CSS Button No Image Css3Menu.com

Baseball Prospectus home
  
  
Click here to log in Click here for forgotten password Click here to subscribe

<< Previous Article
Daily League Strategy:... (04/21)
<< Previous Column
Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: Rec... (04/17)
Next Column >>
Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: The... (04/23)
Next Article >>
Fantasy Article Interleague Report: We... (04/21)

April 21, 2014

Fantasy Freestyle

Why 70/30?

by Mike Gianella

the archives are now free.

All Baseball Prospectus Premium and Fantasy articles more than a year old are now free as a thank you to the entire Internet for making our work possible.

Not a subscriber? Get exclusive content like this delivered hot to your inbox every weekday. Click here for more information on Baseball Prospectus subscriptions or use the buttons to the right to subscribe and get instant access to the best baseball content on the web.

Subscribe for $4.95 per month
Recurring subscription - cancel anytime.


a 33% savings over the monthly price!

Purchase a $39.95 gift subscription
a 33% savings over the monthly price!

Already a subscriber? Click here and use the blue login bar to log in.

This winter, there was a great discussion on Twitter with Peter Kreutzer (a.k.a Rotoman) and Chris Liss of Rotowire about why fantasy baseball teams in auction formats spend about 70 percent of their money on hitting and 30 percent on pitching (more or less). We are beyond auction season now, but this is such a terrific debate (and such an important concept to auction owners) that it is worth revisiting now.

Kreutzer is correct that we spend more for hitters in the aggregate than we do for pitchers because there is always more value to be had in the free agent pitching pool than there is in the free agent hitting pool. A simpler way of putting this is that in a 12-team format you’re far more likely to buy a pitcher who will not be as good as one of the actual top 108 pitchers as you are to buy a hitter who will not be as good as one of the actual top 168 hitters. I don’t agree with Kreutzer’s assumptions on the valuations, but that’s not especially germane to this particular discussion. He’s right where it counts, and this is why most experts use something along the lines of 65/35, 70/30, or something in between for dollar allocation.

However, while this observation about hitting and pitching free agents is correct, it isn’t the primary reason why it is important that you should try to stay close to a 70/30 split on hitting and pitching prices. If you fail to spend 70 percent of your money on hitting and 30 percent on pitching, you will hamper your ability to field a competitive team.

For example, let’s say that you decide that paying for pitching is stupid. You decide to go into your auction using an 85/15 split for hitters and pitchers instead of a 70/30 breakdown. Using 2013’s expert league prices as an example, here is what this dollar allocation would have done to the Top 10 AL hitters.

Table 1: Ten Most Expensive 2013 AL Hitters: 70% Versus 85%

Player

My Bid

AVG Salary

85% Hitter Budget Bid

Mike Trout

43

41

49

Miguel Cabrera

38

41

49

Robinson Cano

33

35

43

Albert Pujols

33

34

41

Prince Fielder

32

34

41

Jose Reyes

31

31

38

Jose Bautista

30

31

38

Yoenis Cespedes

29

30

36

Adrian Beltre

31

29

36

Evan Longoria

28

29

36

The average salary is generated from the salaries of three expert leagues: CBS, LABR, and Tout Wars. These leagues have been spending in the neighborhood of 70 percent for hitting and 30 percent for pitching league-wide for the last few years. My recommended bids—published at Baseball Prospectus for the last two years—use a 70/30 framework as well. As a result, my prices for these players are generally in the ballpark of the expert leagues. If I had been a participant in all three expert leagues, there’s a possibility I would have bought Trout in at least one of them and depending on where his price fell, I might have purchased Beltre. The other hitters I would have passed on. Reyes’s average salary matched my suggested bid, but I’m not in the business of buying players at a par price.

Now look at what happens when you push 15 percent of your money toward hitting (the 85 pecent hitting budget listed above). Suddenly every price for the top hitters is a good price. In theory you should be buying all of the top hitters until you run out of money. In this scenario, let’s say that you bought Trout, Cabrera, Cano, Pujols, Reyes, and Fielder at one dollar more than their average, expert league bid price. This would cost $222 for six players. At this point, you could either try to fill in across the board with cheap players or spend $22 on one more player and go dollar derby on your remaining 16 roster slots. In a best-case scenario, you would clean up on offense and your pitching would struggle. Worst case, one or two hitter injuries would put your team in the basement.

You could argue that since you know that your league is going to only allocate 70 percent per team on offense that you can simply scale back on your prices from the 85 percent for hitters when you are at the auction. However, all you’re doing at this point is engaging in a semantic exercise about what the “right” split is versus how to spend your auction dollars.

It is stating the obvious, but if you turn the dial up on pitching spending, the same principles would apply.

Table 2: Ten Most Expensive 2013 AL Hitters: 45% Versus 30%

Player

My Bid

AVG Salary

45% Bid

Justin Verlander

33

32

38

David Price

28

28

32

Felix Hernandez

28

25

32

Jered Weaver

24

25

28

Yu Darvish

28

25

32

Max Scherzer

23

23

26

CC Sabathia

24

22

28

Chris Sale

18

21

21

Matt Moore

17

19

20

James Shields

20

19

23

Because you are starting with a smaller percentage of the “pie” allocated toward pitching, adding 15 percent of your overall dollars to the pitching budget doesn’t quite have the same dramatic impact as it does on the hitters. But it does have an impact. In a hypothetical bidding war with all of these teams, I would “buy” all of these players except Sale. The same problem would occur for me on the pitching side, where I’d spend $227 on my top nine arms. I might win all of the non-saves pitching categories, but there isn’t enough variability in the world on offense for me to win any hitting categories while spending $33 on my offense. Maybe I would sneak a few points in steals if I got lucky.

The 70/30 split exists not because the dollar allocation is correct or accurate then, but because you are trying to build a team based on market values. You can go over or under budget on the whole for hitters or pitchers by a few percentage points, but once you start moving your split five percent or more in one direction or the other, you run the risk of buying an imbalanced team.

Right now, in mid-April after we have purchased our teams, none of this matters. Hitters and pitchers each contribute half of points in roto-style leagues, and the value proposition changes the moment your auction concludes. This is why it isn’t uncommon to see a $25 hitter flipped for a $20 pitcher; once the season starts, we recognize that the 70/30 valuation of the auction is theoretical and wrong in terms of the realities of the season.

However, if your budget is too far off, your team will be unbalanced and you will have a difficult time correcting, especially in an only league. In a mixed league, you might be able to adjust through free agency, particularly in the example where you spend 85% on hitting. In the end, though, the 70/30 split might be derived from the number of free agents who are as good or better than the players we actually buy, but for me as a pricer this is a moot point. I’m interested in budgeting for my auctions based on the market conditions; the “whys” of those conditions does not particularly concern me.

Mike Gianella is an author of Baseball Prospectus. 
Click here to see Mike's other articles. You can contact Mike by clicking here

Related Content:  Fantasy,  Auctions,  70/30

31 comments have been left for this article.

<< Previous Article
Daily League Strategy:... (04/21)
<< Previous Column
Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: Rec... (04/17)
Next Column >>
Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: The... (04/23)
Next Article >>
Fantasy Article Interleague Report: We... (04/21)

RECENTLY AT BASEBALL PROSPECTUS
Fantasy Article Player Profile: Brett Lawrie
Fantasy Article Dynasty Dynamics: Discussing the Top Five Se...
Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: Two Position Players Angl...
Premium Article Minor League Update: Games of Wednesday, Sep...
Fantasy Article Player Profile: Marcus Stroman
Premium Article Painting the Black: The All-Fringe Prospect ...
Premium Article Baseball Therapy: A Veteran and His Presents

MORE FROM APRIL 21, 2014
Premium Article Transaction Analysis: Escape From New York, ...
Premium Article Minor League Update: Weekend Games of April ...
Premium Article What You Need to Know: Weekend Wrap-Up, 4/21
Premium Article The Prospectus Hit List: Monday, April 21
The Week in Quotes: April 14-20
Fantasy Article Interleague Report: Week Four
Daily League Strategy: Stars-and-Scrubs

MORE BY MIKE GIANELLA
2014-04-29 - Flags Fly Forever Podcast: Ep 17: Pitcher Sa...
2014-04-24 - Fantasy Article Free Agent Watch: Week Four
2014-04-23 - Flags Fly Forever Podcast: Ep. 16
2014-04-21 - Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: Why 70/30?
2014-04-17 - Fantasy Article Free Agent Watch: Week Three
2014-04-16 - Flags Fly Forever Podcast: Ep. 15
2014-04-14 - Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: Auction Leagues and Salar...
More...

MORE FANTASY FREESTYLE
2014-05-05 - Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: The Upside Fallacy
2014-04-28 - Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: Transaction Paralysis
2014-04-23 - Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: The Benefits of Early-Sea...
2014-04-21 - Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: Why 70/30?
2014-04-17 - Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: Recovering Prospects
2014-04-16 - Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: Fighting Early-Season Con...
2014-04-14 - Fantasy Article Fantasy Freestyle: Auction Leagues and Salar...
More...