I'm not going to get into the technicalities here, but wouldn't you rather make moves knowing what a player has done in his one month of play so far compared to his projections?

I think as fantasy owners, or at least hope, that we can understand some trends in baseball statistics. For example, there are some players that historically get off to bad starts, like Ryan Howard. This is the reason I wrote this article, because you need to give time for your team to develop more than just two weeks before you start trading everyone away.

You need to understand that if a player hits 10 HR in April, he likely isn't going to hit 10 every month, but we then know that he has the ability to possibly do so.

one example--cliff lee last year--in spring we knew nothing. in april we knew something. what you choose to do with the April info is a matter of having better judgment. Or the usual mark teixeira slow start. do you sell or buy?

it my opinion it is better to wait and have that information than to not have it. like projections you can use the info well or use it poorly but i prefer to have it and not make deals solely on pre-season projections.

i think you overstate my comments. my main point is that 1.projections are fraught with uncertainty 2. we dont know any more on opening day than we do at the draft. but we can know more on May 1. 3. trading conditions are better on May 1 than on april one since owners are never more optimistic than right after the draft. 4. you cannot figure out any more about "value" right after your draft but you CAN on May 1 if only because you know that certain things will correct themselves.

do you dispute any of these? you balance this against the accuracy of projections and the fact that you get an extra month of stats if you are right (but not necessarily a gain!)

if you dont dispute the premises above then i dont see how one can say you are better off trading sooner rather than waiting a bit. my point isnt that "projections" will be more accurate. it isnt that one is "right" and one is "wrong" but i think it is "better" to wait unless you get blown away by a deal.

...A breakout year has to start somewhere, and as we saw in the pitcher example, it's very hard to have a breakout year if you have a crappy April.

One could certainly make an argument that market conditions are more favorable on Day 30, but our accuracy in player forecasting won't be any higher than it is now.

I think this is an interesting line of thought, though, and I'd be curious if you still feel differently.

Didn't get my full post, apparently, so I'll post the rest in pieces.

...even if it was completely luck driven. That has fallacy written all over it. I don't need a study to tell me that it's hard to dig out of a hole. I need a study to tell me what that hole tells me about the pitcher going forward (hint: I think it's close to nothing).

If we were to look at his May-September line then maybe we could come to some sort of conclusion, but I just don't believe that we can say with any kind of reasonable certainty that we know the direction the rest of a pitcher's season will take after 30 IP. It's just not realistic.

The same fallacy likely applies to the breakout study. If 50 players have a better April than expected, some portion of them are bound to have a breakout year. But how many? 10%? 15%? Maybe? PECOTA Breakout scores or any 80th percentile projections can give you players with a greater chance of breakout than that. A breakout year has to start somewhere, and as we saw in the pitcher example, it's very hard to have a breakout year if you have a crappy April.

One could certainly make an argument that market conditions are more favorable on Day 30, but our accuracy in player forecasting won't be any higher than it is now.

I think this is an interesting line of thought, though, and I'd be curious if you still feel differently.

But Patrick, we DON'T know 10% more on day 30. Unless you're playing in a league where all of the stats a player has acquired thus far get transferred to your team (retroactively), it only matters what he will do going forward. And the level of accuracy on THAT prediction is exactly, 100% the same as the level of accuracy we have right now.

As I'm not an HQ subscriber I haven't seen all the details of those studies, so what I'm about to say could be wrong, but from what I remember reading about them in the Forecaster, I see several places where there could be flaws and biases.

If Pitcher A has a -$10 April and Pitcher B has a $10 April, obviously it's going to hard for Pitcher A to have a better season than Pitcher B! He's already $10 in the hole and $20 behind! From what I understand, that study compares to Pitcher A's entire season line, which is undoubtedly going to be lower because he started off so poorly, even if it was completely luck driven. That has fallacy written all over it. I don't need a study to tell me that it's hard to dig out of a hole. I need a study to tell me what that hole tells me about the pitcher going forward (hint: I think it's close to nothing).

If we were to look at his May-September line then maybe we could come to some sort of conclusion, but I just don't believe that we can say with any kind of reasonable certainty that we know the direction the rest of a pitcher's season will take after 30 IP. It's just not realistic.

The same fallacy likely applies to the breakout study. If 50 players have a better April than expected, some portion of them are bound to have a breakout year. But how many? 10%? 15%? Maybe? PECOTA Breakout scores or any 80th percentile projections can give you players with a greater chance of breakout than that. A breakout year has to start somewhere, and as we saw in the pitcher example, it's very hard to have a breakout year if you have a crappy April.

One could certainly make an argument that market conditions are more favorable on Day 30, but our accuracy in player forecasting won't be any higher than it is now.

I think this is an interesting line of thought, though, and I'd be curious if you still feel differently.

I know that we all think that he's crazy, including myself, but you have to be intelligent to be the general manager of any team, regardless of the results. Sure he made some terrible trades (you learn from experience) but this guy understands baseball better than any of us do.

I never liked him too much until this year when it seems he's stopped talking about his failed Mets teams so much.

i think your assessment will be better by waiting. for example, HQ did research about starting pitchers, finding that a bad (-$10) april makes it almost impossible to crawl out of a hole, and that breakout seasons are often identifiable in april.

but look at it this way: if you dont know what will happen on day one but know 10% more on day 30, doesnt it make sense to wait until day 30? you are far better off IMO trying to buy low and sell high after april than trading in march.

add in the fact that most owner are too optimistic on iffy players in april driving up trade demands, and overall it makes better sense to wait.

Kevin, did you just call Steve Phillips a "smart guy"? [removed]JOSC_emoticon(":silly:")

Pat,
I'm not so sure I agree with this comment. Sure, there is a margin of error in player performance, but that margin of error is going to be there regardless of whether you're trading now or in May or in September.

"Your assessment before a game was even played has to be very accurate otherwise you are better off waiting for a while and seeing how things develop." Why? Is your assessment going to be any better by waiting? The answer is an indisputable no.

I'm not saying that you in particular do this, as I'm quite sure you don't, but if you wait a month and then start making trades based on what has happened so far, many people will end up making a mistake because they'll be placing too much emphasis on the first month of the season.

What we need to do is keep a running, daily projection for players and evaluate them based on that, but those daily projections have just as much inaccuracy as preseason projections.

I couldn't have said it better myself Pat. The margin of error is huge in fantasy sports, and when it comes down to it, there is a lot of luck involved because of that. We can prepare all we want, but there are way too many things that we can't prepare for, since baseball players are human.

A lot of owners often get caught up making moves just to make moves; I heard earlier this year on an ESPN broadcast that Steve Phillips made 600+ transactions in their fantasy league in the Baseball Tonight Fantasy League they have. That is absurd, and I'm sure some of them were good moves and helped him to win (which he did) but he didn't win because he made so many transactions. He won because he is a very smart guy, considering he used to be a general manager of a professional baseball team.

It doesn't always hurt to make small changes to your team, but don't start trading guys for the sake of trading- it happens all the time.

it might be, but 90% of owners act rashly after the draft. players are not robots and they can vary as much as 7-10 rounds of value for no reason. so your assessment before a game was even played has to be very accurate otherwise you are better off waiting for a while and seeing how things develop. with a 30% margin of error you are better off to have some patience.

Thanks for writing this, it is a theory that I subscribe to myself. I used to fall victim of being too trigger happy early after drafts (especially drafts that occur a month or so before the season starts). I think this was due to me feeling guilty for not being "active" or whatever, after making a few mistakes along the way I realized I needed to trust my instinct in what led me to draft them to begin with and to let it play out for a bit before making any irrational or hasty moves.

An active owner, doesn't mean an owner that trades a lot. It's an owner that takes pride in his team! I apologize for the rant Kevin, it was a great article and said what I had been thinking!

I think it comes down to whether or not you had a plan and executed it. Sure, if you winged it and/or got distracted, there might need to be repairs made. But if you basically set out and did what you intended, it makes no sense to start dabbling.

I did that recently, in a 17 team mixed league, and then got excited one day and dropped John Lannan for some minor leaguer (Brantley?).

Ok, maybe not the best example, but learn from my mistakes kids: if it aint broke don't fix it.

I disagree with the advice above, there is nothing wrong with fixing roster issues as soon as the draft ends, mostly every team will have surpluses in certain areas, so there is no reason not to go and try to improve your team.

I've never fully understood the point of trading a bunch of bigs, just to get other big names.

I mean for the most part, the majority of the big name players provide the same skill set (not all, but alot do), to varying degrees.

When I saw this trade in my inbox I felt a little insulted. I understand the purpose of a feeler offer,but at least try to make it reasonable.

That is exactly the kind of stuff I'm talking about Matt- projections have little value at this point in time, so the teams are all even. Let the season play out a little bit and then you can try to trade superstars if need be.

People really need to think twice about trading big name players to begin with. For those of you who are struggling with a trade feel free to e-mail us or post a comment on one of the articles and you'll get all the help you need!

Kevin consider this posted everywhere. So far I've gotten a ton of stupid trades, Pujols and Lind for Miggy Cabrera and Alfonso Soriano- apparently Soriano is the gap between Miggy and Pujols and Lind is to replace Soriano in my line up.

I've seen 6 trades in one league so far, and we drafted on sunday. It's amazing how impatient people are.

Great article Kev.

Thanks for the advice Kevin.
Looking forward to your new show.