|DC Average Standings for Target Drafting ($150 and $375)|
|Theory and Strategy - Platinum|
|Written by Administrator|
|Tuesday, 10 December 2013 18:50|
By Todd Zola
One of the more popular modes of drafting involves setting targets based on the average standings from previous seasons. The NFBC has DC leagues at two price points (well, three but we won't count the $1000 options since there aren't enough leagues to generate ample data). Last season the fees were $150 and $375 with the $375 league paying out equally to the top-three finishers. This season the $375 leagues are $400. The standard option is to pay the top-three equally like last season but there will be some options for graded payouts.
Below are average standings for the 2013 Draft Championship Leagues for those favoring drafting towards category targers (I'm not a fan of this method, but that's a story for another day). There were 98 $150 DC leagues used and 22 $375 leagues.
$150 DC Category Totals Average Standings
$375 DC Category Totals Average Standings
There are some that believe the $375 leagues lend themselves to gimmick strategies since all it takes is third place to cash the same as if you won. While it may be true, there isn't evidence this is the case using the above data. Intuitively, this makes sense since the gimmick strategies involve doing well in some categories while not caring as much about others. In a zero-sum environment like roto-standings, this will even out since there are a few "opposite" strategies (one team gets all power and little speed while another team gets a ton or SB and BAvg with low power).
The second part of this process is having an idea of how many points it takes to win. Below are average standings using points for the same leagues.
$150 DC Points Totals Average Standings
$375 DC Points Totals Average Standings
The manner most do the calculation is note it takes 118 points to win the $150 format and 112 points to win the $375 format. To score 118 points, you need 12 points per category which is basically finishing 4th in each so the category target would be to finish 4th in each (pulled from the first table.) In the $375 format, you only on average) need 112 points which is closer to 5th place in each category.
As an aside. while this difference could be a difference in sample size (98 leagues versus 22) it also may indeed be solid evidence that there are more gimmick strategies employed in the $375 leagues.
Speaking of gimmick strategies, an example how these tables are useful is the following. Let's use second place as that avails you a margin of error to still finish third in the $375 (now $400) leagues. You need 106 points to be in the money. Let's say your strategy is to get saves and either wins and K's or ERA and WHIP. If you run the table, you get (3 x 15) + 1 + 1 or 47 points, meaning you need about 60 more in hiting to cash. There are 75 possible hitting points so hopefylly by avoiding the upper tier starters (part and parcel to either strategy) you solidify htting and get the 60 points.
There are several caveats when using target drafting. Remember these are AVERAGE stanndings. The first place score in the $150 leagues ranged from 99.5 points to 137 points. That is, 118 is not going to win all the leagues.
Another possible issue is the assumption that the MLB statistical distribution remains similar one year to the next. This was NOT the case in 2013 as MLB saw a precipitous drop in steals so the targets used last spring ended up to be non-representatve of what eventually occured.
As I alluded to, I'm not a fan of target drafting (there are more reasons that I'll treat at a future date) but respect those that do employ the strategy. If it works for you, more power to you. If it helps keep a balance or speed and power, that's great.
Regardless, I am more than happy to provide the data and leave it to you to decide if you want to use it.
A spreadsheet of the data is available HERE.