BoaB: Pat Burrell Division Discussion and Taunting
by Sky Kalkman on Feb 15, 2009 2:52 PM EST
Email
PrintThis thread is for discussion about the Pat Burrell Division Ball on a Budget draft. It's open to anybody, not just the people in the league. Trash talking and and mockery is encouraged. Anybody want to place bets on the order of finish?
257 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Jose better go with the first pick or he is all mine
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 15, 2009 3:47 PM EST up reply actions
I'll leave him to you
I am definetly thinking Jorge Julio
by Markakis and Wieters 4 Life on Feb 15, 2009 4:23 PM EST up reply actions
Good -- hoping Ambiorix Burgos makes to my 2nd round pick
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 15, 2009 4:38 PM EST up reply actions
I'm just hoping
that Carlos Silva gets drafted. Who doesn’t want someone with a $12mil cap hit on their team? He is worth it. Totally.
-Zach Sanders
MLB Notebook.com
I'm at Astros camp tomorrow
Sky – send me a PM/email or something and I’ll send you my phone so you can text me when I’m up. I am going to be traveling Wednesday afternoon and then pretty much offgrid most of the day Thursday and Friday. At worst, I’ll give a list to RJ and let him post in my steed.
I'm not going to be keeping up with these consistently, either.
I would email Jeff (TucsconRoyal) and see if he’s up for reminders. Or maybe the guys before and/or after you?
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
Between Han-Ram and Eva
I think I know who I am picking though
by Markakis and Wieters 4 Life on Feb 15, 2009 7:20 PM EST reply actions
Scratch That, Evan Longoria is MINE
for only 500 K…
by Markakis and Wieters 4 Life on Feb 15, 2009 7:28 PM EST up reply actions
My entire draft strategy is now gone
What the hell am I going to do now?
by Jason Collette on Feb 15, 2009 8:49 PM EST up reply actions
Whine about the unfairness, demand more revenue sharing, pocket it, then demand a new stadium.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
Pedroia before Lincecum and Hanley Ramirez?
Do you agree with that?
Personally I wouldn’t of gone Pedroia at 2, but it’s hard to make a wrong pick there
I like Han-Ram at 3
by Markakis and Wieters 4 Life on Feb 15, 2009 9:04 PM EST reply actions
It was close between Pedroia and Han-Ram
I just need to make up the difference with the extra 4 million. Guess we will see.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 15, 2009 11:00 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, but is Han-Ram worth more than 1 WAR than Pedroia???
BEcause if he is, then it is more valuable to get Hanley (IMO at least)… That’s why I got Eva because I figured he would come close enough to one WAR away from Hanley, and save me 5 million…
I don’t hate the pick, I just like Hanley or Tim Lincecum there
by Markakis and Wieters 4 Life on Feb 15, 2009 11:24 PM EST up reply actions
Last year they were within 1 WAR and not sure how draft is going to go
We should know more by the next time we draft
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 15, 2009 11:33 PM EST up reply actions
I was thinking the first few rounds would be full of minimum wage players, even if they're more in the 4 WAR range.
But maybe that’s why I’m not participating.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
Im with you
don’t want to give away draft strategy, but that was what I was thinking as well.
-Zach Sanders
MLB Notebook.com
I am coming in with about 4 strategies
No idea what everyone is going to do, so figured it might change on the fly. I figured if I went with one, everyone else would think of the same one and I am hosed. I hope everyone writes up what they think when it is done. Also, kind of hoping for faster picks.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 16, 2009 2:12 PM EST up reply actions
Don't let his 16 million a year salary fool you
He is still easily worth it.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 16, 2009 2:34 PM EST up reply actions
He's worth taking, just probably not early on.
And I wonder if anyone will leave that kind of cap space for later in the draft…
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
Yes, if someone focuses on taking great bargains early ($400K guys who should get 3-4.5 WAR), they might have enough money left to take a high price, high reward guy like Pujols. With a $60M budget, you can’t afford a bunch of $5M guys. But I certainly understand why early draft picks would want to get a reasonably priced, but not dirt cheap, player who can get 5+ WAR.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 16, 2009 3:51 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, with every pick I'm adjusting the value of wins to my team.
Hanley saved me some money and thus I can spend more money on each WAR, but I still don’t really think I have the money for Pujols.
If you want a team name let me know
When I create a Spreadsheet for the picks I will insert it in then, otherwise it will be your SBNation name.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 15, 2009 11:18 PM EST reply actions
You will all lose and I will win.
Your mothers are all unpleasant to look at and be around.
I'm spent, just can't rosterbate anymore.
by oldjacket on Feb 16, 2009 12:32 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
I've got him at 9.5mil on my list
Figure I’d split the difference since I don’t think there is really any way to know
Yeah, that's right
When he went over a certain threshold, his option vested at $11M for 2009.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 17, 2009 2:05 AM EST up reply actions
Run away
Unless this draft works out differently from what I expect, I think there are only two players making more than $10M that I’d be willing to draft, and Chipper isn’t one of them.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 17, 2009 7:11 AM EST up reply actions
Si
I guess Mauer could be a possibility due to possible position scarcity, but I don’t think I’d do it.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 17, 2009 9:06 AM EST up reply actions
My view
I think position scarcity won’t be a problem in this fantasy league, because we arent using stats like HR/AVG/SB and defense, OBP, position adjustment is accounted….so it probably won’t be hard to find 2WAR catchers and shortstops later on.
There were 15 CA and 18 SS worth more than 2WAR last year and a lot of them are cheap
Yes I think you're right
The half-assed spreadsheet I put together, and my quarter-assed analysis of it appeared to show that there was much, much less depth/scarcity difference between positions than in regular fantasy leagues. There are many 2 and 3 WAR players at every position.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 17, 2009 9:20 AM EST up reply actions
There won't be scarcity in WAR...
… but there might be scarcity in player who both provide decent WAR and at at a low cost.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
I think it could most definitely be an issue, theoretically.
For example, 1Bs tend to be grossly overpaid, making it likely that it’s tougher to find one that’s a good deal. I haven’t actually looked at the data, though.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
I have two more brilliant ideas like the one above.
I will sell them to the highest bidder. Contact me offline.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
Mauer makes over 10 mil?
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 17, 2009 10:25 AM EST up reply actions
$10.5M, per Cots
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 17, 2009 11:02 AM EST up reply actions
Good thing I took McCann
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 17, 2009 12:55 PM EST up reply actions
Might not be
King of the bling come to lay down the evidence//Not George Bush, L-Millz be da president
I've got a salary/contract question
Let’s say someone picks a player who doesn’t have an official 2009 contract yet (either a pending arb. case or a pre-arb.player). We have rules to cover how we determine the player’s salary. But then, after the player is drafted, he’ll sign an official 2009 contract. Will the official number replace the estimate used in the draft? Or will we stick with the number used at the time of the draft pick?
Also, for free agents, as they are signed during the draft, do they then become eligible for the draft? Or are we locking down the draftable pool as of Day 1 of the draft?
The immoderate moderator
my understanding...
… was that we were freezing both contracts and the player pool when the draft started. So Manny is just not available, even if he signs. And any deals signed after we start aren’t considered – we would still be using whatever was available when we started.
Cool
I think that makes the most sense.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 17, 2009 9:53 AM EST up reply actions
Half way inbetween the 2 figures
was discussed in rules somewhere
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 17, 2009 11:57 AM EST up reply actions
yes I believe that is correct
use the midpoint of the 2 figures.
most player profiles on MLB.com will have a link to an article that talks about arbitration figures.
Question Regarding 4-Hour Window
So Daniel Berlyn has until 6:15pm to make the Last Pick of Round 1, Pick 12 overall – the end of his 4-hour window. And that would give the next person in line an opportunity to pick.
And the next pick goes to? Daniel Berlyn. 1st Pick of Round 2, Pick 13 overall.
So I’m asking – Is Daniel Berlyn (and Markakis and Wieters 4 Life, I suppose) getting 8 hours overall to make picks?
Each of us gets 4 hours per pick per round. And while it’s safe to presume they’d make both picks back to back, are we giving them the same windows to pick as they rest of us have? Just curious to see what happens at 6:15pm in this particular case.
I'd think
they dont need more time…I mean the time is primarily to get the person a chance to get online, not give them 4hours to think about each pick
I agree we don't wait another 4 hours.
Might get draft moving faster actually as people try to pick before Dan
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 17, 2009 5:49 PM EST up reply actions
Damn
Braun and Webb were 2nd and 3rd on my wishlist, after having gone several picks without anyone in the top five being taken.
Also, is Braun @ 3rd a typo?
Nope.
Since I had to make the pick, we should make Braun’s 2007 3B defense count towards his WAR ;)
by R.J. Anderson on Feb 17, 2009 9:16 PM EST up reply actions
It's okay
Soto will be replaced with Paul Bako by April
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 18, 2009 12:33 AM EST up reply actions
Nice pick with Votto
I was going with either him or Kemp and Kemp won the coinflip
by Jason Collette on Feb 18, 2009 11:53 AM EST reply actions
Slow Draft
My thoughts:
1) Is there any issues precluding folks from staying on top of the draft (i.e. typically not near computer, traveling, lack of interest, etc…)?
2) Could we arrange to exchange e-mail addresses or some other contact info so that one person can send word to whoever is next that they’re up? That would speed up awareness and also give people the ability to submit a draft pick if they can’t post it themselves.
I'm almost always at a computer.
I just happened to be away when my pick came up. Sorry. Unfortunate timing, I’ll bet I usually don’t take more than 30 minutes of my window.
Sometimes people are going to have things going on which prevent them from making a timely pick
Over the course of the next 2-3 weeks, this will happen to all of us. But hopefully we can do something to pick up the pace, or at least keep the pace from slowing. First, I think people shouldn’t hesitate to make picks overnight. Even though the “clock” pauses from 9 pm to 9 am, if people have the time to do so, please feel free to make picks. Second, perhaps we should exchange e-mail addresses with the person before and after us in the draft order. Then, when you make a pick, you send an e-mail to the person who is up next. Perhaps such notification will speed up the process a bit.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 18, 2009 6:54 PM EST up reply actions
I'm agonizing over my next pick.
I’m looking at three players. One his high risk, high reward, very low pay. One is low risk, low reward and somewhat affordable. The third is VERY high reward, and I can’t afford him now, but I think I could with one more pick of just moderate value. He’s an injury concern, though.
Frustrating.
I feel like Steve Phillips.
I’m crushing all of you in payroll. I have a plan and I’m sticking too it, but being so far in front and looking at almost half my payroll used on 3 players makes me wonder how much i miscalculated.
Well Pujols alone
is about a 4th of your payroll.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 18, 2009 9:34 PM EST up reply actions
Granderson, Longoria, and Joba
Around 4.5 million or so combined I’ve got this locked :)
by Markakis and Wieters 4 Life on Feb 18, 2009 10:04 PM EST reply actions
I am holding judgement till at least 10 rounds
too hard to figure you all out yet, except philKid3, A-rod is still out there
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 18, 2009 11:02 PM EST up reply actions
No thanks.
I can’t see overspending again for a while. LOL
Though Pujols is the only guy I think I’ve overspent on, it’s buy a good margin.
Pujols is the only guy worth overspending on
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 19, 2009 12:35 AM EST up reply actions
Utley
If $11M counts as “overspending.”
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 1:02 AM EST up reply actions
Isn't he injured?
WAR is a counting stat, so that would damage his value a lot.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 19, 2009 1:06 AM EST up reply actions
By my figuring. . .
. . . before a pick has been made, that is definitely likely over spending; by a good margin.
Not so much that it can’t be made up with money saving at other positions, though.
FWIW
I think Utley will get more WAR/$ than Pujols in 2009. So I’d rather “overspend” on Utley than Pujols. But I likely won’t be drafting anyone that expensive.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 1:39 AM EST up reply actions
I would be unsurpised.
But not sure enough to take him over Pujols, especially with Pujols’s higher total.
I see A-rod in your near future.
Space.
It's a problem we face.
So we never go anywhere.
We just stay in one place.
It's not even possible.
I wouldn’t have enough room to sign the rest of my roster at league minimum.
correct - pretty much draft and pray
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 18, 2009 11:24 PM EST up reply actions
We should be able to make trades
before the season starts. That would make it completely fair.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 18, 2009 11:47 PM EST up reply actions
anyway to have a tab on that for a running list of who has been taken?
by Jason Collette on Feb 19, 2009 5:39 PM EST up reply actions
And/or the salaries or 2008 WAR for those players?
I know that is asking a lot.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 5:40 PM EST up reply actions
Well
I’m already second guessing my 1st round pick, I was deciding between Wright and BJ and I most likely made the wrong choice, paying extra 7m for 2-3wins
But people are taking Pujols, Utley, Chipper so it’ll be interesting
The way I look at it. . .
. . . every win is worth a certain amount. As long as you’re not overpaying for those wins, if you take the player who offers you more of them, it’s a fine choice. And if he gives you more wins per dollar, all the better.
And every time you make a pick that saves you money, you can spend that money on a better player in a later pick.
For instance, I figured with Hanley and Greinke, I had saved almost enough money to be able to afford Pujols without going over budget, and I’m one pick away from being guaranteed Pujols’s contract won’t stop me from getting a player I would have taken anyway.
I am not following the logic (won't be the first time)
With only 2.4 million (60/25) to spend per player, how is spending 3.75 and 5.5 saving money to spend on a 16M dollar player?
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 19, 2009 3:16 PM EST up reply actions
+1
I don’t get it.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 3:27 PM EST up reply actions
Hanley was a smart move
but I am not so sure about Greinke. He is maybe 4 wins at best next year and there are quite a few starters who could do that for league minimum.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 19, 2009 3:44 PM EST up reply actions
Greinke was something of a reach at that point in the draft, but...
I think saying that he is “maybe 4 wins at best” isn’t quite accurate considering that his WAR last year was 4.7. Of course projection systems don’t see him repeating that because if you go by a three or four-year regression, you’re including some odd, aberrational years. Now I’m not saying one can count on him repeating a 4.7 WAR, but for quite a while, people thought he was a star in the making. And then at a young age, he really starts to realize that promise. There’s reason to believe that it’s for real. In short, even if the safe projection is for 4ish WAR, he’s the kind of player who realistically has significant upside potential to do a lot better than that in 2009. Some guys are safe 4 WAR players who are very likely to get that, but unlikely to get much more. And some guys are safe 4 WAR players who might get you a lot more. Greinke is in the latter group.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 4:09 PM EST up reply actions
'I think saying that he is "maybe 4 wins at best" isn’t quite accurate considering that his WAR last year was 4.7.'
Not totally what I was saying. I’ll put it in two parts.
1) What I was saying is that I value Greinke as being paid worth 4 wins. At that point, I was evaluating my budget as being able to spend more than one million dollars per win above replacement. About 1.1 million per win is what it would take for Greinke to be worth it if he wins four games.
2) I do expect Greinke to be worth more than 4 wins, and would not have taken him otherwise. Even if he was worth it, I would have taken another player I expected to be better than Greinke who is also worth the money.
The amount I’m willing to spend on a WAR changes with each pick. It went WAY down after Pujols, but should stabalize to at least where I had it at the beginning of the draft with my next pick.
I had Greinke among the best projected players in the draft who were worth their contracts to me at that point, and he was also one whose projection I was fairly confident in and who I felt saved me a bit of money. So I took him.
This is more than I would usually say in a draft like this, but I view this as more a scientific exercise than a competition.
My girlfriend (who also reads this blog) says I could explain this more simply by just saying:
I’m less concerned with money per roster spot than money per win.
I did factor money per roster spot in to my win valuations, though.
The concern, of course, is that this will leave you with little money in the middle and late rounds, thus shorting you on WAR while others can spend more to get more. In reality, I have no idea how this will work out. Your strategy may work out. It just seems risky to me, more risk that I was willing to take.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 4:26 PM EST up reply actions
I made sure to leave enough money to fill the remaining spots.
And I’m constantly keeping track of how much I need to sign those remaining spots at a number a little above league minimum.
"enough money"
My point is that the downside to your strategy is that others will have more money and therefore will likely be able to acquire players with higher WAR in the middle and late rounds. Will that offset your early round WAR advantage? I don’t know. It’s a risk. Of course every strategy has a risk.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 4:39 PM EST up reply actions
Oh, I could see that.
But my plans revolve around those players I fill my roster with being no better than replacement level.
I’m fairly confident I’ll reach my WAR goal, my only concern would be my goal being too low.
I think it is difficult to come up with a WAR goal
And of course, the goal is not to hit a certain WAR. It’s to get more WAR than your opponents. So the question is how many WAR can you get with your strategy and how many WAR can your opponents get with different strategies?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 4:46 PM EST up reply actions
It's not.
I’m slightly over budget. The point is that the odds are very good I can get back under budget on my next pick AND get a player I want. I calculated that before I draft Pujols and would not have taken him otherwise.
I’m not looking at it exclusively from a money-per-position standpoint. I’m putting a dollar value on wins above replacement, while keeping enough money on the side to fill out the remaining positions with (slight above) minimum wage.
So, let’s say I figure I’ve got 40 million to spend and I’m going to shoot for 80 wins above replacement (not the figures I’m using, just for example). That means I value one WAR at .5 million. Meaning I’m going after the best player I can get who isn’t making more than .5 per win.
If I save money on that player, then I can go a little bit over on my next pick. The idea is that, in the end, I will have reached or exceeded my goal in projected WAR and the remaining positions will be filled with replacement-level players.
Hanley was paid WELL below his projected WAR total and Greinke a little bit below. Not enough to save me money for Pujols, but I figured out my odds for being able to save enough on the NEXT pick to make Pujols worth it, an they were good enough I took him. At the time it was a gamble, but as the third round has gone it looks like it should work out.
This is all dependent on the projections working out, though.
I'm still waiting for someone to have a breakthrough on valuing guys for this draft.
Although I guess you wouldn’t share it, would you?
Given the total salary (actually salary above minimum), how many WAR can be bought? Then there’s some sort of replacement-level analysis to do that combines WAR/$$ to form a value for this league.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
Right now all anyone has is theories
Epiphanies and real breakthroughs will only come once the draft has played out. There are many arguable strategies at this point and each have their upsides and downsides. I still don’t know how this is going to play out. There are lots of variables here.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 4:38 PM EST up reply actions
Actually, given knowledge of projected WAR and actual salaries, there should be an algorithm for this.
One needs to somehow find the group of players that would fill all the teams at a cost of 12 x $60MM. There’s a $/WAR for that pool of players. Somehow, using that average $/WAR, you can calculate how much extra WAR a player is providing for his price. You’ll end up doing something similar to inflation.
The ideal player is high WAR / low $$. But there are two types of ok players: high WAR / moderate $$ and moderate WAR / low $$. So the end of the draft will consist of really cheap players who provide little WAR (and thus are of little value) and high priced players with decent WAR (who provide little value because of how much you have to spend on them). The trick is to find the trade-off between saving money and getting WAR.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
.
Thats exactly what I thought and the main problem seems to be if its easier to find a OK WAR/minimum wage guy late or good WAR/moderate wage late in the draft. I’m leaning towards there will be more of the second type…that’s why I think BJ would be a better pick.
There totally is an algorithm but there is no way I’m going to work on it lol
I'm sure there is an algorithm for this
For those willing to engage in that level of mathematics.
So the end of the draft will consist of really cheap players who provide little WAR (and thus are of little value) and high priced players with decent WAR (who provide little value because of how much you have to spend on them). The trick is to find the trade-off between saving money and getting WAR.
The other factor which will come into play in the middle and later rounds is remaining budget. Those who have gone with lower $ players (likely at the cost of some WAR), will have more money to spend, thus able to buy more WAR than their opponents.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 5:08 PM EST up reply actions
But couldn't that be off-set
By early spending on high WAR players? If some of the more expensive, but reasonable, high WAR players are being taken early, by the mid to late rounds then who would you be spending on? Would you rather spend the money on Lance Berkman and his projected WAR later than Pujols and his projected WAR early? just for example.
It very well could work out that way
There are many ways this could work out. One possibility is that someone considerably less in the early rounds gets to pick up an expensive, high-WAR player in the middle rounds that others have avoided. Or perhaps such budget drafting early allows one to spend a bit more each round in the middle and later rounds, perhaps picking up half a WAR more than his opponents each round. I don’t know how it will work out. Spending less early costs you in total WAR early, but allows you to spend more late. Spending more early racks up some early WAR, but gives you less to spend late. Who knows what will work best.
FWIW, I’m taking a middle course, which is probably more safe than smart. I’m trying to average about $3M per pick in the early rounds, about $2.5M per pick in the middle rounds and about $2M per pick in the later rounds. But I’m staying flexible and largely playing it by ear.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 5:30 PM EST up reply actions
I thought of that.
And it was too much work. My goal is probably low as a result, but it makes the math easy.
All that said about my strategy. . .
I do have second thoughts because there’s something to be said about not being top heavy.
You have 50 WAR and 20 of them are in two players, you lose them and you’re out 20 wins.
You have 50 WAR and no player is worth more or less than 2 wins, you lose two players and you’re only out 4.
Good thing that Pujols is almost a garauntee to have a 8-9 WAR season next year.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 20, 2009 1:57 AM EST up reply actions
Not according to CHONE
For whatever it’s worth.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 20, 2009 2:50 AM EST up reply actions
The projection systems don't usually work for the outliers
Pujols has been worth an average of around 8 WAR since 2003 and he hasn’t had one season in which his WAR was below 7.6. CHONE projects him to have a 7 WAR season with +7 defense. Considering that he hasn’t had a season that bad in 6 years, I don’t think it is likely that he will regress that low, especially considering last years 9 WAR season.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 20, 2009 3:06 AM EST up reply actions
All valid points
But when a player has had fewer than 8 WAR in four of the last five years, is he really almost guaranteed to have a 8+ WAR season? A 7.7 WAR season has been more common for him in recent years and it’s not like he’s at an age where he’s likely to be improving.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 20, 2009 3:14 AM EST up reply actions
I would agree with you
But I think that the most recent performance has to be weighted higher than in previous years. Pujols had a flukily “bad” power year in 07, and in 06 he was injured for a while and his defense wasn’t at the level that it is now. 08 seemed like a better depiction of his actual abilities. Plus you have to consider his elbow situation. If he is actually fully healthy going into 09 than he could actually improve from last year.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 20, 2009 3:33 AM EST up reply actions
Isn't it quite possible that he's injured a bit and/or rates only good instead of great in the field next year?
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
For most other players
I would agree with you. However, Pujols has been so consistently awesome every year that we can expect him to build on each of his previous seasons in one way or another. I don’t doubt that he might be injured, that can happen to anyone. However, if he is healthy that I believe he will have a huge year.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 20, 2009 10:13 AM EST up reply actions
I would imagine Pujols has a higher chance of being injured
Considering he apparently needs but is putting off tommy john surgery.
Yeah
but he has had that problem for a long term. It certainly hasn’t affected him at all.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 20, 2009 12:37 PM EST up reply actions
Have you heard the term "wishcasting"?
However, Pujols has been so consistently awesome every year that we can expect him to build on each of his previous seasons in one way or another.
With all the projection research out there, I think the onus is on you to prove this statement true.
If you believe the top players deserve a different formula than the rest of the guys, then you should look at PECOTA, which only compares Pujols to the best of the best. What’s his projection? And look at his comparables: what are their career paths like?
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
And his statistical record doesn't show him improving every year throughout his career
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 20, 2009 5:23 PM EST up reply actions
You're probably right
as you can tell by name, Pujols is my favorite player so I may be a little biased. Although I just check his PECOTA page and his 50% projection is 9.5 WARP, It also projects him to have a 86.4 VORP. I’m not sure about the difference between the two (I am assuming that WARP is WAR, but I may be wrong), either way it appears that he is projected to be around a 9 WAR player next year.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 20, 2009 7:28 PM EST up reply actions
adjusted for position
I have no idea if the WARP listed is old WARP or new WARP. If it’s old WARP, that’s really about 7 to 7.5 WAR. If it’s new WARP, well, that’s too high.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
I think it is the old WARP
because some of his previous season were in the 11’s.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 20, 2009 8:28 PM EST up reply actions
One question
What if someone spends all their money early? I suppose they’d have to draft guys taking minimum only for the rest of the roster? For example if you have 5m left and 12 roster spots to fill, you can only draft minimum salary guys
Yup.
On my excell sheet I have a little ticker telling me how far I am from needing to start spending no more than minimum.
Exactly
And if someone screws up and and has spent all of their money and still has a round or two left to draft, then they can’t draft anyone at all.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 4:41 PM EST up reply actions
Yes and no.
You will have to fill the entire roster of 25 players with your money, you can’t run just 23 players.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 19, 2009 5:32 PM EST up reply actions
What happens if someone screws up?
And spends all $60M with is first 23 picks? Does the person then get $800K more to draft two league minimum players? Are we allowed to go over budget like that?
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 5:40 PM EST up reply actions
They will need to repick with others still picking
I put in a requirement early that we will need to check each other that they don’t go over:
.45M times number of picks let will be what they can’t go under — pretty much how Steve Phillips drafted for 6 picks at the ESPN draft
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 19, 2009 5:52 PM EST up reply actions
Ok, I wasn't aware of the rolling minimum of $0.45M times the number of remaining picks rule
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 6:02 PM EST up reply actions
I’m really glad that someone took Russel Martin, even though that is who was next on my list.
I'm spent, just can't rosterbate anymore.
It was between him, Rios, Pence and others
chose production over saving money
Question
if someone goes on the DL, are we absolutely screwed, do we get to pick up another player(and their payroll, assuming we have room, and then DFA a player when the injured player comes back) or should we get replacement level value, because, in theory, that’s what we would get. I think one of the latter two scenarios would be fair.
Also… I don’t think it’ll happen, but considering my position it’s worth a shot; I think it would be fair if there was a small handicap for drafting later.
Finally, I’m really getting screwed by my schedule.
I think once the draft is over, all league activity is over. No changes or anything. If a player goes down with injury, that’s it. We just draft and see what the total WAR of those 25 players was at the end of the season.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 8:25 PM EST up reply actions
damn
see if you can’t ask a higher-up, though. I would appreciate that.
by Daniel Berlyn on Feb 19, 2009 8:32 PM EST up reply actions
No transactions at all.
That’s not as painful as a typical fantasy league, where zero stats is below replacement level. In this WAR league, zero stats is exactly replacement level. Plus, if you draft enough PAs, you’ll still hit the max. Going over the max carries no benefit.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
If you do go over max
your whole team is prorated down, right? So it would be a hit.
by Daniel Berlyn on Feb 19, 2009 9:01 PM EST up reply actions
No transactions, draft and pray
It will actually be part of the draft strategy if you aim for the # of at-bats or aim over in case of injuries. I kinda figured philkid is going for the exact amount with studs and drafting duds with the rest and hope no one goes down.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 19, 2009 9:05 PM EST up reply actions
this can be approached in many ways
I may have done the same thing if given the opportunity. I mean, bragging rights are the only thing on the line, so you might as well take the risk.
Now, can we draft a minor leaguer or guy like Eric Hurley who we know isn’t going to play this year?
by Daniel Berlyn on Feb 19, 2009 9:16 PM EST up reply actions
Yes. Absolute minimum salary is MLB minimum, though: $400K
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
Just hope they end up with (-) war
I thought about it the all high salery, but the $$$ ran out way to fast.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 19, 2009 9:28 PM EST up reply actions
Question
If a player has not yet played in the Majors, is he 400 K?
And if he signed a 10 million dollar bonus (for an example, I don’t have an actual player in mind) two seasons ago, is that included in any way?
From what Sky has said previously
1. Every player is at least MLB minimum of $400K. We aren’t going by minor league salaries.
2. Draft signing bonuses aren’t counted. But non-draft signing bonuses are included. If Cots doesn’t say which year or years the signing bonus was paid out, then you divide the signing bonus equally over the guaranteed years of the contract. So, a $5M 2009 salary in a 4-year contract signed 2 years ago with a signing bonus of $1M means that we’re going by a total 2009 value of $5M + $0.25M = $5.25M.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 19, 2009 9:54 PM EST up reply actions
Updated Spreadsheet
With updated draft list – I might not be able to keep up to get with it over the weekend
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 19, 2009 11:30 PM EST reply actions
MatthewA is a Mets fan, right?
So I assume he’s not up.
Sucks ’cuz I am, and I tend to sleep in late. As in my-clock-might-expire-on-me late.
I guess I might need to set an alarm. :(
If he IS up and he DOES make his pick in the next few hours, I’ll be right behind him, though. I definitely know who I’m taking unless he takes him.
You are correct, sir.
I’m East Coast based and typically try to call it a night by midnight.
by Matthew Artus on Feb 20, 2009 9:33 AM EST up reply actions
Garza, Chamberlain, and Price
For a little under 1.7 million
by Markakis and Wieters 4 Life on Feb 20, 2009 3:24 PM EST reply actions
Lincecum, Billingsley and Baker for a similar price tag.
Though your team looks better on the hitters’ side of the ledger currently.
I'm spent, just can't rosterbate anymore.
Actually your at 2 million for them :)
That is some sweet pitching you got there
by Markakis and Wieters 4 Life on Feb 20, 2009 3:57 PM EST up reply actions
I like the Garza pick
but I am not for sure of the roles of the other 2. Scared me away on trying to predict innings played.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 20, 2009 4:06 PM EST up reply actions
I'm actually treating Wieters as either replacement level or like he's not going to play much.
At least for as long as I can. Anything he does above that will be a bonus.
That’s probably the way I’d go about Price, too.
I have no luck keeping the injury bug away from my fantasy players
So I am going to aim quite a bit over.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 20, 2009 4:41 PM EST up reply actions
Price though is almost guarenteed to be on the starting roster
At least that’s my understanding… Wieters is expected to be in our farm system till around mid may/june according to the latest reports from McPhail and Trembly
by Markakis and Wieters 4 Life on Feb 20, 2009 4:47 PM EST up reply actions
Really good pick
Not like he had an arm injury, or any history of arm injuries.
Scored three times and detonated an indisputable in four visits to the batting box.
Is there a current spreadsheet?
by Markakis and Wieters 4 Life on Feb 22, 2009 9:07 PM EST reply actions
By sometime tomorrow
I was with family all weekend — I will at least have it by tomorrow night
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 22, 2009 10:30 PM EST up reply actions
-1 for having a life
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 23, 2009 12:46 AM EST up reply actions
Updated Spreadsheet
Will philskids3 being the first to have spent 1/2 his budget and Marc and Jason have both spent under $10M
Also, rember to set up an account with Fangraphs and enter in your players
I will need the CSV’s of the player totals at the 1st of every month for updates.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 23, 2009 4:08 PM EST up reply actions
Go to fangraphs
Register
There is an option in the middle call My Team
You can add and remove player from there
Once you get the players entered you will be able to track team
or select projections and get your projected RAR/150 (I might have people give me these numbers before the season – they are only offensive numbers, but might give us some predictive value)
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 23, 2009 5:41 PM EST up reply actions
NP
If it wasn’t for this option for keeping track, it would have been a PITA to track.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 23, 2009 6:09 PM EST up reply actions
I'm a Rays fan....
I’m conditioned to being cheap :)
by Jason Collette on Feb 23, 2009 6:20 PM EST up reply actions
I believe they had to play 20 games at the position last year at any level.
by Daniel Berlyn on Feb 23, 2009 8:27 PM EST up reply actions
And that is for position players only
There is no positional eligibility for pitchers.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 23, 2009 8:33 PM EST up reply actions
So we can't take Michael Young at third base, right?
Assuming he got no PAs at third (I really don’t remember us ever playing him there, but I could be wrong, regardless, the point stands).
And then, say, a player who sucked at, say, 2nd who is actually playing first base, it might behoove you to take him at 2nd just because it fills a roster spot?
And then, say, a player who sucked at, say, 2nd who is actually playing first base, it might behoove you to take him at 2nd just because it fills a roster spot?
Sure, but of course the positional adjustment of him playing 1B would seriously hurt his WAR.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 23, 2009 9:59 PM EST up reply actions
I drafted Conor Jackson as a first baseman
but he also played more than 20 games in left field last year. Could I switch him there?
vivaelbeñsheets
Sure
We haven’t discussed the details, but I’m sure the way it is going to go is that sometime after the draft is done and before opening day, all of us will take our 25 players and assign them to positions. And guys like Conor Jackson can be assigned to either position, as long as he is eligible for them and all of your positions end up getting filled.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 23, 2009 10:32 PM EST up reply actions
Your guys have to fit a valid 25-man roster by the end of the draft.
If you initially drafted Conor Jackson as a 1B, you could count him as an OF later in the draft, sure.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Feb 23, 2009 10:55 PM EST up reply actions
If we're worried about going over the PA limit. . .
. . . is there anything stopping us from drafting players who we’re sure won’t be making the Majors?
I think that was asked elsewhere, and...
I think TucsconRoyal said you can do that.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 23, 2009 10:34 PM EST up reply actions
There's no penalty for going over the limit. There just isn't any benefit.
Actually, that’s not exactly true. If 12 great players get you to 6500 PAs and your 13th guy racks up 500 PAs at 0 WAR, your WAR/PA will actually go down and since you’re over the limit, your WAR gets proportioned down. So yes, those extra PAs at a crappy WAR-rate will hurt.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Feb 23, 2009 10:57 PM EST up reply actions
though it could actually help if you take, say, Lasting Milledge and he unexpectedly turns in a monster season.
by Daniel Berlyn on Feb 23, 2009 11:19 PM EST up reply actions
Yes, drafting players who have good seasons is a good thing.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
by Sky Kalkman on Feb 23, 2009 11:23 PM EST up reply actions
I'm just saying... even if Milledge pushes you over the PA limit, it could still be a good thing.
by Daniel Berlyn on Feb 23, 2009 11:46 PM EST up reply actions
Or if you have my luck with drafts ....
2/3 of your team will be on the DL in a month so you will need all the players to contribute.
by Jeff Zimmerman on Feb 23, 2009 11:57 PM EST up reply actions
AAAAARRRGG
So many strategies
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Feb 24, 2009 12:33 AM EST up reply actions
the nate mclouth salary is 3.275, not 3.5
($3.8M-$2.75M)
http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2000/05/2009-arbitration-eligibles.html
probably wont make a different, but i thought id let you guys know.
posted this over in the ellis thread
thought you guys might be interested too. i have been putting both drafts in my spreadsheet and so i added a column to subtract the differences in pick numbers. so, JJ Hardy was picked 32nd in Ellis and 29th here, so he gets a +3.
(by the way, you guys rock because you actually use the full pick number :) )
so here you go (note where i say here, i mean ellis, so this is all backwards for you):
====
again, subject to my own transcription errors:
Andre Ethier: +68 (119 here, 51 there)
Jay Bruce +59 (116, 57)
Kelly Johnson +52 (102, 52)
Jody Gerut +46 (122, 76)
+++++
Alexei Ramirez -59 (58 here, 117 there)
Jimmy Rollins -56 (38, 94)
Chase Utley -50 (13, 63)
Ryan Theriot -41 (78, 119)
++++
the biggest + on the pitching side is only 25:
David Price +25 (74, 49)
Matt Garza +24 (72, 48)
++++
Justin Duchsherer -48 (62, 110)
Kevin Slowey -35 (48, 83)
Dan Haren -33 (55, 88)
++++
smallest differences (omitting guys picked in the top 12 or so):
Joba +2
Kershaw +3
Ubaldo -2
Papelbon -2
Uggla -1
Kouz -1
S Drew -2
Werth +2
Dukes +2
Not sure what to make of this but I thought someone might find it interesting.
Could I request that makeup picks be identified as such when they're made?
It can make it difficult to tell who is actually on the clock if you’re trying to catch up.
Correct
Anyone who was a FA on the first day of the draft is off the table.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Feb 28, 2009 6:56 PM EST up reply actions
Draft Spreadsheet "Update"
I just got swamped at work and probably won’t get the sheet updated until Tuesday night at the earliest. I have opened the sheet up for any one to update. If any one has the time, could they please update it. Thanks -Jeff
It should be easy for everyone to plug in their own draftees at least
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Mar 2, 2009 2:19 PM EST up reply actions
It just occured to me I'll be gone from Mon-Wed.
I’ll have some internet access, but no cheat sheet.
Would it be okay to have Gina (BtB poster, she’s in some of these threads) pick for me, or do I need a mod? I trust her to have pretty good insight as things change and the draft goes on, plus she’s my girlfriend so I can talk to her.
I haven’t asked her yet, though.
I would think that it is ok to have anyone pick for you
As long as the picks are within the rules and she tells us that she’s picking for you at the time.
The immoderate moderator
by Scott McKinney on Mar 14, 2009 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Beyond the Box Score
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Follow us on Twitter!
BTB: @BtBScore
Justin: @justinbopp
Satchel: @SatchelPrice
J-Doug: @RationalPastime
Daniel: @CamdenCrazies
Peter: @CapitolAvenue
Josh: @garik16
Julian: @splashinpumpkin
Matt: @devil_fingers
Bill: @BillPetti
JD: @JDSussman
Lucas: @DBITLefty
Jeff: @jeffwzimmerman
Lewis: @LewsOnFirst
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
