Here's a means of calculating cost-effectiveness of players. That uses (VORP/salary*league minimum) as the metric. In effective, it penalizes you for paying too much, even for an effective player.
Here's the top 10 players in cost effectiveness:
| New York | Mohammed Stelly | 17 |
| Brooklyn | James Banks | 15.1 |
| Seattle | Duane Gerhardt | 14.1 |
| Maui | Octavio Cabrales | 13.9 |
| Los Angeles | Thomas Cohen | 13.3 |
| River Cities | Frank Wooster | 13.1 |
| New York | Joshua Giddings | 10.1 |
| Walla Walla | Fernando Estrada | 10.1 |
| Hickory | Donald Hunnicutt | 9.9 |
| Hickory | Allen Reuter | 9.8 |
| Cleveland | Monte Gross | 9.1 |
| Danville | Fermin Perez | 9.1 |
| Cleveland | Christopher Pearsall | 8.2 |
| Los Angeles | Roger Painter | 8.1 |
And here's the least cost effective:
| Maui | Donald Goris | -7.8 |
| Houston | Harry Johnson | -6.8 |
| Cleveland | Nelson Garcia | -6.7 |
| Houston | Coy Hendon | -5.6 |
| Walla Walla | Joseph Bendel | -5.6 |
| Hickory | George Labarre | -5.3 |
| Houston | Basil Napoles | -5.3 |
| Hickory | Jesus Morales | -5 |
| Maui | Juan Henriquez | -4.8 |
| Cleveland | Oscar Avendano | -4.4 |
Ain't numbers grand? There's a LOT of noise in these numbers over the first month. It'll be interesting to see how things develop as the sample size gets larger.
More fun: Win and run cost effectiveness. This is nothing more than the cost each team has racked up for these stats (how much salary spent/win or run). Yay!
| Cost per win | |
| Walla Walla | 1,223,363 |
| River Cities | 1,066,824 |
| Brooklyn | 1,031,020 |
| Los Angeles | 952,473 |
| Seattle | 865,737 |
| Saskatoon | 749,628 |
| Houston | 714,535 |
| Hickory | 699,608 |
| New York | 626,860 |
| Danville | 521,381 |
| Maui | 480,347 |
| Cleveland | 354,912 |
| Cost per Run | |
| River Cities | 128,019 |
| Los Angeles | 102,332 |
| Walla Walla | 97,869 |
| Brooklyn | 95,909 |
| Seattle | 93,090 |
| Hickory | 81,621 |
| New York | 81,414 |
| Saskatoon | 72,080 |
| Houston | 64,425 |
| Danville | 51,116 |
| Maui | 48,574 |
| Cleveland | 38,718 |
Thank God for deep pockets, that's all I have to say.
Keep in mind that the methodology for "worst" players is flawed in that the formula ranks below-replacement, inexpensive players as worse than below-replacement, expensive players.
ReplyDeletePersonally, if I have to have a guy who's performing below replacement value, I'd much rather have a cheap guy who costs $300K than one who costs $10M per year.
I am shocked that neither George Rawlins nor Sherman Wheeler are on the Least Cost Effective list.
ReplyDeleteBut, it is nice being the least fiscally frugal owner, historically, and having two guys on the "good" list and none on the "bad" one.
Wheeler ended up at -0.1. I looked for him.
ReplyDeleteRawlins is sitting right a 0.0, I believe.
I can't complain about my number except I am OVERACHEIVING and not going to get the 1st pick :)
ReplyDelete