The Z Files: Historical Top 200

Everyone playing this game has player expectations. Some are spreadsheet-driven projections, others are more touch and feel. There's no right or wrong, whatever works best for you is the way to go. After all, it's much more about what you do with the expectation than the actual expectation itself.

Still, regardless of the process, it helps to look back at history. Making sure your rankings pass the eye test is the first step before taking them into battle. As such, I've compiled the end-of-season top 350 for the past five seasons. I'll share a series of observations. The elegance of this exercise is you'll likely see an entirely different set of observations, or perhaps interpret what I see differently.

Before presenting the results, it's necessary to review the parameters and intrinsic shortcomings of the procedure. The rankings are based on 15-team mixed leagues, using standard 5x5 rotisserie scoring. Rosters are the typical 14 hitters (2-C, 1-1B, 1-2B, 1-3B, 1-SS, 1-1B/3B, 1-2B/SS, 5-OF, 1-UT) and nine pitchers. The hitting to pitching split used is 69:31, since that's the most common distribution in auction leagues of this size. Please note, the NFBC (National Fantasy Baseball Championship) auctions nestle around 63:37, pushing pitching higher on the list. For those feeling year-end ranks should reflect a 50:50 split, you're correct, but I'm doing it this way since it's easier to compare a list of this nature to your 2019 rankings which allocate more than half of the funds to hitting.

The primary flaw of this method is that, conventionally, the number of positively valued players matches the number of active players in the league. In this instance, that's 345. The available budget is distributed among 345 players based on their contributions relative to each other. The problem is the actual number of players active throughout the season far exceeds that total. The assets should be divvied up between 345 roster spots, not players. This, along with the true split, are discussions for another day. When we initially rank/value players, this same assumption is made, so incorporating the flaw is the best means of comparing apples to apples.

With that as a backdrop, here's the data for the Top 200 from 2014-2018. Once MLB rosters are more settled, I'll do a follow-up piece looking at the final 145 spots to facilitate building the second half of your 2019 fantasy squads:

To facilitate analyzing the data, here's a sortable table displaying the data for 2018's top 200, since that's the pool we're concerned with so early in the off-season. Once free agents sign and trades are made, we can focus on the second half of the pool as noted above. Also included is the average of years appearing in the top 350. Since it doesn't include the seasons they were outside of the range, it's not a true representation of their performance over the past five years, but it does provide another means of sorting to get a feel for players with the potential of being draft-worthy. Finally, the number of seasons each player finished in the top 15, reflecting a first round draft pick, is provided:

While you should be giddy with either one, there's a heated debate between Mike Trout and Mookie Betts for the top spot. Only one of the dynamic duo has actually accomplished the feat since 2014, though, with Betts finishing as the top fantasy player in both 2018 and 2016. This isn't as much of an argument for Betts as it is a counter to those suggesting Trout is a no-brainer. In Trout's favor is a more consistent, and longer, track record of excellence.

Only Trout and Jose Altuve wrapped up four of the past five campaigns as a first rounder. In fact, from 2014-2017, Altuve outproduced Trout by a slim margin. Recency bias, as well as some tangible concerns, have Altuve several spots below Trout heading into 2019. My initial top-15 hitters places Altuve seventh, just a little more bullish than the early market.

Nolan Arenado is the only player to make the top 15 each of the previous four campaigns. He doesn't run and his batting average isn't enough to warrant anything higher than eighth, a ranking he's achieved twice, but you know what you're getting with 13 more batters to make up for the paucity of pilfers.

Some are questioning Jose Ramirez's inclusion as a top five player next season, pointing towards his streakiness. Don't forget, he was 2017's 11th-most valuable player, so there's precedent for another high finish. A solid two-year track record should assuage any fears regrading Ramirez's rather tepid finish to the 2018 season, which extended into the playoffs.

While this is the first season Max Scherzer will be ranked universally high than Clayton Kershaw, he's been the better fantasy pitcher each of the past three seasons.

Whit Merrifield is being drafted in the third round early on, to the consternation of some. However, the truth is he's been better than a top-20 player the past two seasons.

Charlie Blackmon is one year removed from occupying the top overall spot. In 2016, he finished a lofty seventh overall. Yet, after a still-solid 20th in 2018, he's lasting until at least pick 25 in most of the early drafts and mocks. This is just wrong, ditty, wrong, wrong, wrong.

Francisco Lindor is a wonderful player, in fantasy and otherwise. Last season, he finished an impressive fifth overall. However, he required the highest plate appearance total of the last five seasons to do so. Many, including yours truly, have Lindor pegged for another top-five finish. Based on the above tables, I'm seriously reconsidering that position as it leaves no margin of error, both in terms of playing time and skills. Research shows gravity has a huge affect on both. What Lindor has done in terms of maintaining such a high level of playing time is nearly unprecedented. At least 55, sometimes up to 70 percent of the player pool incurs a drop in skills one season to the next. With both forces working against Lindor, he'll be hard pressed to repeat a top-five campaign.

While I have more thoughts, they'll come up in future installments, so how about I open the floor for your observations on the data. Please feel free to post your interpretations in the comments below.