Sox Prospects Pre-Season Top 40 Voting Results

0 Kudo

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Author

Comment

Lippa91

Sox Prospects Pre-Season Top 40 Voting Results

Lead

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 1530

03/17/08 2:13 AM

Tags : None

RK	PLAYER	MEAN
1	Clay Buchholz	1
2	Jacoby Ellsbury	2.117647
3	Justin Masterson	4.264706
4	Lars Anderson	4.5
5	Jed Lowrie	4.970588
6	Michael Bowden	5.705882
7	Nick Hagadone	6.794118
8	Ryan Kalish	7.588235
9	Oscar Tejeda	10.08824
10	Josh Reddick	10.26471
11	Brandon Moss	12.44118
12	Will Middlebrooks	12.64706
13	Kris Johnson	14.76471
14	Chris Carter	16.23529
15	Aaron Bates	16.67647
16	Che-Hsuan Lin	17
17	Michael Alamanzar	18.23529
18	Mark Wagner	19.23529
19	Dustin Richardson	19.70588
20	Ryan Dent	20.82353
21	Jason Place	23.76471
22	Argenis Diaz	24.44118
23	George Kottaras	26.26471
24	Anthony Rizzo	26.41176
25	Drake Britton	26.79412
26	Daniel Bard	26.85294
27	Yamaico Navarro	27.82353
28	Reid Engel	28.29412
29	Bubba Bell	29.23529
30	Jon Still	29.38235
31	David Mailman	29.47059
32	Ty Weeden	30.52941
33	Hunter Jones	32.79412
34	Adam Mills	34.61765
35	David Pauley	35.11765
36	Chih-Hsien Chiang	35.58824
37	Tony Granadillo	35.76471
38	Zach Daeges	36.02941
39	Austin Bailey	37.08824
40	Bryce Cox	37.55882

-66 different players received at least 1 top 40 vote.
-36 ballots were tallied

If anyone would like the spreadsheet, let me know.

"There's a reason why you wear this Red Sox uniform. Because you're a bad mother#@%&$." -- David Ortiz

Arquimedez Bozo

#1

[-]

Moderator

Veteran Member

Posts: 4178

03/17/08 4:31 PM

Moderator

I'll take a gander to see if there's any abnormalities. send it to cahatfield at gmail.com

Solid work Lippa.

I'd have to say this looks like a good job by the sp.com posters.

"they should go to soxprospect so that BOZO THE CLOWN and the rest of THE WANTS TO BE will give you some information" - A SP.com Legend

"A doubleheader is better than tipping the other team off the side of a cliff." - Cin1010

AgentOrange

#2

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 448

03/17/08 6:02 PM

Wouldn't it make more sense to tally the votes in the manner used by the AP poll in NCAA football? (Ex. 40 points for a first place vote, all the way on down to 1 point for a 40th place vote). Unless you're using some other method to take into account outlying votes, the mean probably won't provide the most accurate rankings.

For example, let's say one poster is a fanboy of prospect A. He ranks him 35th, while no one else puts him in their top 40. Prospect A's mean would be 35. Prospect B gets votes from 12 posters, but all are towards the back end of the list. He ends up with a mean of ~36 from 12 voters, while A has a mean 35 from 1 voter. Who is truly held in higher esteem by the Soxprospects.com community? I'd say it's clearly prospect B. Unless I'm missing something, your methodology would rank these two prospects incorrectly.

This is mainly a theoretical quibble, as the difference between the two lists ranked by mean and by points would likely be small and would occur only towards the bottom of the rankings. Still, I think the point methodology is more sound.

I'm not trying to be a jerkoff, so forgive me if this issue has already been debated here and the consensus of the community was for ranking by mean.

TNS

#3

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 3056

03/17/08 6:22 PM

AgentOrange wrote:
Wouldn't it make more sense to tally the votes in the manner used by the AP poll in NCAA football? (Ex. 40 points for a first place vote, all the way on down to 1 point for a 40th place vote). Unless you're using some other method to take into account outlying votes, the mean probably won't provide the most accurate rankings.

For example, let's say one poster is a fanboy of prospect A. He ranks him 35th, while no one else puts him in their top 40. Prospect A's mean would be 35. Prospect B gets votes from 12 posters, but all are towards the back end of the list. He ends up with a mean of ~36 from 12 voters, while A has a mean 35 from 1 voter. Who is truly held in higher esteem by the Soxprospects.com community? I'd say it's clearly prospect B. Unless I'm missing something, your methodology would rank these two prospects incorrectly.

This is mainly a theoretical quibble, as the difference between the two lists ranked by mean and by points would likely be small and would occur only towards the bottom of the rankings. Still, I think the point methodology is more sound.

I'm not trying to be a jerkoff, so forgive me if this issue has already been debated here and the consensus of the community was for ranking by mean.

You've got it right. I know there are a handful of players that only showed up on half the lists but they're surprisingly high on the bottom of the overall list (specifically Hunter Jones, Pauley, Chiang, Granadillo & Bryce Cox) while a guy like Daeges who was on every list is at 38. I'm not doubting the numbers averaged out the way they did but as AgentOrange mentioned, it may not reflect the quantity of votes, just the average vote from those who voted for them.

Arquimedez Bozo

#4

[-]

Moderator

Veteran Member

Posts: 4178

03/17/08 6:23 PM

Moderator

Fair points.

Lippa, would it be hard to re-do the rankings, using reverse points? (i.e., 40 for a 1st, 39 for a second, etc.)

"they should go to soxprospect so that BOZO THE CLOWN and the rest of THE WANTS TO BE will give you some information" - A SP.com Legend

"A doubleheader is better than tipping the other team off the side of a cliff." - Cin1010

Lippa91

#5

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 1530

03/17/08 8:33 PM

Done

RK	PLAYER	POINTS
1	Clay Buchholz	1360
2	Jacoby Ellsbury	1322
3	Justin Masterson	1249
4	Lars Anderson	1241
5	Jed Lowrie	1225
6	Michael Bowden	1200
7	Nick Hagadone	1163
8	Ryan Kalish	1136
9	Oscar Tejeda	1051
10	Josh Reddick	1045
11	Brandon Moss	971
12	Will Middlebrooks	964
13	Kris Johnson	892
14	Chris Carter	842
15	Aaron Bates	827
16	Che-Hsuan Lin	816
17	Michael Alamanzar	774
18	Mark Wagner	740
19	Dustin Richardson	724
20	Ryan Dent	686
21	Jason Place	586
22	Argenis Diaz	563
23	George Kottaras	501
24	Anthony Rizzo	496
25	Drake Britton	483
26	Daniel Bard	481
27	Yamaico Navarro	448
28	Reid Engel	432
29	Bubba Bell	400
30	Jon Still	395
31	David Mailman	392
32	Ty Weeden	356
33	Hunter Jones	279
34	Adam Mills	217
35	David Pauley	200
36	Chih-Hsien Chiang	184
37	Tony Granadillo	178
38	Zach Daeges	169
39	Austin Bailey	133
40	Bryce Cox	117
41	Caleb Clay	70
42	Brock Huntzinger	62
43	Stolmy Pimentel	54
44	Jose Alvarez	49
45	Craig Hansen	49
46	Chris Province	42
47	Rafael Espinosa	39
48	Leo Sumoza	24
49	Jeff Natale	20
50	Ryan Khoury	14
51	Carlos Fernandez-Oliva	13
52	Jon Egan	9
53	Ronald Bermudez	9
54	Mike Rozier	9
55	Israel Perez	8
56	Chad Spann	8
57	Jeff Corsaletti	6
58	Jordan Craft	6
59	Daniel Haigwood	6
60	Chiha-Chu Chen	4
61	Micky Hall	4
62	Kyle Jackson	3
63	Ryan Pressly	2
64	Wilfredo Pichardo	1
65	Jimmy James	1
66	Luis Exposito	1

"There's a reason why you wear this Red Sox uniform. Because you're a bad mother#@%&$." -- David Ortiz

chavopepe2

#6

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 718

03/17/08 9:02 PM

Veteran Member

Interesting that nothing changed.

AMarshal2

#7

[-]

Moderator

Veteran Member

Posts: 7199

03/17/08 9:06 PM

Moderator

Yeah, not a single thing.

"Since I stole that base I have not gone one day -- not one -- without someone coming and saying 'thank you.' You may never experience that, and I have it for life." -Dave Roberts

Forever Red 9

#8

[-]

Moderator

Veteran Member

Posts: 2323

03/17/08 9:59 PM

Moderator

3 through 5 is basically a toss up at this point.

TNS

#9

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 3056

03/17/08 10:25 PM

Are these voting results going to be the site ranks to start the season?

SoDDaveB

#10

[-]

Rookie

Posts: 43

03/17/08 10:38 PM

Huntzinger > Bailey

Sox on Deck

TNS

#11

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 3056

03/17/08 10:42 PM

SoDDaveB wrote:
Huntzinger > Bailey

We could do comparisons like that for half the list.

The voting system really needs to change in the future to try to eliminate double-standards (and hopefully weed out some of the insane lists).

left coast bosox fan

#12

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 1878

03/18/08 1:14 AM

Veteran Member

A suggestion: Use sampling techniques, compile the list, compare everyone's list to the compiled list, throw out the worst 15% correlation, recompile. You'll get far better results in the bottom half of the list since it will objectively weed out "insane lists".

To me the most obvious discrepancy is Hansen. I don't know where the original thread is but I'd guess those that thought Hansen was eligible had him top 20 but most thought he wasn't eligible and weren't anywhere on their lists. SOSH had that problem and dealt with it early on asking people to add him to their lists, sometimes by email.

Last Edited By: left coast bosox fan 03/18/08 2:03 AM. Edited 1 time.

chavopepe2

#13

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 718

03/18/08 6:13 AM

Veteran Member

I think you are WAY off base TNS. The system naturally weeds out the players only named on 1 or 2 lists. I actually think this list is very good. Just because you disagree with some of it, doesn't mean it is a bad list.

I personally would take Bailey over Huntzinger. They are fairly similar. Neither has pitched very much. Bailey got a higher bonus. To point out that discrepency is a little rediculous, especially when one is ranked 39 the other is ranked 42.

I'd love to hear what other things you have a problem with. Are there things I disagree with? Sure. But that doesn't make it a bad list. I'm actually impressed with this compilation.

Cem21

#14

[-]

Moderator

Veteran Member

Posts: 1013

03/18/08 8:05 AM

Veteran Member

I agree with you chavo. It is kind of coming across as belly aching and poor form. No one's individual list is any superior to another. This is not a bad list at all. Are there minor tweaks? Probably. But this gets the jist of it and plus, this is the community's take on the rankings. A collection of opinions. I find it rather difficult to point to anything as "insane" since none of this is etched in stone or fact for that matter. Personal preference in a lot of cases. One could take a look at any of our lists and disagree with a number of things. That is what makes it fun. Rather than get all flustered and bothered, let the season take care of it, and we'll all look back at this point saying "What was I thinking?" or "I knew it!"

LongGone24

#15

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 743

03/18/08 9:06 AM

I agree w/ cem here. These guys are prospects, most of them none of us have seen. As raters, most of us have biases. I'll admit that when I make lists I have a tendency to group in tiers- then use production at different levels as my tie-breakers. Because of this my list is going to lean toward players at the highest levels. I also am older than most of you and I have followed Sox prospects since the days of Lynn, Rice & Ted Cox so I am likely to be more tolerant of poor half year, or year, as most players don't seem to develop on a linear path.

All this being said I went back and looked at the first 30 lists and here are some things I saw.

Brandon Moss- Mostly went in the low teens. Did have a 24 & 26 thrown in.

Chris Carter- Mostly in the teens. Had one of the widest spreads with people rating him as high as 9- 10, to being rated as low as 32.

Mark Wagner- Most had him in the late teens/ early 20's. Went as high as 13/ 14, as low as 27.

Ryan Dent- Another big spread. 12, 13, 14 to 27, 31...

Jason Place- Off one list. 14, 15 to 28, 29, 40

A Diaz- He was everywhere. 13, 15, 15, 16 to 36, 36, 36

G Kottaras- 14, 19 to 36, 37, 40

D Bard- 19, 21, 21 to 35, 39

What does this prove? Probably nothing except the voters biases when we make up the list. Carter, Moss, and to a certain extent Kottaras are more mature prospects where we can envision their ceilings. Bard and Place are poster children for those prospects who are talented, but taking a non-linear path. Wagner people are uncertain about due to the "Lancaster effect". Diaz wasn't on anyone's radar based on his production- then he went to Hawaii. Rating is hard. I did my top- 40 on my lunch hour. If I was doing it again today I would certainly make changes, but overall I am content. I think others were rushed as well as Navarro & Place were left completely off lists (oversite, or intentially I don't know). The bottom line is we took a series of list from different posters and create a master list which represents how we collectively feel. I think it is a pretty good list.

Back to work.

Arquimedez Bozo

#16

[-]

Moderator

Veteran Member

Posts: 4178

03/18/08 9:16 AM

Moderator

This is not going to become the site's top 40, so don't worry about it. There was an update yesterday that I believe reflected the first-hand reports we got out of MLST from Mike, Jon, and Chris.

"they should go to soxprospect so that BOZO THE CLOWN and the rest of THE WANTS TO BE will give you some information" - A SP.com Legend

"A doubleheader is better than tipping the other team off the side of a cliff." - Cin1010

Lippa91

#17

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 1530

03/18/08 9:28 AM

Ryan Dent- Another big spread. 12, 13, 14 to 27, 31...

Dent was left entirely off of 2 lists. In going through everyone's rankings, I think Beat probably had the widest variance in his picks compared to the whole.

"There's a reason why you wear this Red Sox uniform. Because you're a bad mother#@%&$." -- David Ortiz

SoDDaveB

#18

[-]

Rookie

Posts: 43

03/18/08 11:35 AM

How did Dent get left off peoples lists? While he may not deserve top 20 he is better than a Chih-Hsien Chiang or Tony Granadillo. Not that I am an expert but some people are just dicking around when they made their lists. There needs to be some standard for counting writers lists.

Sox on Deck

Lippa91

#19

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 1530

03/18/08 11:47 AM

SoDDaveB wrote:
How did Dent get left off peoples lists? While he may not deserve top 20 he is better than a Chih-Hsien Chiang or Tony Granadillo. Not that I am an expert but some people are just dicking around when they made their lists. There needs to be some standard for counting writers lists.

It's very possible that he was left off accidentally. I think you might be taking this a bit too seriously. If some posters decide to be a little loose with their rankings, I think they're entitled to do so. These aren't the official site rankings, it's meant to be fun. Besides, almost of these lists are opinions based on 2nd and 3rd hand reports. I don't know if anyone who voted saw all of these guys play, and very few have seen more than a handful. That's going to lend itself to a very wide variance in people's opinions, especially when there's no established standard for how the prospects should be rated.

"There's a reason why you wear this Red Sox uniform. Because you're a bad mother#@%&$." -- David Ortiz

TNS

#20

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 3056

03/18/08 12:02 PM

SoDDaveB wrote:
How did Dent get left off peoples lists? While he may not deserve top 20 he is better than a Chih-Hsien Chiang or Tony Granadillo. Not that I am an expert but some people are just dicking around when they made their lists. There needs to be some standard for counting writers lists.

That was the point I was making but was less than delicate referring to them as insane. There are double-standards existing in the prospect evaluation and there needs to be some sort of bottom line about evaluating the players with minimal exposure (a season or less of playing professionally). (The Lancaster evaluation double-standard also comes into play albeit on a smaller scale.)

On some of the lists I just wish the people had to give a "why" on some of the more out there choices. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and there is no right or wrong but some lists come off as illogical without the insight that went into the decision. We need more structure to the voting in the future.

jspearlj1

#21

[-]

Veteran Member

Posts: 4549

03/18/08 12:28 PM

I think the end result worked out well, but I agree with TNS, that there should have been more of an explanation on the "out there" picks. Everyone is entitled to their opinion of course, but if you are going to have the cojones to put Carter in the 30's or Dent off entirely then please explain why. Not that you have to, but I think everyone would like to hear the contrarian opinion. I ranked Bard at 39 and was tempted to leave him off, but I did so with an explanation because if I saw a ranking that seemed off, I'd like to know why. I loved that TNS adressed the Bates versus Carter rankings and it led to me changing my list, I didn't understand why the discussion in the thread was cut off because I thought it added to the list rankings to hopefully open some people's eyes about certain stats they may not have been aware of or something along the lines. That type of info has a direct positive effect on the rankings so I thought it was detrimental to remove discussion.

"I'll buy you a beer while we talk about our favorite 17 year old Dominicans while everyone around us thinks we are pedophiles" - Chach.

Yuku free message boards

SoxProspects.com

Sox Prospects Pre-Season Top 40 Voting Results

Sox Prospects Pre-Season Top 40 Voting Results