RotoGraphs Consensus Ranks: Outfield

by
March 6, 2013

The outfield is always a bear. So many dang players. We’ve got 114 ranked, and another 16 mentioned, which should get you all the way through your five-outfield twenty-team league and then one or two.

But a word first about our rankers and our rankings. One of the reasons we’re using four rankers is, as I said, to do a mini crowd-source. (I do like the idea of opening it up to our fans, so we’ll see about that as a long-term plan, by the way.) Something was made of a certain ranking of Chase Headley in the third basemen — but that ranking dragged the Padres’ hot corner man up one spot in the consensus. Seems like folly to make such a big deal about one spot, and, in a way, it represents the fact that some drafters out there will believe in Chase Headley too. Heck, our own xHR/FB analysis believes in Chase Headley.

But that’s enough about third basemen. Here, no doubt some of you will be upset about a certain ranking of Giancarlo Stanton. Well guess what. That ranking might have cost the powerful Stanton two spots in the rankings at most. And! Stanton doesn’t steal bases, has a high strikeout rate that could lead to a bad batting average, and is coming off a year in which he saw knee surgery. You could tell the story of Justin Upton, who has power, speed, and the ability to hit .300 — is it crazy to put him ahead of a possible one-category guy on a bad team?

Answer: no, it is not crazy. All four of these men have proven philosophies about ranking players. Most have their own brand of projections even. No problem stating your case for a different belief, but maybe a little less foot on the gas pedal sometimes, eh? There’s always the rankings spreadsheet (to your right) where you can pick your favorite ranker and remove the ones you don’t like. And then we’ll have tiered rankings from your dedicated positional correspondent. You’re covered.

So I’d say enjoy these rankings below. And where you *don’t* enjoy a ranking, note it. Because someone in your league will feel the way you do, and someone will feel the way one of our rankers does. The players with wildly divergent rankings offer the most opportunity. They’re gems!

(The projections listed are the FanGraphs-Steamer projections and are not the basis for each analyst’s rankings.)

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.
RotoG ES JZ MP ZS Name PA AVG R HR RBI SB
1 2 2 1 1 Ryan Braun 670 0.301 99 33 104 19
2 1 1 2 2 Mike Trout 708 0.285 113 26 82 42
3 4 3 3 4 Matt Kemp 633 0.284 86 29 93 13
4 3 4 5 3 Andrew McCutchen 675 0.291 91 25 89 14
5 6 6 4 5 Carlos Gonzalez 548 0.304 81 25 86 13
6 7 7 7 7 Justin Upton 658 0.287 92 28 96 12
7 8 9 9 8 Adam Jones 668 0.28 84 27 96 9
8 5 5 6 18 Giancarlo Stanton 615 0.272 89 42 107 4
9 11 11 12 6 Jacoby Ellsbury 597 0.285 83 14 59 22
10 9 10 8 14 Jason Heyward 668 0.266 93 27 88 13
11 10 8 13 17 Bryce Harper 670 0.257 87 24 82 16
12 14 16 15 10 Matt Holliday 628 0.291 84 23 88 3
13 12 23 10 12 Yoenis Cespedes 563 0.282 73 22 81 9
14 17 20 17 11 Adrian Gonzalez 639 0.294 85 27 96 1
15 13 25 14 15 Jose Bautista 560 0.266 85 33 90 5
16 18 14 23 13 Shin-Soo Choo 678 0.27 94 19 64 15
17 20 15 16 20 B.J. Upton 636 0.246 80 22 75 25
18 16 22 18 16 Jay Bruce 613 0.258 81 32 93 5
19 15 38 20 9 Josh Hamilton 509 0.278 69 24 79 4
20 21 19 21 26 Desmond Jennings 666 0.241 86 14 58 30
21 23 30 11 24 Alex Rios 595 0.271 71 18 73 13
22 24 18 31 19 Austin Jackson 709 0.274 97 13 65 13
23 22 13 22 37 Michael Bourn 711 0.262 87 6 48 35
24 25 24 33 23 Alex Gordon 690 0.276 92 18 76 8
25 19 31 25 30 Allen Craig 546 0.29 73 23 79 3
26 26 12 24 44 Norichika Aoki 700 0.284 96 14 63 23
27 31 21 30 29 Angel Pagan 680 0.281 92 9 57 24
28 28 26 41 22 Melky Cabrera 610 0.285 79 14 68 10
29 34 36 28 21 Ben Zobrist 676 0.262 89 19 77 11
30 39 17 27 36 Ben Revere 636 0.27 71 3 44 32
31 33 33 19 35 Shane Victorino 609 0.273 81 11 63 23
32 29 28 34 32 Nick Markakis 670 0.29 87 17 75 4
33 30 35 29 33 Ichiro Suzuki 586 0.29 67 7 54 22
34 27 32 44 25 Martin Prado 642 0.294 85 13 66 8
35 32 29 38 51 Alejandro De Aza 614 0.268 79 10 53 19
36 36 48 48 27 Carlos Beltran 523 0.271 69 19 69 6
37 46 45 43 28 Hunter Pence 609 0.271 72 19 81 4
38 35 27 49 57 Starling Marte 589 0.262 73 13 54 26
39 37 50 36 47 Nelson Cruz 496 0.268 64 22 73 5
40 47 61 32 34 Carlos Gomez 440 0.247 48 13 49 23
41 54 51 42 31 Mark Trumbo 502 0.255 63 24 74 3
42 38 44 40 63 Brett Gardner 518 0.261 64 6 45 28
43 43 54 47 42 Jayson Werth 550 0.26 70 17 61 9
44 45 42 26 73 Carl Crawford 514 0.265 65 12 50 17
45 52 47 39 50 Cameron Maybin 585 0.252 65 11 52 21
46 40 39 35 80 Coco Crisp 531 0.262 70 10 48 31
47 44 63 50 38 Andre Ethier 508 0.272 59 16 64 1
48 42 40 55 59 Juan Pierre 559 0.273 62 3 36 25
49 53 49 58 39 Josh Reddick 606 0.238 72 25 82 6
50 56 53 51 45 Chris Davis 487 0.261 61 25 70 2
51 48 59 60 40 Torii Hunter 530 0.27 66 16 63 4
52 41 37 45 86 Adam Eaton 543 0.282 74 8 46 29
53 49 70 56 41 Josh Willingham 504 0.251 65 23 72 2
54 55 52 57 54 David Murphy 486 0.283 59 14 59 7
55 51 60 46 64 Michael Cuddyer 459 0.276 57 17 64 6
56 50 46 67 60 Michael Brantley 620 0.269 73 8 54 11
57 62 57 37 69 Justin Ruggiano 486 0.251 52 14 55 14
58 57 55 54 62 Nick Swisher 615 0.259 79 23 82 2
59 66 64 52 49 Lorenzo Cain 480 0.262 56 10 48 13
60 59 41 62 71 Jon Jay 565 0.283 67 9 53 11
61 67 65 59 46 Todd Frazier 502 0.242 55 19 63 7
62 60 43 75 65 Dexter Fowler 616 0.272 91 11 54 10
63 61 56 64 70 Denard Span 591 0.268 69 5 43 13
64 58 34 53 108 Curtis Granderson 630 0.239 82 30 86 9
65 65 62 72 58 Will Venable 519 0.245 60 13 51 19
66 64 68 63 66 Michael Morse 464 0.271 54 19 62 1
67 68 78 61 55 Alfonso Soriano 498 0.244 57 21 68 3
68 70 67 71 56 Dayan Viciedo 488 0.261 57 21 64 1
69 69 66 68 61 Garrett Jones 515 0.262 61 21 71 3
70 77 79 70 43 Michael Saunders 499 0.232 52 14 52 13
71 74 74 79 52 Matt Joyce 483 0.248 59 17 61 4
72 63 58 74 85 Corey Hart 481 0.259 59 19 66 3
73 72 71 66 76 Jason Kubel 488 0.255 58 20 66 1
74 76 76 83 53 Cody Ross 488 0.258 56 16 59 3
75 78 80 88 48 Adam Dunn 612 0.213 78 31 81 1
76 80 81 78 72 Ryan Ludwick 469 0.258 56 20 66 1
77 79 95 73 74 Justin Maxwell 448 0.223 51 17 53 10
78 73 73 94 81 David DeJesus 575 0.266 72 11 49 5
79 81 82 81 78 Carlos Quentin 454 0.245 55 19 62 1
80 75 75 86 88 Logan Morrison 510 0.251 58 16 62 2
81 88 84 85 68 Darin Mastroianni 444 0.235 51 4 32 31
82 86 93 76 79 Andy Dirks 343 0.265 39 9 40 5
83 105 100 65 67 Drew Stubbs 410 0.23 45 10 40 17
84 82 90 77 89 Emilio Bonifacio 346 0.258 38 2 29 20
85 85 88 92 75 Peter Bourjos 418 0.25 49 9 45 11
86 71 69 95 106 Gerardo Parra 469 0.279 54 8 44 10
87 83 83 100 83 Domonic Brown 396 0.256 42 11 46 6
88 93 94 89 77 Lucas Duda 454 0.245 49 15 53 1
89 84 102 69 102 Leonys Martin 275 0.268 33 6 31 10
90 92 72 82 112 Wil Myers 349 0.254 40 12 42 4
91 104 99 80 84 Brandon Moss 392 0.241 47 17 52 3
92 91 87 102 90 Chris Young 474 0.233 58 15 51 10
93 96 89 91 95 Ryan Doumit 452 0.262 49 13 53 1
94 97 91 84 104 Colby Rasmus 464 0.245 55 17 58 3
95 100 85 108 92 Chris Denorfia 404 0.264 45 8 39 8
96 87 110 96 93 Chris Parmelee 358 0.246 38 10 40 1
97 90 86 90 120 Delmon Young 375 0.277 40 12 48 1
98 94 103 93 97 Jeff Francoeur 388 0.255 41 10 44 4
99 108 104 99 82 Trevor Plouffe 430 0.235 47 17 53 2
100 95 98 105 99 J.D. Martinez 446 0.255 48 11 50 1
101 99 92 87 120 Tyler Colvin 390 0.256 45 15 54 4
102 103 97 101 100 Seth Smith 438 0.248 52 14 50 3
103 102 96 97 107 Nate Schierholtz 398 0.261 46 10 43 4
104 98 77 108 120 Brandon Guyer 482 0.249 52 12 54 13
105 101 116 108 87 John Mayberry 310 0.248 32 11 38 3
106 106 105 98 103 Franklin Gutierrez 417 0.242 42 7 38 8
107 89 122 106 101 Nolan Reimold 254 0.248 31 10 30 4
108 113 114 107 94 Donovan Solano 411 0.248 34 3 34 5
109 112 115 108 96 Mike Baxter 331 0.242 32 6 32 5
110 107 101 108 120 Scott Hairston 380 0.255 44 16 51 5
111 113 107 108 109 Jose Tabata 313 0.269 34 4 26 7
112 110 123 108 98 Jonny Gomes 287 0.244 34 11 35 2
113 113 111 108 110 Steve Lombardozzi 298 0.252 27 4 27 6
114 111 117 103 111 Nate McLouth 333 0.234 41 9 32 8
115 109 120 104 113 Fernando Martinez 328 0.25 37 12 40 1
116 113 112 108 114 Gregor Blanco 365 0.233 33 4 31 15

Others ranked by one analyst: Andres Torres, Brett Jackson, Casper Wells, Chris Heisey, Craig Gentry, Daniel Nava, Eric Young Jr, Jason Bay, Jerry Hairston Jr, Kirk Nieuwenhuis, Matt Carpenter, Rajai Davis, Raul Ibanez, Roger Bernadina, and Tony Campana.





 

With a phone full of pictures of pitchers' fingers, strange beers, and his two toddler sons, Eno Sarris can be found at the ballpark or a brewery most days. Read him here, writing about the A's or Giants at The Athletic, or about beer at October. Follow him on Twitter @enosarris if you can handle the sandwiches and inanity.

57 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Cody
13 years ago

I do not think anyone has a problem with an individual having their own rankings, but I think everyone has a problem with an individual’s rankings being so far skewed against the consensus in such a small sample that it causes the aggregate to be a false representation of the majority. As you said, we can take the rankings into Excel and modify as we see fit, but why not display all four rankings while eliminating any outliers outside a given number of standard deviations for the aggregate rankings?

I am sure that we all enjoy Zach Sanders and his thoughts that may be outside the norm, but in this format, where he cannot explain further, it is simply frustrating even if the impact is minimal on the whole. For example, how is Adam Jones ranked eighth and Giancarlo ranked eighteen making them eighth and seventh in the aggregate respectively? I must know why he would rank them as such before I can even entertain the idea of it being a legitimate/respectable/logical opinion.

3
Cliff
13 years ago
Reply to  Cody

he prolly ranked Jones ahead of Stanton because Jones has been better than Stanton in previous years…including last year…here are there respective stat lines from 2012

Stanton: .290, 75 runs, 30 doubles, 37 HR, 86 RBI, and 6 SB

Jones: .287, 103 runs, 39 doubles, 32 HR, 82 RBI, and 16 SB

given how bad the Marlins will be and Stanton’s potential lack of focus and care when his team is heading for a 110-loss season, most likely all factors into these rankings.

1
ManwichManMember since 2018
13 years ago
Reply to  Cliff

But that’s still a cop out. Jones had 195 more pa’s to bolster his numbers. You can say health is a factor, but he has hamilton 9th and ellsbury 6th. The run production may be below average, but he should be the top hr guy, with a solid batting average with 600+ pas. Jones is safer, but Giancarlo is miles ahead of everyone else in terms of power

1
jfree
13 years ago
Reply to  Cody

Might I suggest you save your frustration for more significant things?

Differences in rankings – not consensus in them – are the only meaningful part of any position rankings.

1
Eno SarrisMember since 2020
13 years ago
Reply to  jfree

This is a huge point. If you have a strong opinion about Stanton being worth whatever ranking you think he’s worth, now you know that someone in your league over or under-values him. That’s huge. And it doesn’t affect the consensus that much.

1
SKob
13 years ago
Reply to  jfree

Consensus is not the point and these guys are not local fantasy nerds. I’m not surprised when someone I beat every year thinks Choo will be more valuable than Stanton. I love reviewing different pojection systems and determining where the subtle dfferences are. When I see something like this, I throw it out as there is no credibility to the reasoning behind it. You enjoy though!

0
Eno SarrisMember since 2020
13 years ago
Reply to  jfree

Zach has projections. He runs them through a calculator that we’ve shown on this site and has been vetted by the community. He has different projections for plate appearances for some key players that have high variability in plate appearance projections from system to system. Just because you don’t agree with a few of his rankings doesn’t mean he just threw crap on a wall to see if it sticks. That’s the point.

0
Tylersnotes
13 years ago

Nevermind Zach, Jeff is crazy low on Hamilton. I’m looking forward to bold predictions this year

0
Tylersnotes
13 years ago
Reply to  Tylersnotes

Thinking marte is the least consensus player so far. Sounds about right I guess

0
TheGrandslamwichMember since 2026
13 years ago
Reply to  Tylersnotes

Yeah, I was wondering how Hamilton could possibly be ranked 25 spots below Norichika Aoki. Yeah, Hamilton comes with lots of downside, but he also has the upside of a top 5.

2
Cody
13 years ago
Reply to  TheGrandslamwich

Agreed. I do not think the issue alone is with Zach’s rankings. His rankings, until this point, have just been the most obvious. Zimmerman’s ranking of Hamilton (especially directly compared to Jennings just below it) is baffling. I must know why.

1
bballislife17
13 years ago
Reply to  Tylersnotes

Here are Jeff’s 35-39th rankings

35: Ben Zobrist
36: Adam Eaton
37: J. Hamilton
38: Coco Crisp
39: Juan Pierre

That’s some crazy company for Hamilton

4
tylersnotes
13 years ago
Reply to  bballislife17

on the other hand though, it’s entirely plausible that Hamilton could have a terrible year with the move to a more pitcher friendly park, injury history, and at least some evidence that pitchers generally have him figured out. We’ve also seen, from Zimmerman’s other rankings, that whatever system he’s using seems to rate SB fairly highly (at least within certain positions). So I will say that Jeff’s rankings are internally consistent. And I generally trust his writing on injury/playing time. I can’t imagine drafting Hamilton in any league given his ADP, but if I were in a league of Jeffs i’m sure he’d fall to me.

The Marte and Aoki rankings are more interesting because if I’m in a league with knowledgeable owners I have to assume somebody else is going to be equally high on those guys. A lot of appeal for Marte especially is that he makes a good sleeper candidate, but if he’s a top 25 OF on someone’s list there go my chances of getting him as a sleeper. Rutledge is a similar case for that.

0
SKob
13 years ago
Reply to  bballislife17

Some outlying injury or bad year being plausible does not mean someone should invest in it as fact, which is what these rankings are doing.

That Hamilton ranking is pure stupidity, but it’s still not as bad as saying Stanton will be the 18th best OF – 5 places behind SHIN-SOO CHOO! ARE YOU CRAZY!

These lists are becoming pointless! This is not good discussion, this is perpetuating a lack of credibility.

1
Jeff ZimmermanFanGraphs Staff
13 years ago
Reply to  Tylersnotes

I went back through to see where the disconnect was with Hamilton.

2 Items

1. I used the Fans/Steamer projection for PA and his 509 PA is killing his projected counting stats. I move into the 625 PA range puts him in the 15-20 range for me. Personally, I create a several projections and one is with equal PA. While not accurate to the real world, it helps to show where disconnects exists.

2. SBs again are getting harder and harder to come by. The above OF, which are some of the fastest players are projected to hit 1773 HRs to only 1175 SB, or a 1.5 HR for 1 SB.

0
Pat G
13 years ago
Reply to  Jeff Zimmerman

Explain to me why Gardner doesn’t get a boost if you have such a SB fetish then?

-1
Jeff ZimmermanFanGraphs Staff
13 years ago
Reply to  Jeff Zimmerman

The rest of his hitting profile is weak (low power) and isn’t likely to produce many RBI and Runs

1
Cody
13 years ago

To be fair, posting the rankings as they are may be a ploy by the writers to get our reactions to base subsequent articles on. If so, well done Eno and company.

0
Paul Holmes
13 years ago

What separates Andre Either and Nick Markakis so much?

0
Matt BertelliMember since 2016
13 years ago
Reply to  Paul Holmes

Overall and good list.

Players who seem low to me:

52. Josh Willingham
57. Nick Swisher
63. Curtis Granderson
71. Corey Hart

Power is down overall and I think these guys power numbers are being undervalued in my own opinion. Granderson will miss 4 or 5 weeks and Hart less.

0
MustBunique
13 years ago

Are you using Geomean to arrive at a consensus ranking?

Surprised Adam Eaton is so low. I understand being conservative when considering a player’s stats in what will potentially be his first full season in the majors, but to see him ranked behind a few of the players listed above him, such as Juan Pierre, is puzzling. Even Steamer likes Eaton more than Pierre.

0
SKob
13 years ago

I’m going to restate this point – Zach Sanders has Shin-Soo Choo as his #13 OF and Giancarlo Stanton as his #18 OF.

Eno, seriously, you need to stop including his rankings! Maybe all individual rankings should be hidden. I don’t care that it only dropped him 2 places in the overall order. You need to start protecting these guy’s credibility! Every list I’ve seen of these includes some really ridiculous rankings. I can’t say for sure that some of these guys even take their writting on this site seriously! It looks that bad!

1
SKob
13 years ago
Reply to  SKob

Holy crap I missed it – ZS even has Ellsbury at #6. I don’t even know how to handle that!

0
SKob
13 years ago
Reply to  SKob

Granderson – Jeff says #33, Zach says #110, Eno and Mike say he belongs in the 50’s. I’m pretty sure we can all agree that a 77 place difference is a real problem! At least 2 people are credible. I feel like I’m in the most annoying mock draft ever.

0
juan pierres mustache
13 years ago
Reply to  SKob

yeah, it’s a serious problem that different guys are differently worried about an injury that could result in any amount of missed time, and might evaluate such a player differently. It’s almost like they base their own personal rankings off something other than the default espn fantasy rankings!

1
Zach SandersMember since 2020
13 years ago
Reply to  SKob

Grandy’s hard because of injury. How long will he be out? Will the injury have any lingering effects after he returns?

This is all an educated guessing game.

0
Will H.
13 years ago
Reply to  SKob

Deep breaths, SKob. May I direct you to MDC or Yahoo or ESPN if you want to see what you expect. But you don’t win better leagues by hewing to conventional wisdom, and for all the science that includes using your gut, so it doesn’t surprise me to see such variance here. Choo’s SB make up for a ton of homers, and CIN should look much RBI-friendly than CLE, while Stanton has himself and, well, himself in MIA to knock in, playing also against a much harder division. Just one example.

Being a sheep is what would make me question credibility.

Again, breathe deep, and enjoy the open process. Oh, and Jeff won a team of a number of smart players last year… all the credibility I need.

2
Eno SarrisMember since 2020
13 years ago
Reply to  SKob

I reiterate: Sanders’ ranking cost Stanton two places in the rankings. He’s still the seventh-best outfielder. ESPN has Stanton eighth, and they don’t tell you how they got there.

We show you how the sausage is made. Because RotoGraphs — and FanGraphs — is not about black box stats or rankings.

Now you know whose rankings you prefer.

2
Joe DouglasMember
13 years ago
Reply to  Eno Sarris

Eno, I am really surprised by the backlash from a lot of fans regarding these rankings. Considering all the negativity present in these comments, I wanted to say thank you for putting the list together. It is appreciated!

Personally, I enjoy that the rankings are vastly different as it shows how different owners value players differently. (I certainly would not expect my leaguemates to think the same as I do after all). I would rather account for this variance and prepare for it going into a draft, then believe everyone will think the same. After all, if each ranking was the exact same would we learn anything about an opposing viewpoint? Or would we leave thinking the exact same thing as before we viewed these rankings? Which is really more helpful?

Why each of these writers holds a certain opinion is much more important that what the specific opinion is. So if Zach or Jeff have a logical reason for their rankings (as I am sure they do), then my critique of their ranking is irrelevant. If you do not agree with specific ranking x,y,or z then just disregard them. That does not make the rankings invalid, or detrimental to your draft prep in any way. It only shows what a opposing owner might think.

“First seek to understand, and then to be understood.” Instead of blindly criticizing the rankings because of group-think, why not consider why each ranking could be valid (even if you disagree)?

8
James
13 years ago
Reply to  Eno Sarris

I’m pretty sure ESPN had their “live rankings summit” chat, which detailed some of their thoughts regarding rankings. It isn’t 100% of what was said in the room, but it is something.

1
ManwichManMember since 2018
13 years ago
Reply to  Eno Sarris

No, i really enjoy coming here and seeing what discrepancies there are with popular opinion. This is great stuff. You guys can release whatever you want, but on a site all about analysis, getting even a slightly deeper sense of what went into everyone’s rankings is just as important as the composite itself.

0
MDLMember since 2021
13 years ago
Reply to  SKob

I find it useful to take the median value of the rankings.

For what it’s worth, when ranked by median, the only guys in the list that move 4 or more spots from the Consesnsus Rankings are Prado, Crisp, Eaton, Pence, Trumbo, Granderson, D. Young, and Colvin.

Nobody in the top 22 by Consensus moved by more than 2 places.

2
Eno SarrisMember since 2020
13 years ago
Reply to  MDL

Thanks for checking that out!

0
johnnycuff
13 years ago

nobody ranked wil myers? not sure how daniel nava and tony campana received votes but myers didn’t. was he at another position or something?

1
Eno SarrisMember since 2020
13 years ago
Reply to  johnnycuff

We’ll get him in there.

0
MLB Rainmaker
13 years ago

I lose you on the PA — who does Jeff Francoeur lose 300PA to? Jonny Gomes isn’t even likely a platoon player this year, yet sees less than a half season of ABs? Leonys Marting is only going to see 275 ABs as the starting CF for TEX? Carlos Gomez goes backward in PA after his huge season last year?

0
Eno SarrisMember since 2020
13 years ago
Reply to  MLB Rainmaker

Those PAs are Steamer rankings and are only there for reference, we all ranked according to our own projections/intuition.

0
Matthew TobinMember since 2025
13 years ago

Perhaps it is because I am in an OPS league, but Stanton is criminally underrated by you guys as is Cruz,Willingham,Reddick, Cepedes.

I also hate your Bautista ranking. He is certainly less of an injury risk than Ellsbury or Kemp.

I think speed is being overvalued and power undervalued.

0
CC
13 years ago
Reply to  Matthew Tobin

Ellsbury isn’t a big injury risk. There’s a difference between having two freak injuries and being plagued by nagging injuries.

0
Tvators
13 years ago
Reply to  CC

Seems ellsbury is a big injury risk as one could easily say he is kinda fragile (its a italian for easily broken) and I’ll say it, a slow healer, so best hope Ells goes the whole year w.o colliding into someone, bc odds are he will be out for a long time, heal slowly, maybe hit the dl again and never really get going

0
CC
13 years ago
Reply to  CC

Yeah, and players collide with other players like he did in 2010 and 2012 all the time. I mean, Reid Brignac is only out there to fall right on top of guys, and Adrian Beltre kicks people in the ribs like it’s his job.

Ellsbury doesn’t play catcher. He doesn’t have a great chance of colliding with other players. Most outfielders don’t collide with their teammates over the year. It only happens when someone’s lost out there. The Brignac situation is even rarer.

0
CC
13 years ago

Jeff Zimmerman: A 39-year-old Ichiro Suzuki is a better option for your OF than Josh Hamilton.

2
jaysbluejays
13 years ago

I am sooo upset about these rankings that I won’t be able to take my wife to her chemotherapy appointment this afternoon.

2
Ben
13 years ago

I love that everyone independently ranked Justin Upton 7th, so the “consensus” ranks him 6th!

-2
Tvators
13 years ago

I think Eno gets its that the outlying rankings will cause a stir as he tried in his pre-commentary to quell the upcoming storm, but it just seems like trying to defend an obvious guilty party by diminishing the overall effect, the of the “bad” ranking …Seriously how can you justify having Bruce(amongst others) ahead of Stanon, a bigger BA risk w/ no SB and less power, you can show your relative dislike for Stanon by ranking him 10 or Hamilton 15 (I haaaaate Hamilton and I couldnt even find 36 OF if I tried) really I dont mind the outlying rankings of a guy you really like or dislike, its better than standard boiler plate stuff found in a billion places on line, i was actually more bothered by the attempt to justify/minimize the “outcry” before hand and also jaysbluejays comment was probably the worst thing on this page, anyway

0
Eno SarrisMember since 2020
13 years ago
Reply to  Tvators

Fair point about the pre-minimizing, but as juan pierre says below, it’s a rite of passage. It happens every year to every site that does rankings. I’m not saying, don’t express yourself. I’m saying: argue for a player, and against a ranking. No need to impugn the rankers and suggest they don’t watch games, or weren’t paying attention, or were ranking based on some other criteria. None of which you did in particular, but does happen every year, everywhere.

1
Tvators
13 years ago
Reply to  Eno Sarris

NAh, I understand, i felt immediately bad about calling JZ ranking of Altuve #2 the worst Ive ever seen, (in hindsight I could have held my tongue and that prob be 4th or 5th worst by now) but just bc I think its the worst doesnt mean its not going to be right. Altuve could hit .330 and steal 56 bases and be the 2nd best 2B. I dont see stanton that low w/o an injury though and even though its 2 spots how could Bruce who could only be described as an older Mike Stanton-lite be ahead?!?, Hamilton could have a bad year in LAA but again barring longterm injury his bad year would prob be .271, 28, 110 or something…

0
Jay29Member since 2025
13 years ago
Reply to  Eno Sarris

One of the rare things I like about ESPN’s fantasy coverage is how they pick sleepers/busts/etc and have each writer write a blurb to justify their choice.

Why not pick a few of the outliers from the consensus (e.g. ZS’s Stanton, JZ’s Hamilton, Revere, MP’s Rios) and have the author explain how and why that player’s rank differed from the crowd? I think the ‘why’ is important, as it can lead readers to re-think their draft planning.

0
Mike PodhorzerFanGraphs Staff
13 years ago
Reply to  Eno Sarris

Jay29, we’ll be doing this. At least, I will be. Next week I’ll go position by position to identify and share who I like more than everyone else, and perhaps who I like less. Many of the names actually surprised me. I thought I knew who I liked more or less, but that wasn’t always the case!

Rios I knew I liked him. He’s easy to explain.

1
Cliff
13 years ago
Reply to  Tvators

Re: TVators

Last 2 Seasons…

Bruce: .254, 87 runs, 33 HR, 98 RBI, and 9 SB

Stanton: .276, 77 runs, 35 HR, 86 RBI, 5 SB

Bruce has the SIGNIFICANTLY better team around him, hitting behind/ahead of Choo, Phillips, Votto, Ludwick, Frazier, while Stanton gets Pierre, Ruggiano, Polanco, Brantly, Logan “I’ll Be On The DL By May 15th, No Problem” Morrison, and Solano. Throw in the awesome hitters park vs. one of the worst hitters parks, plus consistency vs. injury-guy, and it’s not only easy but sensible/logical to have Bruce ahead of Stanton.

On simple numbers alone from previous years, Stanton gets highly overdrafted IMO. I don’t think I’m alone in believing that he’s much closer to a .265-.270 hitter than .285-.290. But you’re paying for that possibility that this will be the year he goes up and posts .285, 50+ HR, 110+ RBI. Cause he prolly will do that at least once. But would it shock anyone if he posted .260, 25 HR, 75 RBI, playing only 125 games? End up with one of those “lingering” injuries or something at the end of the year? When the Marlins are heading for 110 loses, do you really think Stanton is gonna push it at ALL? Even the slightest knock…

Especially after the organization basically said screw you Giancarlo, we don’t care about winning, and given that you’re basically our star player, we therefore don’t really give a shit about you. 

Quit complaining about Stanton. We get it. He can hit it really far. And quite often. But that’s all he can do, and he’s surrounded by pretty much the most negative conditions for any baseball player in regards to fantasy.

If you love ESPN so much, go join Matthew Berry at his giant pity party…heard he’s really campaigning for some random people to tell him how great he is….

-1
juan pierres mustache
13 years ago

you know what’s really fun is going back to the 2012 pre-season rankings and reading the outraged comments there now that we’ve actually seen the results. ZOMG YOU GUYS DON’T THINK MARIANO IS THE BEST CLOSER, I LITERALLY JUST ATE MY OWN FOOT OUT OF ANGER

2
MDLMember since 2021
13 years ago
Reply to  juan pierres mustache

Last year’s rankings for “Mike” Stanton: 8, 15, 7, 24 (Zach Sanders).

I guess whatever projection model Mr Sanders uses really doesn’t like Stanton.

0
Jason B
13 years ago

ZS has no #11. Was Granderson 11th originally, and then he tacked a ‘0’ onto the end (shifting him down to 110) when he got hurt, basically as a signifier that he was going to steer clear of him this year?

0
MDLMember since 2021
13 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

It is very plausible that Granderson should have been ranked #11. Nice catch. Going by median, that would bump Granderson up ~20 spots in the rankings (up to Crawford/Pence/Werth territory)

0
Jack
13 years ago

It is not logically possible to rank Granderson as the 111th OF if you realize your ranking are being used as part of a consensus ranking. When you start to look at JZ rankings as a whole they look like the guy in your mock draft that is seeing what crazy pick he can make next. Castro was the #1 SS only because JZ rated him #1 & he rated Reyes as #7. I guess I expected better of RotoGraphs.

0
Eno SarrisMember since 2020
13 years ago

Adrian Gonzalez is now in there, and Wil Myers. Gonzo was actually Sanders’ 11th ranked outfielder.

0
Andrew
13 years ago

I think people are making a bit too big of a stink about these rankings…Obviously some of them are very out there, i.e. Hamilton, Stanton, Aoki (way high IMO) but these, at the end of the day, are just people’s opinions… I remember last year I was dying to trade Beltran (30’s) and Rios (50’s) off of my team at the beginning of the year because of there OF rankings and projections. Good thing no one else wanted to trade for them either lol. Even if you look at the projections for any random player, which are all done by very reputable and respected projection sources, there is so much variance its unreal. For example, using the 4 main projections on fangraphs, Ellsbury could hit anywhere from 57-100 Runs, 48-67 RBIs, and steal 18-37 bases. If you use the top of those projections, you have a top 5 OF. If you use the bottom, you have a guy better left on waivers in most leagues. It all depends on what you value, how you weigh injuries, risk aversion, etc. Even if some opinions are really far off from the norm, at least now you know there are some people that are abnormally high on guys like Choo, Aoki, and Bourn, and abnormally low on hamilton and stanton. It points out guys with a ton of variance and helps to show the diversity of opinions you will see at the draft table.

0