As a first year member of Baseball Monster, I have had very little success using the program. In fact, I did much better without it last year. Although it's a very small sample size, those have been my results. I have done stacking, non-stacking, and considered as much as possible up until game-time, but have had very poor results nonetheless when using this product. I don't believe the projections are that accurate or advanced really. Last night, was the first night, where I thought to myself, that the projections are just downright not adequate at all. Clayton Kershaw, who was reported to be on a pitch-count (there were more than sufficient rumors among those covering the team, well ahead of game-time) and was fully anticipated not go deep into the game at all, was projected to be the highest scoring pitcher, and to get 49 points on FD, by Baseball Monster. When the games started, I noticed he was only at 6% on FD GPPs. I understand there is great variance in baseball on a day-to-day basis, but how can a guy who isn't going to be eligible for a win most likely (won't pitch 5 innings), and who is on a pitch-count, supposed to rack up 49 points, or even close to that number? I will try Basketball Monster in the fall, as I believe that is the far better product. I hope Baseball Monster becomes a better product down the road, but as of now, with projections like that, and the results I've had using this product, it's hard to make a case for paying for it again next year. Thanks.
0% Agree (0 votes)