GPP Stacking with Park Factors
Good morning DailyRoto members! Welcome to another installment of “GPP Stacking with Park Factors.” If you are new to the segment, please be sure to catch up on the previous weeks by selecting “Park Factors” from the MLB Free dropdown menu.
If you’re just catching up for the first time, let me explain the experiment to you. Each week I stack lineups from different games using park factors and enter them into GPPs at DraftKings. A park factor is simply a relative rating of a ballparks aptitude for offense.
Since the second week of the season, I’ve been using a manipulation of the FanGraphs park factors by handedness as shown below.
Below I’ve included a pair of rosters that I used in the huge $3 DraftKings GPP this week.
You’ll notice that these two teams scored similar scores and as result finished quite near each other in the overall standings. While neither were good enough to win me $100K, I want to point out a few trends that I’ve been tracking all year and note why they can make you successful if things go well.
First off, note that the pitching actually put up respectable point totals. As I’ve mentioned more in recent weeks, the pitching staff will put up the bulk of your point total so long as you get it right. This is a really important part of the GPP roster construction that has been overlooked a little bit in this experiment because I’ve been so focused on hitters and offense in the parks. On this particular slate of games the options were so slim that I used Ross and Martinez in both lineups, and they did their part. You might also notice that everyone else used them too as they made their way into 20.1 and 35.8 percent of rosters, respectively.
Secondly, look closely at the ownership percentages. Granted, this was a rather large tournament (111,679 entrants) so even small ownership percentages means a lot of teams have a particular player, but these low numbers were exactly what you want when trying to maneuver your way to the top of a large field tournament.
After locking up solid performances from the pitching staff, I felt decent about these teams making a dent. However, they felt like letting me down, and both were pretty mediocre. That has been the story of this segment the last few weeks, as teams haven’t put it together when I’ve needed them to.
The good news is, the process is sound and I’m not ready to jump ship. Things are clicking in terms of my earlier hypotheses. The games in the “worst parks” are yielding low ownership levels leaving room for plenty of upside, and the games in the “best parks” keep grinding out min-level cashes.
This process has been sound for GPPs, especially at the very low levels I’m playing. If the best parks can continue to grind out a small reward it gives me incentive to keep playing and cash in large when the “worst parks” break out.
In the coming weeks I want to make sure I’m sticking to the process and paying attention to just how well the teams I’m making are doing in terms of not only ROI but in points scored.
I’ve updated the tables below with the ROI and the points scored from this week as well as the averages from the games available.
|Week||Worst Park Avg.||Best Park Avg.||Worst Park ROI||Best Park ROI||Total|
|Year to Date||100.4||105.74||250.63%||246.48%||248.65%|
There are just a few notes I want to point out from the table. You might think it is odd that the “Worst Park” averaged more points this week, but yet didn’t cash anything. This speaks to the variance of Daily Fantasy sports and Major League Baseball especially. On a given night, the required cashing score can change greatly.
Also you might notice that the total ROI for the worst park took a decent sized leap downwards. This is due to the fact that I played more than usual this week because of the unique $3 GPP offering on DraftKings, therefore lowering my overall yield.
In the future, I’m hoping to crush one of these GPPs so I can gloat about it for four whole pages instead of mumbling on about mediocre teams that barely cashed. Hope that comes next week!