Upside - does it really matter?

[horrorfan]

Thought I'd throw this out there to hopefully generate a good discussion. I don't play in any keeper leagues so this is more of a curiosity question rather than trying to lessen its importance. We've all seen people use the term 'upside' when deciding on several players, whether it's a young guy entering the league to a comparison of superstars.

I'll pose these three extra questions to get the ball rolling:

How important is upside to you?
What's the likelihood a player hits their perceived upside?
Is this a term being used too often to evaluate players?

[ericdaoust]

It's a useful value but numbers tend to get thrown around carelessly. A tool is useless if you don't know how to use it.

[wendelclark17]

Thought I'd throw this out there to hopefully generate a good discussion. I don't play in any keeper leagues so this is more of a curiosity question rather than trying to lessen its importance. We've all seen people use the term 'upside' when deciding on several players, whether it's a young guy entering the league to a comparison of superstars.

I'll pose these three extra questions to get the ball rolling:

How important is upside to you? Important, especially when I am looking at prospects in my pts only keeper in sig. I don't care about guys that will be 50 pt players 4 years after they get drafted, I want the guys who could be 70 pt players. I like the homerun swings so upside is a big factor in my prospect drafting decisions.

What's the likelihood a player hits their perceived upside? I think an upside should be achievable. Dobber says his aim is to not have the upside he lists for a player exceeded. I myself generally shave some points off the upsides listed in the Dobber guides as I think they are often too high. For instance, in this season's guide Giroux's upside was listed as 115. I'm more realistic and think he has a 100 pt upside, a number I could actually see him hitting if everything went great for a season.

Is this a term being used too often to evaluate players? Yes it is being used too often to evaluate players in shorter term scenarios. Say I'm looking at production in the next 2-3 seasons, I don't care if someone like Strome has a 90 pt upside (according to the guide) if he has very little chance of hitting it during that period.

My answers are bolded.

[Reuben]

My answers are bolded.

I've gotta agree with these replies.

Upside matters to me with a prospect...but I think I'm realistic to know they don't hit that upside all that often. But I'd rather have a high-upside guy (as Wendel says) than a guaranteed 50pt guy.

But when it comes to building a team - More and more, I've been using that "upside" to deal away prospects for proven players, because other owners can get lost in that upside sometimes.

Good evaluation tool, but don't use it as the main way to build your team.

[Axeman33]

I use it as a tool to bolster a players value when I am trying to sell a prospect.

I take it with a larger grain of salt when I am buying a player.

[mounD]

Your questions hinted at an answer, actually ... Upside is, of course, only effective in player evaluations when viewed in a lens of how likely that player is to achieve said upside. You can work it out to an equation of sorts.

Say, for instance, Player A has a 90-point upside but only a 50% chance of reaching that. If we multiply (90) * (.50), we get the figure of 45.

Now, let's say for sake of argument, Player B has a 75-point upside but also a 75% chance of reaching that upside. If we multiply (75) * (.75), we get a figure of 56.25.

Assuming again that our probabilities of reaching upside are accurate, it would be more beneficial to own Player B. Sure, Player A may have a higher raw upside; however, given the likelihood of B reaching his upside, we have an added measure of security and consistency we don't have in Player A. Of course, this is just a generality, and we never actually know the REAL probability a player will reach his raw upside. But this is just meant to illustrate that "upside" absolutely MUST be viewed in a lens of probability in order for the consideration to have any merit.

[ericdaoust]

It's all about perspective. When you're at your prospect draft then by all means swing for the fences on upside and risk/reward. But when you're dealing an established superstar for prospects you're just asking for trouble.

[The Bottlenecker]

The website "Hockey's Future" does something like what MounD suggested. They have a potential talent score out of 10 (10 being a Gretzky or Orr), and then a Probability of hitting that potential on a scale of A, B, C, D or F (with A meaning they will almost always hit their maximum potential to F which sees them hitting their potential less than 50% of the time). I do refer to it when considering young players, but sometimes it is just a feeling I get about things like: minor league stats, team that drafted them, team depth chart, minutes on PP, bloodlines (love that Darnell Nurse is related to Donovan McNabb) and intangibles that I pick up from talking to friends, reading hockey related articles and looking at past performances. That is what makes pooling so much fun!!!

[mounD]

Upside needs to be treated as a PIECE of information, to be viewed in conjunction with other pieces of information. Together it makes a big web / collage- looking type thingy. At least that's what it looks like in my brain ...

[LawMan]

The first key for me is defining "upside". As pointed out, Dobber uses the term to mean the top number a player could reach if the stars align and very few players ever hit their Dobber perceived upside. Others will use it to mean the number a player should reach in his best season in the league. Neither approach is wrong but they will produce different numbers because each is using the same term to mean something different.

I like to compare fantasy analysis to the popular business concept of "best case, worst case, most likely". Basically I consider a player's "best case" (upside), worst case (injury, demotion, trade to Buffalo) and most likely. The most weight is given to a player's most likely but when comparing two similar players considering upside and downside may break a tie.

[newfcollins]

How important is upside to you?

It depends on the league and where my team is. If I'm going for the win, I stay away from guys who are a few years away. It's a waste of a draft pick, for me to draft someone who may not count for me for three years when I need to win now.

On the flip side, if I'm a team that is a few years away, then upside becomes very important. I'd rather a guy who has a chance at 80 points three years from now than a guy who might get 50 points now but never higher than that.

What's the likelihood a player hits their perceived upside?

It's no different than the NHL draft. There are going to be busts, and some stand outs, and some you got exactly right. All the prep work in the world isn't going to be enough if a guy gets a concussion, or is buried behind some standout players (ie- a young prospect centre may look great if he's drafted by Washington, but his value takes a hit if he's traded to Pittsburgh).

Is this a term being used too often to evaluate players?

No. You need to know a player's upside if you're going to be a successful GM. If not, you'd be ranking Drouin the same as Stephane Da Costa. Both might become long-term NHL players, but you need to know the upside to have a better shot at winning.

The only problem is fantasy GMs have a tendency to over-evaluate their own prospects. Everyone always thinks their prospects are better than other prospects.

[Pengwin7]

Here is a site that I like for their use of a "grade" along with "probability" to encapsulate "UPSIDE"
They capture upside pretty well:
http://www.hockeysfuture.com/teams/florida_panthers/

For the Panthers, would a fantasy GM rather take a 7.0/B guy like Howden... or an 8.0/D guy like Grimaldi?
In most cases, upside is very important because you win leagues on "longshots panning out".

I help a buddy in one league and we'll probably finish 1st this year all based on Kyle Okposo having an incredible year!!!

Another good comparison is the 2013 NHL draft with Nugent-Hopkins & Landeskog.
I think many viewed RNH as a 90pt "upside" guy... but maybe only a 50% chance of hitting that. (High risk & higher reward)
Whereas many viewed Landeskog as a 75pt "upside" guy... but more like a 80% chance of getting very close to that quite often. (Low risk & lower reward)

[newfcollins]

Just to add to my earlier comments, for me, upside is how often a player can consistently hit numbers, not once in a while. But it's still a future projection. (ie- The upside for player X is 75 points, and he hits that every year, and once hits 90. For me, his upside was still 75, because I'd rather go with what I view as a consistent bet rather than the extreme).

[Darren_Kennedy]

Thought I'd throw this out there to hopefully generate a good discussion. I don't play in any keeper leagues so this is more of a curiosity question rather than trying to lessen its importance. We've all seen people use the term 'upside' when deciding on several players, whether it's a young guy entering the league to a comparison of superstars.

I'll pose these three extra questions to get the ball rolling:

How important is upside to you?
What's the likelihood a player hits their perceived upside?
Is this a term being used too often to evaluate players?

I really like what Dobber does in his annual magazine. Projections and upside are more valuable when you add probabilities. Sometimes a guy (like Filatov) can have immense upside but a very small chance of hitting it

[Bomm Bastic]

I really like what Dobber does in his annual magazine. Projections and upside are more valuable when you add probabilities. Sometimes a guy (like Filatov) can have immense upside but a very small chance of hitting it

Agreed. Upside is the starting point in determining value. But it's one piece of the puzzle. No more no less.