit. In Points, that is never the case – even a truly awful catcher, given 190 PA, will put up 150 or so points, probably more.