Mastersball

The Saves Conundrum

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 20:33:00 +0000

Yeah, I know, I’m not the only one, this is far from an original thought, but the saves category bugs me, and for whatever reason, even more so this year. I think I know the reason, and it has to do with what I enjoy about the hobby, what I personally considering challenging and how handling saves is a polar opposite in terms of philosophy. I’ll try to refrain from using the word ”lucky” too much, as my thoughts transcend the pure luck element of saves and the associated strategy, but it will no doubt rear its ugly head.

To best explain my discomfort with saves as a rotisserie category, it is best if I start at the beginning and discuss my overall approach to the game, what is fun and challenging for me and why I keep coming back for more every year.

It all starts with player projection, trying to predict future performance based on past historical trends, spiced up with some scouting. Next is putting a value on those statistics, on both a micro and macro scale. Then the real challenge is taking those units of value and constructing a team using elements of game theory to devise your strategy. And finally, there is the day to day managing of your squad in an effort to maximize your points.

I wholeheartedly admit I completely favor the first three elements with the last, in-season management being a distant fourth on my enjoyment scale, for a variety of reasons. This is likely the reason I usually fare better in deeper leagues as opposed to the shallower mixed leagues.

The primary issue I have with saves is there is practically no element to their strategy that meshes with what I find fun and challenging and their inclusion introduces too much, okay I’ll say it, luck.

Granted, an important part of your global strategy is how you wish to approach saves. Perhaps too simplistically, you have 4 choices.

A. Invest in the top-tier closers with elite skills
B. Invest a little less but still get a closer with a full-time job, but with a less-than-elite skill set
C. Throw darts into the group of closers that have the job but do not have the skill set to success long term or lack experience so it is not clear if they can handle the mental side of the position
D. Go the totally speculative route, both at the draft/auction and into the season

So yeah, I like strategy and there is some level of strategy necessary to decide which route you wish to pursue. But the reason this strategy even exists is at the root of my problem with saves – projecting them is largely a crapshoot, with the key being it is even more so than compared to other categories such as wins, runs and RBI, all three of which also have factors out of control of the player that affect the performance projection to a pretty large degree.
Here is what we know “scientifically”. Most teams win between 70 and 100 games and most teams have 45%-55% of their victories saved. So the worst team can be expected to get between 32 and 39 saves while the best team can be penciled in for 45 to 55. The rest is pretty much a crapshoot. Do you just split the difference and project each team to have 50% of their wins saved? How do you partition those, as even the best teams have other relievers pick up a save or two? Some have tried to come up with a more scientific manner to distribute saves based on how many close games they feel the team will play, etc., but there is no year-to-year correlation and no way to predict it if there was, so the best we have is figuring each team will have half its games saved, plus or minus ten percent.

My personal way of dealing with this is to assume all full time closers will get the same number of saves and to use their peripheral stats to rank and value. It lets me sleep at night, but I am bothered by the relatively unscientific nature saves are allocated.

But this is not really the problem. If you tell me I have to go through this exercise with 30 players, one per team, I would be fine with that. I would tier the closers, give 45 saves to everyone in the first tier, 37 to those in the second tier and 30 to those in the third tier and call it a day.

But of course, that is not the case. Teams having multiple relievers assume the closing role over the course of the season is the rule, not the exception. And is there is no real scientific way of first identifying the candidates and second, divvying up the saves. Yes, it is perfectly reasonable to have suggested Kevin Gregg will lose the job to Carlos Marmol, or Brandon Lyon to Fernando Rodney or Huston Street to Manny Corpas. But truthfully, anyone who claims they KNEW it would happen by such and such a date is full of it. They may have hoped it would, or thought it might, but there is no scientific means of setting the date – and my enjoyment and challenge of the hobby is at least trying to maximize the scientific nature of projection theory, valuation theory and game theory. Projecting saves flies in the face of all that. Your opinion may differ, and that’s obviously fine.

But that is not where my angst ends. Because of the singular nature of the category, acquiring saves from an unexpected source can make a huge difference in the standings. Is there really a skill in drafting Ryan Franklin with your last reserve pick? Was that any more skillful than drafting Leo Nunez? Was there any skill in throwing a buck at Todd Coffey or picking up Julian Tavarez or Joe Beimel? Is this really challenging? Is this really fun? Is this really what you want to decide, or at minimum affect your league’s standings?

Before I go on, trust me, I understand completely there are other huge elements of happenstance that go beyond saves. My contention is the same exists for saves, but to a greater degree -- a much greater degree. And this degree has reached a point that is has sucked some of the fun out of the game for me. The frustration has begun to challenge the enjoyment. I am beginning to wonder if all the pre-season effort to project players, value/rank players then assemble a team is even worth it. Don’t fret, I said BEGINNING TO WONDER. I am pretty sure I will not be announcing my retirement anytime soon because I am up to here with the saves category.

That said, I come from the school that says don’t bitch about something unless you have a solution. So here’s my solution – TEAM SAVES. Yes, team saves. You draft a team, and if anyone on that team gets a save, you get a save. You don’t get anything else, just a save. And if you own the player that recorded the save, tough shinola, only team saves get scored.

But that’s not all. Obviously, a player like Mariano Rivera or Jonathan Papelbon should still have some serious fantasy value, beyond that of just their excellent peripherals. If you take saves away, their relative fantasy value is no longer commensurate with their real baseball value. So we need a way to pump up their value a bit. That is why I suggest weighting team saves at .5 and using a 6th category, also with a weight of .5 that benefits the better closers, either K/9 or K/BB, with K/9 being my personal favorite. Doing this still gives decent value to the better relievers. In fact, it is probably fairer that the present system as a superior set-up man would be more valuable than an inferior closer, with saves removed from the equation.

I need to ruminate on this one a little further and perhaps run some numbers, but an additional improvement might be to replace wins with innings pitched. My thinking is using team saves and K/9 to encompass a category may lead to the ‘mostly reliever’ strategy. Going with innings would increase the value of a middling starter versus a middling reliever. I have no issue with teams using talented relievers. I would have an issue if this system took away the science of evaluating the middle to lower tier of pitching.

So there you have it. If I were King, I would eliminate the saves category as it exists now, use team saves and K/9, each at ½ weights. I would also likely replace wins with innings pitched. The overall effect would be to remove an element of the hobby I find frustrating, dealing with the fickle and downright unpredictable nature of saves, while minimally impacting the value of closers and altering global strategy.

Thank you from Mastersball

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 01:11:00 +0000

We recently sent this note out to our registrants:

On behalf of Gary Jennison, JP Kastner, Lawr Michaels and me, Todd Zola, we would like to thank you for making us part of your fantasy baseball experience for the 2009 season. Special thanks go out to those of you that have become regular forum readers and contributors. And our warmest heartfelt appreciation goes to those who trusted us with their hard-earned income in these rough economic times, becoming a Platinum subscription member.

Some of you may be wondering what our plans are short and long term. To be honest, our long term plans are still a work in progress as we continue to establish our identity on the fantasy landscape. For 2009, our goal is somewhat modest, focusing on getting as much analytical and strategic content out to our readers as possible, including weekly in-season updated projections, at a price point we felt was unmatched in the industry. In the future we look forward to expanding to continue to meet customer needs, but maintaining our core missions - providing top analytical and strategic content while being the best fantasy baseball value on the market. As the spring turns into summer and we get a better handle on our capabilities and hone in on the specific type of content we wish to provide going forward, we will look to first recruit from our loyal legion of registrants so stay tuned for details if have an interest in joining the Mastersball staff.

In the short term, we have three primary objectives. The first is reorganization of the public message forum, in an effort to stimulate discussion of some of the current events aspects of our hobby, such as player performance, injuries, revolving closer situations and minor league call-ups. To that end, we will rename the General Fantasy Baseball Topics Forum and call it Player News and Analysis. The intent is for the discussion to focus on players in a general sense, without specific reference to one’s own team. We will then have a separate forum for specific team advice. The Trade and Potential Trade, Keeper List Feedback and Rate my Team forums will thus be consolidated into an all-encompassing Team Management Advice forum. Initially, we will go forth with these two forums but if the need ensues, we will adjust as necessary, for example breaking the Player News and Analysis forum into separate AL and NL section. A new set of forums will be created, dedicated to
questions, comments and discussions pertaining to site content, for both Platinum and publicly available material. An off-topic forum will also be available, called The Water Cooler, in which our community can talk about anything they want, so long as it is not fantasy baseball related. All of the present discussions will be directed to the appropriate forum. Once this reorganization is finished, I will get the ball rolling and make an effort to start the newsy type threads, hoping those wanting to contribute their two cents will feel comfortable in doing so. You know, sort of like putting the feeder five into my tip jar. Before long, others will hopefully follow suit and post news items as they hear them. Something to keep in mind that if you are in fact interested in joining the Mastersball team, the best way to ‘audition’ is via message board participation. Long time Mastersball followers can confirm this, as this was my initial introduction to Gary and more recently
Shawn Carey, our Minor League consultant.

The second focus will be the blog. We are efforting expanding the cast of contributors. We hope to have an announcement soon.

The other concentration will be making the front page of the site a portal of sort, a place where we can announce the posting of Platinum content as well as link the free content we produce that can be found on such sites as mlb.com, SI.com and CREATiVESPORTS.com. We will also announce radio and podcast appearances. The present plans include producing three publicly available pieces of content each week. The first will be the 2-start pitching rundown I do for mlb.com, posted sometime each weekend. The second will be a weekly strategy column, possibly to be part of the fantasy content at SI.com, but even if not, it will definitely be posted at www.CREATiVESPORTS.com. The final offering is back via popular request and will be free this season, as we will be preparing a review of the likely available free agents in common leagues, which will definitely be posted each weekend at www.CREATiVESPORTS.com. Beginning this week, links to the above as well as other site announcements and
news will be available from our home page, as well as the aforementioned message forum for comments, questions and discussion regarding this specific material.

For our Platinum subscribers, again, I simply cannot thank you enough, not just for your patronage and trust, but also for your patience and understanding as we literally put this together on the fly. I completely realize that as hard as I long for the good old days where all I had to do was write a couple of pieces a week and have some fun on the message board, as soon as we accepted one penny from one subscriber, we made the leap into a business and thus we need to respect that and treat it accordingly. Starting next weekend, we will unveil our advertised in-season content, which includes weekly updated rest-of-year projections for everyone appearing in the Majors as well as year-to-date values for common leagues. This week we will also start the daily posting of our Player and Team Tracker, which some of you may know as ZIDDY. And even though we feel this content was a great value for the price point, Gary and I have decided that we each should produce some additional
subscriber content on a consistent basis. To that end we will post an article three times a week, accessible only to our Platinum subscribers. It will be somewhat free-form, commenting on whatever moves us that particular day. The bulk will be fantasy baseball oriented, but I have been known to get tangential at times and Gary has never been shy to float an opinion on whatever touches a nerve. We will provide the exact details early in the week on the site’s home page.

Once again, please accept our sincere gratitude for helping to make the resurrection of Mastersball a success. With your continued support and guidance, we strive to carve out a special niche in this wonderful industry. Thanks for hopping along for the ride.

Todd Zola, aka the Forum Funklord

The Hedge and The Stand

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 04:47:00 +0000

A recent piece by Baseball HQ’s Ron Shandler brought to light something I have been thinking a lot about this spring. Not so ironically, I have done so directly because of a clever exercise Ron included on this year’s First Pitch Forum series. Ron suggested one way to orchestrate a projection is to come up with a set of possible outcomes and attach a probability each will occur. The final projection is then a weighted average of the varying possibilities. We did this using Ian Snell and Andruw Jones. Each had three possible scenarios – a recent solid season, a recent poor season and something in between.

As I expected (your mileage may vary), the final result in all 7 cities for both players can best be described as a hedge. The vast majority of attendees voted for the middle projection with some talking a stand good or bad. The good and bad basically cancelled each other out so the final results were pretty similar, with some variance because the good and bad were not exactly equal in each venue.
Here is what I have been thinking about. Let us say I fall on either extreme. What do you want, the extreme to be the published projection? A weighted average where the extreme is the majority of the calculation, but there is enough there to hedge the final number a bit closer to the middle? In a perfect world, my personal choice would be to take a stand, not hedge and publish what I think will happen, and then verbalize any hedge in an associated profile or analysis piece. But I am not naïve, I realize some customers utilize solely the projections and really do not incorporate the corresponding supporting material. So the projection has to be as useful as possible, as a standalone entity.

So what did we do? I would like to think we took a stand, at least in terms of playing time. Our projection model and philosophy does not lend itself to going out on a limb with a significant increase or decrease in skills. We allow for some subjectivity but rigorously build as much of what others consider personal touches into our foundational basis. Playing time, however, is a good deal subjective, with history serving as a strong guide.

Ron’s piece is entitled Pundits on Parade and is his annual comparison of projections for players chose by his subscribers. Mastersball was included in the group of sites surveyed.

Brandon Wood was one of the subjects, and we came in with a lowly projection of .237 with 4 HR in 93 AB. The next lowest total of at bats was 247 with 409 leading the pack. Ron’s comment was the following:

Perhaps the most fascinating subject on this list, it's almost all about playing time. And clearly, the most gutsy projection is from Mastersball's Todd Zola. That says to us, "yes, there's a playing time crunch in the Angels infield, but it's going to take more than a .237 BA to squeeze into it."

Well, that was EXACTLY my thought process. Might a hedge have been better, to at least get him on the radar, as he does have some potential, especially when it comes to power? Perhaps, but I kept looking at that .237. In order to project more playing time, I would need to justify an improved level of performance, but I could just not do so, even with a strong spring. I just didn’t see it, so I left the average at .237 and thus concluded that barring an injury to an infielder, and perhaps two as Erick Aybar and Robb Quinlan are ahead in Angels’ pecking order, Wood’s performance is not going to warrant regular playing time. So I took a stand.

Another interesting comparison was David Purcey. We have him sporting a rather ugly 4.91/1.40 line, but over a relatively high innings total of 165. Ron’s comment was

Mastersball gives a lot of innings to a near-5.00 ERA

Yes, we do. But when assigning innings to the Toronto staff, I asked myself if not Purcey, then who? With McGowan and Marcum on the shelf, and no confidence that Matt Clement would complete his comeback, we needed to account for someone eating those innings. So Purcey was projected for what I see as a reasonable total, think of it as 33 starts with an average of 5 innings per outing. Perhaps not as strong as a stand as with Wood, but an outlying opinion nonetheless.

As a site, we are admittedly growing when it comes to projections. I am personally most comfortable with taking a stand, presenting what I honestly feel will occur, even if it means a whole lot of site disciples perhaps miss a Brandon Wood breakout or maybe suffer through another middling campaign from Delmon Young. That said, the other thing I have been thinking about a lot this spring is how frustrating it is to work so diligently on the objective projection base, flavor it with some justifiable subjective adjustment, then throw darts at a playing time board. But we do have some ideas in mind to help mitigate this, at least partially anyway.

I'm back!!

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 01:19:00 +0000

Long time, no see.

Now that the bulk of the subscriber content is finished, I can get back to what I like doing most, sharing my thoughts, some baseball, some maybe not.

Opening day is special, no question. I've been watching the game for almost 40 years, but my favorite opening day memory is recent. But then, some that have been watching the game since 1919 would say the same, Red Sox opening day, 2005, the ring ceremony.

Three memories remain the most vivid.

1. Hearing a rumor that the then Super Bowl champion Patriots would make an appearance and spotting a bunch of shoes underneath the American flag that draped over the entire Green Monster and realizing the two champions would indeed share the same field. When they lifted the flag and the Patriots emerged, the goosebumps were rampant.

2. Noting the entire Yankees team on the top step of the visitor's dugout, respectfully watching the ceremony.

3. After the team had received their rings, the music was building to a crescendo and "LAST BUT NOT LEAST" appeared on the video scoreboard -- my section started chanting "Theo, Theo". I turned to the guy next to me and said, "Nah, not his style." He said "then who, Pedro? I laughed and said, "you'll see..."

I was right, and Johnny Pesky finally got his World Series Championship ring. My goosebumps got goosebumps.

REPEAT AFTER ME -- It's only one day.

And no, we are not going to change Felipe Lopez' projection.

But I do own him on almost every team.

Hey, we projected Emilio Bonifacio to hit a homer this season and we were right!!!

Obviously by the opening thought, I am a Boston fan, but trust me, this is honestly an unbiased warning to all those pundits handing the NL MVP to Manny Ramirez. He is not going to carry over the production he had for 2 months for an entire season. He is going to go through stretches like that, for sure. But he will also go through a couple of spells where he looks lost, pulling off the ball, his lead shoulder flying.
He will break the slump by going the other way with authority, at which point you can expect him to get in a zone. The end result will be a typical Manny season, .300-35-100. Nice, but not MVP. Not in the same league as Albert, sorry.

I finally signed up for the MLB channel. Good thing I waited, I would have never been able to do the weekly projection updates otherwise.

Am I the only one who believes the football hosts on the Sirius-XM football station absolutely blow away the baseball hosts on the Sirius-XM baseball stations?

Gotta run, I have some games to watch....FINALLY!!!!!!

Tout NL Auction, First Look

noreply@blogger.com (lawrm) — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 14:07:00 +0000

The Tout NL auction commenced at 9 am this morning. With the moves made in Tout, getting back to the core of the members of the league nominating participants, a more diverse and extremely competitive collection of players assembled (in fact, though the AL has garnered the bulk of attention over the past few years, all three leagues now boast formidable rosters of participants).

Anyway, player one nominated by Mike Lombardo--the convincing winner of the past three NL titles--was Mets third sacker David Wright who promptly gobbled up $39 of Tristan Cockroft's money. Albert Pujols followed to team Cory Schwartz for $38.

Tim Lincecum led the pitcher's price list going for $32, to Johan Santana's $31.

The closer barometer was set in the $18-$22 range, with Krod and Brad Lidge topping the list. Heath Bell ($19), then Francisco Cordero, Jose Valverde, Jonathan Broxton, and Francisco Cordero all clocked at $18.

For shortstops, Hanley and Jose Reyes both cost $41, with Rollins $34. Of the second tier, Drew was $22, Furcal $20, and Troy Tulowitski $18.

Mixed League Tout Draft Begins

noreply@blogger.com (Jason Mastrodonato) — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 21:40:00 +0000

Hi again, live from the Tout Drafts here in NYC. We'll be picking back up where we left off this afternoon. The Mixed League has been a hot topic of discussion here, as they raised the amount of players from 12 to 17. The experts were not sure what to expect in the opening rounds, but when Jose Reyes jumped off the board for $55 to Doug Dennis, things got interesting. The person sitting to the left of me turned and said, "Was that fifty-five? As in five-five, fifty five?!"

It didn't stop there, with Doug also grabbing David Wright for $50. JP Kastner from CREATiVESPORTS had a different approach, targeting values of Pablo Sandoval ($9), Francisco Cordero ($13), and Mike Cameron ($12). After the first break, he positioned himself well with over $140 of his budget still available (good for 2nd highest at the time). This way he can continue to be patient and seek what he feels are value guys.

The AL results from this morning have been posted on the Tout Wars website. Head over there to check those out.

Rosters Are Finalized

noreply@blogger.com (Jason Mastrodonato) — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 17:32:00 +0000

After 5 hours of drafting, the rosters for the 2009 AL Tout Wars teams are finalized. They'll be posting the final rosters sometime soon over at their website, ToutWars.com. Here are my final thoughts:

Best Value Pick (Hitter): Ben Francisco ($4), Steve Moyer; not the most attractive pick, but Francisco has a starting gig in a semi-productive lineup. He hit a respectable .266 with 15 HR last year in 447 AB.

Worst Value Pick (Hitter): Brian Anderson ($6), Sam Walker; Sam then claimed he thought he was drafting Garret Anderson... we'll let that one slide, although he probably won't enjoy his career .221 BA.

Best Value Pick (Pitcher): Kelvim Escobar ($3), Ron Shandler; Escobar is already throwing 95 MPH in camp, and they expect him to be major league ready by early May.

Worst Value Pick (Pitcher): Matt Garza ($18), Sam Walker; Garza proved himself to be a reliable pitcher last year, but he doesn't have the K rate or the track record to be worthy of $18.

A big thanks to Todd Zola, and you can find him in the NL Tout Wars, drafting tomorrow.

Thanks for stopping by guys.

You can find Jason's columns at CREATiVESPORTS on Sundays throughout the season, or his blog site, thefantasyADVICE.com.

Time to Draft Catchers

noreply@blogger.com (Jason Mastrodonato) — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 16:26:00 +0000

It's that time... When the pool of available players is becoming thin and the long run of catchers begins. After Joe Sheehan took George Kottaras ($2), the backup catcher for the Red Sox, Matthew Berry walked away with the starter, Jason Varitek, for just a buck. Johima and Barajas were taken for $2 each, and if you had those two as your catchers for $4, you're not in bad shape at all. My two favorite AL catchers, Miguel Olivo ($9) and Kelly Shoppach ($7), were not taken at the same bargain price, however they could pay dividends with 20 HR power.

Jason Grey finished his team with Brad Penny ($1), Brett Anderson ($6), and Trevor Cahill ($7). Don't be alarmed, Cahill likely won't cost you that much in your league; it was Grey's last pick and he had $7 left. He built a value staff centered around Scott Kazmir ($17). It's my guess that he'll address pitching depth in the reserve rounds.

Ron Shandler, also building a value staff, his centered around Felix Hernandez ($20), grabbed some cheap starters to finish his team in Kelvim Escobar ($3) and Scott Lewis ($3). I really like these two and have been targeting them in most of my drafts as well. Lewis has a great minor league track record and will be given a rotation spot to start the year.

Often you'll find the players in your league who like to draft off of their favorite teams. Predictable and silly right? Well, when you like a team, you usually like their players too, and there's no shame in drafting players you think will do well. Dean Peterson and Jason Collette have proven that theme, continuously drafting and nominating from their favorite teams, the White Sox and Rays.

Kurt Suzuki or Matt Wieters?

noreply@blogger.com (Jason Mastrodonato) — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 15:34:00 +0000

Midway through the draft someone noted that, based on the current rosters, Matthew Berry would finish in 1st place according to Baseball HQ's projections. Berry then noted that the simple spreadsheet projects that he has just $26 left with 10 players to fill. He's filled his team with 7 pitchers thus far and must make his $26 go a long way to finish his hitting roster.

Joe Sheehan won a bidding war with the room for Adam Jones, paying $22. Other notable draftees and their values include Justin Duchscherer ($2), Jason Kubel ($13), Travis Hafner ($7), Jim Thome ($12), JD Drew ($12), Jack Cust ($14), Kurt Suzuki ($11), and Pedro Martinez ($1). As Sheehan noted, this has to be the only league where Kurt Suzuki goes for more money than Matt Wieters ($9).

Jason Grey almost has his full hitting squad filled out, with a very nice mix of speed and power. Rather than spending big on the stars, he's drafted players in the range of $11-$24.

Don't Pay For Saves?

noreply@blogger.com (Jason Mastrodonato) — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 14:43:00 +0000

"Don't Pay For Saves" is a popular view among many fantasy experts. Closers have been flying off the board here so far, possibly for less money than you'd expect. After Papelbon ($28), Soria ($28), Nathan ($26), and Rivera ($25), there seems to be a decent drop off in closer value. During a short break, Dean Peterson noted that since the DPFS mantra seems to be in effect by many, there could be some extra money flying around.

Starting pitchers have also come at some surprise values, with Josh Beckett getting stolen at $21 by Steve Moyer (Beckett went for $25 in my FantasyPros expert league on Wednesday). John Lackey was taken for $18 after the news that he may not be ready for opening day. Other notable SP's taken: AJ Burnett ($20), Dice-K ($19), David Price ($10), James Shields ($23), Scott Baker ($19), and Cliff Lee ($19), and Francisco Liriano ($21).

I really like the way Moyer has filled out his staff, with Lee, Baker, and Beckett at decent prices. He can now build around those three guys with some cheap starters and maybe a closer.

Ron Shandler has addressed speed early on, grabbing Raj Davis ($8), Johnny Damon ($24), Torii Hunter ($24), and Jason Bartlett ($16). I've noticed that speed just isn't there later in drafts this year, so that may not be a bad idea for the fantasy legend.

Matthew Berry is already regretting his $21 spent on Robinson Cano; especially after Jose Lopez was grabbed by Jason Collette at $18.

Arod is Gone

noreply@blogger.com (Jason Mastrodonato) — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 13:37:00 +0000

Ron Shandler wasted no time in nominating Alex Rodriguez, who Lawr Michaels landed at $25. If ARod comes back to form in early May, as they are hoping he will, this risk could pay off for Lawr, who also added CC Sabathia ($30) and Joe Nathan ($26).

The team of Rick Wolf/Glenn Colton came to spend, as they have already spent over $150 on 5 of the top hitters. Mark Teixeira ($37) was one of them, who surprisingly went for only $1 less than Miguel Cabrera ($38).

As Matthew Berry continued to poke fun at Sam Walker, he then nominated a previously selected Justin Morneau ($30). Walker wasted no time in returning the favor.

Twins catcher, Joe Mauer was taken for $14, a discount due to the injury concerns. Another risky play that could end up helping or hurting Joe Sheehan, who also selected the semi-healthy BJ Upton ($34).

Live Blog From Tout Wars

noreply@blogger.com (Jason Mastrodonato) — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 13:33:00 +0000

Hi guys -

We will have a live blog going today from the Tout Wars AL-only Draft in NYC. Things just got started here as they took a few minutes to present some new rules for this year. The minor changes include the reserve roster cut from 6 to 4. The first pick of the draft was presented by Sam Walker, last year's winner. He threw out Matt Wieters, as he noted, a future hall-of-famer, for $1. Jason Grey ended up taking him for $9.

-Jason Mastrodonato
CREATiVESPORTS

Todd's Picks and Pans

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 21:24:00 +0000

Every off-season I am asked to contribute to the PICKS AND PANS section of the Fantasy Baseball Guide magazine, published by my friend Peter Kreutzer, aka Ask Rotoman, with a bunch of help from the crew at CREATiVE SPORTS. (Hey Lawr, I am contractually obligated to always do the all CAPS, small "i" thing?)

Unfortunately, with the resurrection of Mastersball, I plumb forgot to send them in on time, so they did not make the publication deadline. But fear not, this allows me to share them with you here. While I won't let you completely behind the 4th wall, let's just say the notes I used to write these had gravy and cranberry sauce stains -- okay, that's a little poetic license, I don't eat gravy on my turkey, but turkey and stuffing don't really stain. Well, and I really didn't write notes on a piece of paper either.

Without further ado....

HITTER PICKS

Hunter Pence – Some bad luck on balls in play depressed average enough that he could be a value pick as the power is real. He will also steal double digit bases in spite of a rather poor success rate.

Alex Rios – The numbers guy in me won’t like this, but sometimes you have to trust your eyes and gut. Rios’ power appears to be slipping, but his approach definitely changed after being re-inserted into the 3-hole after the mid-season managerial change. For some of early 2008, Rios was miscast at leadoff, as he tried too hard to play the role, hitting more grounders than normal, impacting his power. His second half total of 11 homers is more indicative of his potential.

Chase Headley – After opening the season by drawing no walks in his initial 53 at bats, Headley’s patience improved to the tune of 30 free passes with 278 at bats, a very good percentage. This should lead to an improved batting average. Though PETCO likely played a role, don’t be too concerned about Headley’s drop in homers as the season progressed. He puts the ball in the air a lot and his doubles rate was strong, suggesting more home runs are in the cards as he develops.

Fred Lewis – Meet the new Randy Winn with a little less power and a bit more speed, though he does strike out more than Winn. Okay, so the comp is not perfect, but Lewis is bound to fly under the radar much like Winn has for years. Lewis is the perfect outfielder if you need steals but cannot totally ignore power.

Ichiro Suzuki – The effect Ichiro has on your team’s batting average is one of the more underappreciated elements of player ranking. Last season, a down-year by his lofty standards, Suzuki still finished the campaign as a top-20 fantasy producer in mixed leagues, earning most of his owners a profit. Yet his stock is slipping, meaning if you design your offense accordingly, owning Ichiro could be a second or third round steal in drafts.

PITCHER PICKS

Josh Johnson – Might have lingering risk from the ‘returning from Tommy John surgery’ stigma, even though he spent the last half of 2008 shaking off the rust so he should be at full speed to start this season. As with many post TJS returnees, the extra work during his rehab may have actually improved his stuff.

Jake Peavy – Injuries and a subpar campaign have dropped Peavy’s stock to a point he could be a value play, assuming good health. This time last year he was the second starting pitcher off the board, now he is out of the top-5.

Kyle Lohse – While his K-rate is not what most desire, he doesn’t walk many and keeps the ball in the yard and has the appearance that he will continue to do so, making Lohse a viable back-end starter for a staff otherwise staunch in strikeouts.

Daisuke Matsuzaka – I am going to assume my fantasy brethren have panned Dice-K, correctly suggesting his success was more luck than skill as he cannot be expected to repeat that stellar ERA walking so many. In fact, I am going to assume this is commonly accepted in the general fantasy community. This all assumes that Matsuzaka does not improve his BB-rate. But what if he does? What if he improves his control while maintaining the rest of his peripherals? The inevitable reversal of fortune will be balanced by allowing fewer runners. I’m betting he makes an effort to do just that.

Carlos Villanueva – As a starter, Villanueva’s spotty control and penchant for giving up the long ball were his downfalls. But as a reliever, albeit in a small sample, he displayed much improvement in these areas. So much so that if he shows the ability to maintain this new level of skills, he could find himself working later in games, perhaps even at the very end.

HITTER PANS

Ryan Ludwick – Yes, the power is real, but the near .300 batting average was completely driven by an unsustainable line drive percentage. Assuming that returns to his career norm, Ludwick becomes a .270 hitter with pop that strikes out a lot. If he incurs a degree of bad fortune, his average could drop even more, putting his playing time in question.

Dustin Pedroia – The reigning AL MVP has nowhere to go but down, which considering how high he is currently being valued, will likely result in a profit loss to his owners paying full price. In order to simply repeat last year’s phenomenal performance, Pedroia needs to maintain an excellent line drive and contact rate, when historically, players regress a bit off the previous season’s mark when at that level. He will also be hard-pressed to repeat his 20 of 21 stealing success.

Chris Dickerson – Dickerson might be a popular end-game selection based on his late-season performance, but the truth is his production was fueled by a fortunate .410 BABIP, masking his below-average contact skills. He also displayed more power than in the minors which is not guaranteed to manifest again.

Josh Hamilton – It’s a bit odd how many are downgrading Ian Kinsler but not Hamilton. Much of Hamilton’s 2008 success was because table setters Kinsler and Michael Young did an extraordinary job and any time a player’s value is so reliant on other’s doing their job, he must be considered a risk. In addition, Hamilton’s “injury-prone” label has vaporized after a single healthy season. I am not saying he is not a good story and even better player, I am only saying he carries a bit of risk for a top-10 pick, when there are other similar and safer players available.

Brandon Inge – Inge is becoming a sexy pick based on his catcher eligibility but the likelihood of increased playing time is not necessarily a good thing as his power has waned since knocking 27 out of the yard in 2006, to a point his batting average is a greater liability than his homers are an asset.

PITCHER PANS

Francisco Rodriguez – K-Rod is being drafted as the second best closer, even though his peripherals are not top-5, and maybe barely even top-10. While his K-rate is still excellent, it is declining though his always high BB-rate is staying the same. Do not rank him on 62 saves in 69 chances; instead let someone else draft last year’s numbers while you fortify your hitting or starting pitching.

Roy Halladay – Doc’s outstanding 2008 season was the direct result of his highest K-rate since 2001 combined with his greatest number of innings since 2003. In order to return value this season, he is going to have to repeat his success last season, and the odds are he will regress in terms of both performance and innings.

Gavin Floyd – A fortuitous hit rate buoyed Floyd’s 2008 season, masking usual high preponderance of homers allowed. Many look at John Danks and Floyd as a duo that both took great strides last season. While Danks’ success was real, Floyd’s was largely good fortune.

Mock me if You Will -- Todd's Epiphany

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:14:00 +0000

I recently had an epiphany. Actually, it was something I pretty much knew, but am finally willing to admit, or better stated accept. The difference between the skilled fantasy gamer that does well, sometimes really well, but also has times where they struggle and those gamers that are always in contention boils down to one thing, and it is not luck -- it is preparation.

By preparation, I am not talking about having rankings and depth charts average draft positions. I am not talking about reading about each player, deciding in a vacuum if they are a breakout or bust candidate. I am not talking about knowing the next-in-line closers for each team. What I am talking about takes the aforementioned information to the next level and best might be describes as fantasy baseball game theory.

What I mean by preparation is knowing the machinations of the player pool inside and out, so you are best able to react to every scenario confronted in your draft or auction. This goes beyond just having a set of projections and dollar values or rankings by your side. The goal of a draft or auction is not to get the maximum value possible from each pick. The goal is to amass the maximum value at the end of the draft or auction, and distribute this value in such a way to maximize rotisserie points. This entails knowing the player pool backwards and forwards, so you know how to deal with every situation, regardless of the picks of your opponents. The 30, or 60, or 90 seconds between picks is not sufficient to formulate this reaction unless you have been faced with a similar situation previously. Without this past experience in your memory bank, while you may be able to discern the manner you want to proceed, you will likely not have sufficient time to identify the ideal player to carry out your plan. Or perhaps you settle on “value” and figure you will be able to balance everything else later. The point is, continued deployment of either or both of these methods will ultimately result in a squad constructed with less value than if you were fully prepared.

The fully prepared player will be ready under any circumstance. They will be able to recognize the current landscape of the player pool and adjust their series of picks accordingly, or they will be able to adjust their strategy on the fly to take advantage of an unexpected player of high value. There is a purpose to each pick beyond “best player available.” They are setting up future picks in an effort to maximize the OVERALL quality of the team.

Truth be told, I have been discussing the above for several years, this is nothing new. The epiphany is even though I may have had a hand in every projection and wrote or edited every profile we have produced recently, that is nowhere near enough ammunition to take on a league of NFBC gamers or Tout Wars cohorts, not to mention the sharks in my local league. And simply adding the ADP from our good friends at Mock Draft Central to my arsenal was not sufficient. I have been naïve, kidding myself that I can compete in this manner. In a vacuum, I will put my player-by-player analysis up against anyone’s. ANYONE’S!!! But that does not render me a solid gamer, capable of competing against the best every time. It means if things fall right, I have as good of a chance as anyone to win. But if they don’t, I am ill-prepared to have all my bases covered and will have a weaker team than I otherwise could have constructed.

So how do I plan on becoming adequately prepared? Three words – mock, mock, mock. There is no better way to become intimate with the player pool and all its permutations than to go through the process of assembling a team. This way, you will be faced with a variety of different scenarios in terms of what players are taken in terms of position and categorical contribution. It isn’t so much knowing who will go when, an ADP will tell you that. It is more a matter of being able to react to positional or categorical runs – do I jump in or will there be someone available later? It is a matter of being forced to at one time or another dissect every player’s potential contributions in terms of how they can help your team. So when you are doing “the real thing”, you will immediately recognize the situation and know exactly which players you can select, as opposed to what was described above, recognizing the situation but not knowing the best player to now take, or taking the “best player available” and trusting that you will be able to use that value later.

For the purpose of really getting a handle on the player pool, a slow mock is preferred as that affords you the time to really analyze the situation and find the best player to carry out your plan. But obviously, one can only do so many slow mocks so relying on multiple regular mocks, with a minute or so between picks is necessary. The drawback is the time constraint. But the more mocks you do, the less this becomes a hindrance as you become better at thinking on the fly. But what I really suggest you do is after the draft is complete, go back and decide if the strategy you deployed was optimal? Did the draft proceed as you expected after the curveball thrown in the early rounds? Were the players or types of players you anticipated to be available actually there for you? And if not, was there a flaw in your thinking that you can correct and better combat next time? THIS is the sort of post-mortem analysis that is most beneficial, as you are no longer constricted by a ticking timer. If you do conclude your thinking was flawed, go back and decide on what player you “should” have drafted. Or go back and decide if you really made the best possible selection at each turn. Doing this means you are familiarizing yourself with the player even more. The more times you look at a player in context to what your team needs, the better you will be able to recognize this intuitively when it counts.

Though a mock obviously implies you are preparing yourself for a draft, this is quite applicable to the auction format, at least in terms of knowing the player pool like the back of your hand. There are some significant differences in terms of dynamics with a draft an auction. In a draft, the players leave the board roughly in order of value and are relatively similar in order from draft to draft, while there is no rhyme or reason to the order in an auction and it differs every time. In addition, in a draft, you do not have access to every possible player you feel can help whereas in an auction, you at least have a shot at everyone. This means you cannot familiarize yourself with a bunch of auction scenarios like you can draft scenarios. However, in an auction you are not confronted with the same constraint of a time clock, so you can think about the strategy as players you do not want are being auctioned off and then have the experience of having looked at the player pool extensively in mocks, as opposed to having to both formulate the strategy and find the players necessary to carry it out.

Suffice it to say I will become a regular at www.MockDraftCentral .com in the coming days and weeks. For those not familiar with the service, it is an outstanding site dedicated to mock drafting. The java platform is easy to use and you can export the results to a spreadsheet for a post mortem. You can plan a private mock or join a public one. And you may recognize one of the options for projections to generate predicted standings.

The Information Pyramid

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 02:18:00 +0000

Recently, several readers have contacted me and asked how I approach mock drafts. Do I take them seriously? Do I try my best? Do I experiment with new strategies? Do I purposely not reveal my real favorites as I know others that I will be competing against can see the results?

Honestly, I try my best each and every draft, basing each pick on the body of knowledge I have AT THAT TIME. That friends is the key, AT THAT TIME. My level of preparation on December 1 is by no means comparable to where it is on January 17, and my level today pales to what it will be come March.

This feeds into what I like to call THE INFORMATION PYRAMID. While this concept may not sit well with everyone, including my fantasy brethren, I have been around along enough to strongly feel it is real.

I believe there is a small number of sources that are primarily responsible for the entire body of information provided to the fantasy community. For lack of a better word, let's call this virgin information and is atop the information pyramid. This information can be in the form of projections, rankings, values, strategies, etc., and most importantly, the theory and principles used to generate this information. What defines this top-level is the emanation of unique information, based solely on internal principles, without the guidance of outside assistance. Don't get me wrong, not every single nugget of information produced by this top level is completely unique. Not so humbly using myself as an example, my valuation process is a meld of "public" theories and principles. I have put them together in a unique fashion, but to call it "my valuation method" is hyperbolic. On the other hand, some of the strategic work I have done is absolutely unique and in fact emulated by others.

The second level of the Information Pyramid takes this virgin information and distills it. Hopefully what they do is take the principles and theories described by the upper level and apply their own interpretation before disseminating. At minimum, they are influenced by the upper level. What defines this level is that while most often they generate their own work, it is based upon, or at least influenced by the work of others.

The third level is composed of people like the 120-something (and hopefully many more) registrants for this site and are active on the message board and other similar forums. They take the above information, discuss it, analyze it, critique it, denigrate it, etc. Most distill it and formulate their own opinions much like the second level did with the first. What distinguishes this level is that while the top two levels are primarily information providers, this level is primarily an end-user. But they are a very important element in the pyramid as they really help "spread the word."

The fourth level is strictly an end-user. They too may season the above information to taste, but some simply take it as verbatim and draft "their" team. The difference is they keep to themselves and have no public presence at all.

The manner this Information Pyramid affects mock drafts is it takes time for the virgin information to be distilled and distributed to the masses. In December, the extent of information available is limited. Projections are not completed. The 2008 season has not been fully analyzed so 2009 strategies have not been fully developed. All this takes time, beginning at the top of the pyramid. The second level lags a bit and the third level follows.

So what happens is the early mocks and such done in December are based largely on unrefined information, before 2009 number crunching is fully complete. For a spell, this imperfect information is treated like the virgin information. The further you go down the pyramid, the more the information is considered to be pure. Eventually, the top level generates their actual 2009 information, the second level does their thing, etc.

The end-result is a mock in December will have significant differences than a mock in February and March, as December perceptions become February reality, either for the better or worse. I can guarantee you that the ADP of Evan Longoria and Dustin Pedroia will steadily decline from now until March as their perceived value is replaced by the more conservative views of the top tier.

I would like to close by stating I am by no means passing judgment on any of these levels, they are all integral components of the information matrix. Heck, I am actually a member of all four levels myself. I only bring it up to help explain the thought processes of early mocks. In addition, please do not interpret this in terms of different levels of expertise as that is by no means the case. In fact, there are myriads of niche experts at each level.

That said, very soon we will be 'pitching' our pay product and will probably reference that it is better to get your information directly from the source and not second hand. To quote a good friend of mine, "experts do so gloat, they just call it marketing."

Todd’s View on Scarcity

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 03:08:00 +0000

One of the most oft talked about fantasy baseball concepts is that of scarcity, usually positional scarcity but also statistical scarcity. It is at this point I usually get on my soapbox, waxing poetic about the multiple connotations of the term scarcity. I thought I would try something different here and talk in general terms about the concepts related to scarcity, but not actually use the term.

How to adjust a player’s value or ranking based on the position(s) they qualify is a hotly debated topic with respect to valuation theory. There are two general viewpoints. The first is that value should be assigned independent of position. If a league has 168 roster spots allocated to hitting, and if in order to legally fill all the spots, one has to roster a player outside of the top-168, that player returns “negative value”. Okay, I’ll say it, that player’s position is commonly referred to as a scarce position. The other stance is that the draft-worthy player pool should be composed of ample players to legally fill all the allotted roster spots, with draft-worthy being defined as a player returning positive value. Long-time readers know I espouse the latter. I believe that sufficient players to fill all roster spots should comprise the draft-worthy pool.

The argument used to support the former view is that the same stat line should result in the same value, irrespective of position. Obviously, I disagree, and here is the simplistic example I like to use to demonstrate why. Let’s say we are playing a home run derby league. The rules are we each need to choose one player from POOL A and one from POOL B. You have the first pick, who do you want?

POOL A: Red 45, Blue 40
POOL B: Green 20, Black 10

If you truly believe the all stats are equal regardless of position, then Red should be your choice, as he is the most valuable since he hit the most HR. My turn, I will pick Green. That leaves you Black for a total of 55 HR. I get Blue and guess what, I win with 60 HR. What happened?

The point that proponents of the first viewpoint miss is not all of Red’s or Green’s HR are useful. What if I presented the pools as follows?

POOL A: Red 5, Blue 0
POOL B: Green 10, Black 0

Now you obviously select Green first. Well, this is how I feel the original stats should be considered. At minimum, I am guaranteed 40 HR from POOL A and 10 from POOL B. The first 40 HR from POOL A and the first 10 from POOL B are not useful. I do not want to assign value to that which is not useful, and I certainly do not want to pay for it.

What if I now extend this example to include 6 pools? And what if instead of POOL A, POOL B etc., I called them catcher, first base, second base, etc.? This is why I am comfortable contending that a home run from a catcher is not necessarily worth the same as a home run from another position. Each stat at each position is not equal to that of the same stat at the other positions; an adjustment needs to be made. This adjustment is the determination of the USEFUL stats at each position. So what I am comfortable saying is a USEFUL homer from a catcher is worth the same as a USEFUL homer from a second baseman, or whatever.

The repercussions of only valuing useful stats is the exact same stat line for say a shortstop and an outfielder may be worth different amounts, depending on the level of useful stats each contributes, which is based upon the performance of the last player drafted at each position, akin to Blue and Black above. Let’s say a shortstop hit .300-30-100-35-120. For kicks, we’ll call him Hanley. Now say an outfielder named Grady hit the exact same thing – who was more valuable, Hanley or Grady? The answer is there is not enough information available, as you need to also know how the last draft-worthy shortstop and outfielder fared. Anecdotally, most figure the last shortstop is not as good as the last outfielder, rendering Hanley a bit more valuable than Grady.

Let’s bring this discussion more into the realm of actual player pools. Using the concept of scarcity discussed herein, most consider the position of catcher to be the scarcest, followed by second base and shortstop. But you know what? If you use last year’s final stats and calculate values for a 15-team mixed league with standard 14 man hitting rosters (leading to 180 draft-worthy players) without positional considerations to compute useful stats, you can legally fill all 15 team’s hitting lineup with the top 180, with the sole exception of catcher. So while even though you should still use positional considerations to get useful stats as the exact line of each position is a bit different, an argument can be made that scarcity does not exist, save for catcher except in leagues with fewer than 15 teams in the mixed format and 7 or 8 in the single league format. For the record, we predicted this phenomenon before last season, in part due to the early recognition of this by site user viper.

How I plan on applying the above to my drafts and auctions will be fodder for future blog entries and Draft Kit essays. But first, I would like to discuss, at least in a general sense, some of the other connotations of the term scarcity. One such use is to describe a position that has a bounty of talent at the top end, but a large drop-off to the dregs at the back end. Another is to refer to a position that in total, the cumulative value of the draft-worthy pool is significantly lower than the other positions. So please visit again soon, as I will try to get those written later this week. If you have not seen it yet, there is a pinned thread in each message board forum that I will update when a new blog entry is posted.

Between You, Me and the Firewall...

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:24:00 +0000

One of the major reasons for electing to relaunch Mastersball was my building frustration with respect to writing about topics for years, and either having the material buried behind a firewall or lost in the shuffle. Before I go on, trust me, there will be a plethora of quality material contained in the Draft Kit we will make available soon (details on the way), I am talking more about some general philosophies, processes and approaches that I see discussed publicly all over the Internet. As mentioned, I have been writing and speaking about a lot of these for longer than most have even been playing the game so I relish the opportunity to bring these out from behind the firewall and present them in a readily accessible manner.

Previously, the manner I presented much of this material was "I'm right and you're wrong and here's why, moron". Perhaps the most important lesson I have learned over the years is that in most instances, there is no absolute right or wrong, the best case scenario is better or worse, with the majority of issues having neither right nor wrong, but different approaches.

That said, when I present these topics in the coming days and weeks, in my heart of hearts I believe the opinion I share is right, or perhaps better stated as best. But while reading, please keep in mind that in most cases, it is indeed an opinion or personal preference. I will do my best to explain my reasoning, in an effort to lend credibility or validate said opinion.

Something else I have learned is sometimes what I consider to be right or best, others consider to be wrong. As such, I welcome comments and will gladly engage in discussions concerning anything I pose on these pages. In fact, I encourage such discourse. So please feel free to comment directly on the blog piece, or preferably, start a thread in the appropriate message board forum and we will have some fun.

Now please excuse me, I have an essay on scarcity to write.

OK Todd, what's next?

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 22:39:00 +0000

Good question.

As most of you know, the forum is up and running. And if you didn't know, you do now.

As explained, we will continue to add functionality to the site. Most of it will just appear. The next major phase will be getting set up with a mechanism to accept payment for our paid subscribers. Gary and I are finalizing the exact nature of this content and will be making an announcement with respect to what, how much and when soon.

What is for certain is we will be offering a Draft Kit complete with player projections, player profiles, values and rankings along with a detailed outline of our projection and valuation methodology. We will also be writing several strategy essays and player pool analysis pieces. We will do our best to spread the wealth amongst all the most popular formats including auction, draft, mixed, single, points and head to head. We will also provide our annual NFBC primer, which actually transcends simply use for the NFBC competition. The Draft Kit will be released in phases, with the target date (read -- not set in stone) of February 1 for projections, profiles, values, rankings and the description of methodology. The projections will be updated at least once a week through the first week of April.

For those wondering, we will have a customizable automated value calculator with the kit, though I cannot promise it will handle anything more than the most common categories. Last year, I introduced a version for extra categories and non-conventional categories, but I did so without adequately beta-testing it and with all that is going on, I cannot promise it will be released in 2009. BUT -- along with the Draft Kit, we will include a set of customized values specific to your league. We won't provide these with every update, but we will do our best to make sure you are able to properly manage your keeper team by providing a set when you need to declare keepers and another set based on the projections updated nearest to your draft. I apologize to those that play leagues that use non-conventional categories, but at this point you are in the minority and presently it would be an inefficient use of time to spend on the multi-AVC. But like I said, trust me, we'll have you ready for your 10x10 league with K/9, BB/9 etc.

In-season, we will fluidly update the projections and provide year-to-date values.

All the rest of our content will be free, either in the form of a newsletter (details to follow), blog entries, forum discussion or articles that will likely be posted at our companion site, Creative Sports.

For the next few weeks, I will be as active as possible on the boards though blog entries will slow a bit as we will be pounding away at the Draft Kit. Once the season starts, blog entries will pick up.

With respect to the forum, please do not expect a response from Gary or myself for every post. We are hoping to build a community such that there is free discussion and everything posted gets answered. We'll do what we can, especially when it comes to the more theoretical or philosophical questions, but I just don't have the time to say whether I like Luke Scott better than Jose Guillen for your utility, though I would more than likely share HOW I would go about making a decision like that in general terms.

Now for a little surprise. The Draft Kit is not for me, it is for you. As such, we would like your input as to what you would like for content. I am not talking about a weekly article for the season, we just don't have the manpower for that. YET. I am talking about an essay that will help prepare you for your draft and/or auctions. I will start a thread in the forums and we will do what we can to cover your topic(s).

Mastersball 2.0

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball) — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 22:17:00 +0000

We simply could not wait another minute! Instead of building a fully functional website with all the bells and whistles, we decided to launch once the core functions were working. It is too close to the start of the season to do otherwise. Our hard-core readers expect nothing less.

Over the next couple of weeks, you will see many changes. Take a look and see what we have done so far:

http://www.mastersball.com

In the mean time, you can register on the site by clicking on the “Create an Account” link under the login box. This will open a window that allows you to create an account. After you enter some basic information and click the "Register" button, an E-mail will be sent to verify you are who you say you are. You will need to click on a link in that e-mail before logging on. It is not that we don’t trust you; we just don’t want any hoodlums.

When you create an account on the Mastersball site, it automatically creates one on the Mastersball Forum with the same user name and password. The forum is brand new and we need you to break it in.

You can go straight to the forum by either clicking the Forum icon on the top menu or by going straight to the forum at http://forum.mastersball.com. You cannot create an account on the forum separately from the main Mastersball site.

If you discover something not working, you can send an e-mail to support@mastersball.com. Keep in mind that there is going to be construction going on.

Thank you for being a loyal reader while we finish construction.

Todd's Team in the NFBC Champion's League I

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 01:54:00 +0000

Every December, Greg Ambrosius, founder of the National Fantasy Baseball Championship recruits 15 NFBC winners from the previous season. Greg also is the editor for Krause Publications Fantasy Sports Magazine and this draft gets published in their first fantasy baseball magazine. In addition, the league gets played out during the season under standard NFBC rules. I back-doored my way into this loaded field by winning a high stakes NFBC NL-only auction league. I readily admit I am not nearly as polished a drafter as some of the upper echelon gamers that field competitive teams year after year. But I believe I have finally cracked the code and plan to change that this season. We'll see.

I had the 12th pick and really was not targeting any one player, more hoping someone I liked in the top-10 would fall to me. I have already discussed my top-6 previously (Hanley, Reyes, A-Rod, Wright, Pujols and Sizemore). Braun and Miguel Cabrera are 7 and 8. After that I am still fuzzy, though I do not like Howard or Hamilton in the top-10.

1.12 Ian Kinsler - OK, I lied, there actually was someone I was hoping would be available for me and that was indeed Kinsler. Previous to his August sports hernia, he was the MOST VALUABLE player in all of fantasy baseball. The caveat of course is he has played only 120, 131 and 130 games the past 3 seasons -- not the pedigree of a first rounder. The good news is none of the injuries are chronic so while he has missed significant chunks of the past 3 seasons on the DL, he is not as "injury-prone" as others who have missed similar time. therefore, while I will not call the past injuries flukes (2006 - dislocated thumb, 2007 - stress fracture in his foot), there is reasonable hope he shakes the injury bug and plays upwards of 150 games. Also encouraging is he showed last season he is not entirely a product of the favorable Ballpark at Arlington. Healthy, Kinsler is a strong candidate to go .300-20-20 with a ton of runs scored and a decent number of ribbies for a table-setter.

2.04 Lance Berkman - For someone as hot as he was early in the season, some may be disappointed with Berkman's total of "only" 29 homers, but he did slug 46 doubles, considerably more than he did the previous couple of seasons so it may have just been a little bad luck. His excellent walk rate and very good contact rate limits his downside, which is necessary as I incurred some downside risk with Kinsler.

3.12 Ichiro Suzuki - Last March, I let myself be talked out of taking Ichiro on my main event team. While I am not saying I "regret" the decision to bypass him at the 15/16 turn (I named my team Ichi-no as a tribute), I still value him higher than most and will jump all over him in the third round where his ADP seems to be slotting him. His batting average allows you to make up for his lost power with any of a number of .260/25-30 types available at corner or in the outfield.

4.04 Kevin Youkilis - "Youk" as he is affectionately known in Boston (I refuse to call my hometown Beantown as only non-Bostonians refer to it in that manner)has the added bonus of dual 1B/3B eligibility. Truth be told, I think in general he has been over-drafted in the early mocks, going in the 3rd, and while his upside hence profit potential is limited as he does not steal bases and won't hit 40 HR, he is a good bet to break even at this point of the draft and I am still looking to balance some of the risk from going with Kinsler. If you have followed my other teams, I call the 4th round "The Dead Zone" as I have not liked the available hitters. In testament to what I just said about Youk's ADP, he was not available to me in the other drafts at this point -- and those were 12-teamers!!!!

5.12 Adam Dunn - Some will disagree with this selection, but it is a strict by-product of having a serious batting average foundation and the ability to pick up 40 HR is quite nice at the tail end of the 5th round. Dunn was available to me in the 12-teamers referenced above, but I did not feel I had adequate batting average base to take him.

6.04 Ryan Doumit - Just as I do not pre-determine a round to take pitching, I pick a tier and time it accordingly, I am doing the same with catching. My disdain of the back-end of the 2009 catching pool is well documented so I planned on getting someone of quality early. For the record: Martin-3.14, McCann-4.01, Mauer-4.08, Soto-4.11, VMart-5.01. I have Doumit and Soto about even so it was time to jump as there is no way he would have made it to me in the 7th. The other player I considered was Joakim Soria, replacing Jonathan Papelbon in the PAPELBON PLAN I outlined in an earlier post. I knew he would not be there in the 7th for me, but I am more confident finding adequate closers in a bit as opposed to decent catching options.

7.12 John Lackey - He's in my second tier and the second tier is flying off the board as Liriano, Kazmir, Beckett, JShields, Harden, ESantana and Felix have all been drafted since my pick at 6.04.

8.04 Cliff Lee - Regression? Yes. A total collapse? No. At least I don't think so. His K-rate and BB-rate were not flukes, not with that many innings pitched. Even allowing for a small decrease in strikeouts and an uptick in walks with a HR-rate regression to the norm, Lee should warrant his 8th round status.

9.12 Brian Fuentes - I am counting on Fuentes signing on somewhere as closer. His skills are upper-tier worthy.

10.04 Orlando Cabrera - Part of the deal with re-launching Mastersball is I am contractually obligated to draft OCab, as he has been a favorite of myself, Jason and Rob for years. A good portion of that was due to his latent potential to swat double digit homers while stealing 20 bases. The power is now high single digits so I may be higher on him than I should be, but his selection was that of need and I need a SS and another handful of steals.

11.12 Chris Young P - I have talked about Young already, I like his stuff a lot, he just needs to stay on the mound for a full season.

12.04 Bengie Molina - There will be no fishing in the back-end catching cesspool for this guy, welcome Mr. Reliable.

13.12 Placido Polanco - Looking ahead, there are quite a few high power (or high speed) low average types still on the board, so I thought it best to add some batting average reinforcement and fill in my middle infield.

14.04 Derek Lowe - Another site and personal fave, downgraded in many eyes because he is not a flame thrower, but his K-rate is not horrible and he accrues a ton of innings. And I only have to sign him to a 1-year deal.

15.12 Casey Blake - A good example of a decent power, lower average type.

16.04 Manny Corpas - Sort of a gut feeling that Huston Street will be moved, giving Corpas the job, plus he is useful in this format when streaming starting pitching as he has a high K-rate.

17.12 Adam Jones - I have been fairly safe to this point, it is time to take a shot a potential profit pick.

18.04 Randy Johnson - I'm willing to bet with his landing in San Francisco, The Big Unit's ADP is previous to the 18th round.

19.12 Josh Willingham - We are at the fungible portion of the draft. Willingham is coming off an injury-riddled season and is on a new team with playing time a bit in doubt, so he is sliding in early drafts. With 500 AB, he more than earns 19th round value. If he struggles, I replace him.

20.04 Philip Hughes - Total upside pick as starting pitching is as fungible as 5th outfielders at this point of the draft and I like my fairly stable base of starting pitching so I can take some fliers.

21.12 Gary Matthews - Looking for some upside as he is not assured of regular at bats, though the Teixeira to NYY signing helps.

22.04 Jeff Francis - another flier on a guy coming off an injury-filled season.

23.12 Jack Cust - Getting 30 HR this late is fantastic and I should have the batting average to absorb the collateral damage.

24.04 Josh Fields - A possible utility option if I need pop.

25.12 Jamie Moyer - He won't be active all 26 weeks, but can be useful when deployed in favorable 2-start weeks.

26.04 Miguel Batista - Seattle closer? If not, bye-bye.

27.12 Juan Rivera - Hedging my bet with Matthews

28.04 Nick Punto - I have no plausible rationalization for this pick other than I wanted a backup MI and Punto will get full-time at bats.

29.12 Brad Penny - Why not?

30.04 Carlos Villanueva - Gonna be perfectly honest here, I totally spaced on Villanueva as I really like him as a bullpen option even if he does not find his way into the closing role. I probably would have taken him in round 26 had I not been doing an auction in a chat room simultaneous with this draft - oh, I failed to mention that earlier. About round 3, my buddy Jeff Erickson from Rotowire asked me to pinch-hit in their staff auction for their magazine. Good times.

C Doumit, Molina
CI Berkman, Blake, Youkilis (Fields)
MI Kinsler, OCabrera, Polanco (Punto)
OF Suzuki, Dunn, AdJones, Willingham, Matthews (Rivera)
UT Cust

SP Lackey, Lee, CYoung, Lowe, RJohnson, Hughes, Francis (Moyer, Penny)
RP Fuentes, Corpas (Batista, Villanueva)

I see this squad with enough power, but a little short on speed. I'll also need some help with back-end pitching and someone will have to emerge as a solid #2 closer. Where I finish may revolve around how effective I am at finding saves.

What do you think?

Hey Todd, no one cares about your teams but you

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Thu, 25 Dec 2008 01:15:00 +0000

Jason and Rob, my old partners and I coined a phrase "No one cares about your team but you." But yet, I have contradicted our own credo and spent two blog entries detailing a couple of "my teams." So here is the explanation as to why I have shared these teams and will continue to share other teams I draft.

The thing to keep in mind when I talk about specific players, player pool observations and strategies is not to focus entirely on the actual analysis, though that is perfectly acceptable fodder for discussion, but rather to apply the more general concept of drawing your own conclusions and mapping out your own means to take advantage of the situation as you see it.

By means of example, I have been opined about how I find the second tier of closers to be shallower than normal, the second tier of starting pitchers to be quite plush, the back end of the catching pool to be a cesspool and how none of the non-catching hitters in rounds 4-6 interest me.

I have then offered how I plan to deal with these observations: taking a top-closer early and taking a top-catcher early.

Again, my fantasy-life is an open book and I welcome all comments, but the take-home message should not be whether you agree or disagree with my personal observations, but rather to keep in mind the building of a team is a puzzle and in order to build the best puzzle, you need to know the player pool inside and out and determine how you can best balance value and stats based upon your personal observations.

That said, I have 2 more teams I will be sharing with you over the next few days. So along with simply sharing who I took, I will do what I can to let you into my head and share why I took that specific player.

On behalf of Gary and myself, HAPPY HOLIDAYS EVERYONE!!!

Krause Publications Expert Draft, Todd defends his championship

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 04:39:00 +0000

The following is my recent effort in the Krause Publications Expert Magazine draft. This league gets played out and I am actually the defending champion. The league is a 12-team mixed 5x5 format with standard 23 man rosters, 14 hitters and 9 pitchers. There are no reserves, but players on the MLB DL can be placed on your fantasy DL. Active rosters can be changed once a week with free agent acquisitions done anytime on a first come, first serve basis. For example, if you pick a guy up on Wednesday, he is activated for the following Monday.

I had the second pick in this draft which was very nice considering I had the first pick in the public mock described in previous post. I made the decision to jump on the top catchers in rounds 4-6 if similar to the previous draft I was not enthralled with the available hitters. I also decided to target Jonathan Papelbon and use the idea I described in a previous post in a draft that counts.

The only real change in strategy I used was taking fewer chances on the back end of the pitching staff as with no reserve, they will obviously be active. If available, I would take safe relievers that have the chance to close as streaming 2-start pitchers is a very viable strategy as the season progresses since the pool of available starters is quite plush.

Here we go…

1.02 Jose Reyes – while power is down in general, there is still plenty to be found in a shallow league such as this so I will take the steals.

2.11 Carlos Lee – the first of several names you will see in common with this draft and the public MDC mock. Funny how that happens, but remember I was drafting from a very similar draft position. As mentioned last time, Lee was on his way to a career year and he should be fully recovered from his broken pinkie.

3.02 Brandon Phillips – yup, the same 2 picks I got as in the other draft at the 2/3 turn, but this time I opted for Lee first, figuring Phillips would make it to me in the 3rd. As mentioned in the comments to that post, I like the upside of Phillips as much of last year’s struggles were bad fortune and not a skills regression.

4.11 Russell Martin – as explained, I really do not like the non-catching options and prefer not to go pitching as I want Papelbon next. Brian McCann was off the board so it was Joe Mauer or Martin. I favor Martin’s power-speed combo over Mauer’s batting average.

5.02 Jonathan Papelbon – putting my money where my mouth is. Well, not really my money, let’s see if I do this in an NFBC league.

6.11 Victor Martinez – I still did not like the available hitters and figure V-Mart for a bounce-back season. Plus I could use the power a healthy Martinez should contribute as 3 of my first 4 hitters have a significant steals aspect to their production.

7.02 Roy Oswalt – time to jump in on pitching as the run to the second tier will no doubt take place between now and my next pick. Oswalt’s first half struggles were directly a result of an extremely unlucky HR-rate. Once that stabilized, he was fine and actually reversed a K-rate slide.

8.11 Felix Hernandez – another familiar name common to the previous draft. He still has the same upside he had two days ago.

9.02 Joey Votto – this is pretty late to be taking my first corner, and I think I have a real good one considering the round. Votto won’t challenge for the league lead in homers, but he will hit 20-something with a decent average.

10.11 Alex Gordon – Gordon’s value, especially in a league like this with no reserve, is buoyed a bit by his dual position eligibility. While he has obviously fallen short of the lofty expectations expected as a top-prospect, he is showing signs of getting it and should have 15 HR/15 SB as a baseline, with power upside.

11.02 Brad Hawpe – I need more power and Hawpe is a viable source as he is now the likely clean-up hitter in Coors.

12.11 Ben Sheets – Here’s hoping Big Ben does not sign in Texas. Sheets is the result of the Papelbon Plan, taking on a bit of risk with my SP3. The one drawback is in this format, Sheets can be a problem as he cannot be reserved and is a guy that does not always go on the DL, but misses a start here and has an extra couple rest days there.

13.02 Ted Lilly – a very underrated starter who racks up the strikeouts and has some nice upside if he keeps the walks in check.

14.11 Ryan Theriot – I’m beginning to think I am higher on Theriot than others, but I see a solid .280 - .300 average and 20 SB.

15.02 Derek Lowe – perhaps the perfect starter for this format as he is so consistent and with his GB nature, you aren’t quite as scared if he is going in a favorable hitter’s park and you cannot reserve him.

16.11 Jair Jurrjens – I sense a pretty big dropoff in starting pitching soon but still like the available hitting, especially outfield.

17.02 Mike Cameron – I should have the batting average to cover Cameron and could use a bit more power and speed.

18.11 Paul Konerko – in 12MIX, this corner spot is basically fungible as here will be plenty of chances to find a replacement if Konerko continues his slide and does not bounce back or even level off.

19.02 Brad Ziegler – while some regression is expected, Ziegler should remain a solid reliever and has the chance to close based on his success in the role late last season.

20.11 Willy Taveras – I usually avoid the SB specialist in 12MIX, but I have a hunch there will be power left at the end.

21.02 Billy Butler – another fungible pick at corner with some nice upside as Butler’s power took off in the second half of 2008.

22.11 Chris Ray – if he’s not ready, I put him in the DL and pick up a replacement. If he is healthy, he could close. If he is healthy and does not close, I drop him.

23.01 Jack Cust – and my hunch comes to fruition. While I do not think I will travel the country and preach the Taveras/Cust plan, pairing them in the end game gets you the equivalent of a duo of 15 HR, 25 SB guys with a .250 average in the end game, I’ll take that.

SUMMARY

C Martin, V Martinez
CI Votto, Gordon, Konerko
MI Phillips, Reyes, Theriot
OF C Lee, Hawpe, Cameron, Taveras, Cust
UT Butler
SP Oswalt, F Hernandez, Sheets, Lowe, Lilly, Jurrjens
RP Papelbon, Ziegler, Ray

While it looks like I am light on power, I have several hitters with upside HR potential (Votto, Gordon, Butler) so I should be okay. I will need to fish for saves, but I should have the ratios foundation to take some chances until I happen upon a useful saves provider.

OK, your turn, let me have it…

The Papelbon Plan, Has Todd Gone Mad?

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 04:46:00 +0000

At this point, most everyone realizes that conventional wisdom suggests to hold off on drafting closers or the wisdom would not be, you know, conventional. The reason for this ploy is so many saves become available during the season that it is an inefficient use of resources to expend an early draft pick or a large chunk of your auction budget on saves when you can fortify the category from waivers or free agency as the season progresses.

As with most strategies, they work best when they are the tactic of the minority and not the majority. So when wisdom becomes conventional, it may be time to go back to zigging while everybody else is sagging, hence the unveiling of THE PAPELBON PLAN.

To best explain the Papelbon plan, it is necessary to first describe how I tier the closers. The top-tier is those that have jobs, are not injury-prone and have a history of outstanding ratios and strikeout totals. The next tier has jobs, is not injury prone but has a chink in the skill set. The third tier has the job, but is either injury-prone or inexperienced in the role. The last tier has the job in the mind of the team’s manager, at least for now, but really has it by default as they are the best of a set of relievers devoid of the skill set necessary to succeed in high-pressure situations. Sorry, we’re still in the getting-to-know-each-other phase of the new site, once we are more comfortable, I’ll simply say the fourth tier sucks.

The past few seasons, I have been advocating bypassing the first tier of closers and targeting one or two from the second tier, what I lovingly call the “The Cordero Tier”, named after Francisco and Chad, who exemplified the level of closer I favored. My rationale was that a Cordero had the same probability of leading the league in saves as a Wagner or a Rivera or a Nathan, but for less cost. And I still believe that to be true.

But here is the deal. The aforementioned conventional wisdom has altered the economics of save acquisition. The reason it was so effective to pay less for saves and fortify the category in-season was not everyone was cognizant of the plush supply, hence the demand was low. High supply, low demand – that’s good. But now, the supply of in-season saves is not what it used to be, as the fantasy community has adopted the strategy of cherry-picking the would-be closers and stashing them on reserve. As an aside, I personally think reserve lists are to fantasy baseball as the designated hitter is to real baseball, but that is a story for another day. Okay, back to Economics 101, the supply of in-season saves has depleted, but the demand is high as the inevitable job changes have occurred, forcing owners to start trolling for saves, not to mention all the owners who completely ignored saves at the draft table and are also in the mix for these available saves. Low supply, high demand, that’s bad.

I first noticed this changing economy a couple of years ago, and my reaction was to target the Corderos, or pitchers of similar ilk. It worked out just fine. So why am I about to suggest drafting Jonathan Papelbon? Because the available candidates in the second tier are not nearly as plentiful as previous seasons, and quite frankly, I do not see this changing all that much come the spring. There will always be someone not shy about drafting the upper-tier closers, but I sense more of a battle this season for the limited second tier, reducing my chances of securing the guys I like, especially in a draft as there is a chance I am shut out if I am on the wrong side of a run. So while the zaggers are targeting Francisco Cordero, I will zig and shock the fantasy universe and take Jonathan Papelbon. Well, I would also take Joe Nathan or Joakim Soria, but I like alliterative nicknames.

Anyone who has followed my work over the years realize there must be something else coming, it cannot be as simple as draft Papelbon. As was explained in an earlier post, I consider building a team akin to constructing a puzzle. Adding the Papelbon piece as opposed to the Cordero piece leads to the ability to alter your staff in a couple of different ways as Papelbon’s ratios are so strong. I also break starting pitchers into tiers and the presence of Papelbon effectively jumps a pitcher up a tier, so if you usually draft a top tier starter, you can wait and take someone from the next tier and when combined with Papelbon, you have a top-tier starter and a very good closer. You can also take a riskier starter such as Johnny Cueto or Randy Johnson and have some of the risk mitigated by Papelbon’s stellar ratio foundation. Or you can even alter your strategy to add subsequent closers, as Papelbon can help compensate if you choose a dud in-season.

Earlier I mentioned that I would also do this with Joe Nathan or Joakim Soria as they are the ONLY other relievers I trust enough to pull this off. In early mocks, Papelbon can he taken in round 4 or 5, Nathan in round 5 or 6 and Soria in round 6, 7 or 8. I would not take Nathan in round 4 or Soria earlier than 7, but if they were available later and there was not a great hitting option, I will not hesitate to take one of that trio early.

Once the closer situation fleshes itself out a bit more, I will share my tiering, or perhaps tearing if this Papelbon Plan does not work. But since I have taken Papelbon in multiple drafts so far, I thought it would be a good idea to anticipate the inevitable shrieks of “has Zola gone mad?”

Todd's Team in the first Mock Draft Central public mock draft

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 01:31:00 +0000

The following is a review of a 12-team mixed public mock draft I was invited to participate in by my friends at Mock Draft Central. But before that, one of the great things about now communicating in blog form is I can go tangentially off-topic once in awhile, though truth be told, back on the old Mastersball site, I was blogging before the format was invented in my weekly column entitled “Let Me Speak on This”. Anyway, I just wanted to take a second to express how happy I am that Jason Pliml and Geoff Stein have carved out a successful niche in the industry with their MDC site. Jason had a vision, and combined with the necessary support, patience, ability, demeanor and intuitiveness to carry out his business plan, he now runs a great site, at a time when it was very difficult to make your mark. This was my second year doing their kick-off public mock draft. I really enjoy doing it as if you can’t already tell, I like sharing my opinions and the appeal of this draft is viewers can pose questions to the participants and I am not shy about answering. I don’t tipe vrey well when I am ansrwing questions on the fly, so pleas accept my aplogies, but here is the link to the chat transcript that took place during the draft:

http://www.mockdraftcentral.com/2009_fantasy_baseball_expert_draft_transcript_1.jsp

And here is a link to a podcast with Lenny Melnick and Paul Greco doing the commentary:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/fantasybaseballguy/2008/12/16/Fantasy-Baseball-EXPERT-Mockdraft-1

Okay, without further ado, from the 1-hole…

1.01 Hanley Ramirez: It is rare one gets to take the first overall pick and still have the potential for UPSIDE, but such is the case with Ramirez. I am leery about a drop in power as well as tempering steals if he remains batting third all season, but a baseline of .300-25-100-100-35 from a shortstop is well-deserved of the top pick. This leaves him an upside of 10 HR and 15-20 SB. I’ll take it.

2.12 Brandon Phillips: While I have not crunched the 2009 numbers yet, it is my expectation that the effect most call positional scarcity is minimal, but yet still existent in the 12-team mixed format so I am quite pleased to be able to fill my 2B/SS without having to reach for either player. Phillips had a down 2008 as compared to the previous season, but there are sufficient signs that it was as much bad luck as anything, the skills are still very much intact, so I expect a bounce back campaign.

3.01 Carlos Lee: .314-28-100 is a career year for many; Lee did it in only 115 games. There is no reason to expect any lingering effects from his fractured pinkie and at 32, his skills should not yet be in decline.

4.12 Shane Victorino: I am going to be completely honest; I am not enamored with this pick. It is justifiable, but in retrospect, I wish I had gone in another direction, which I ended up doing in another draft, details to follow. Basically, I am calling the 4th and 5th rounds “the dead zone” as there are no hitters that really stand out and I have not yet refined my player pool analysis to favor one position over another. As such, I called upon my resistance to chase a stolen base specialist in 12-team mixed drafts and took Victorino, so I would also get double digit homers with my 35+ steals. This should allow me to accrue ample stolen bases without needing to take a Willy Taveras or Michael Bourn type and I was fairly certain Victorino would not make it back to me at the 6/7 swing.

5.01 Jonathan Papelbon: I am going to save the analysis of this pick for its own posting, as I am going to introduce what I affectionately call “The Papelbon Plan” into the fantasy baseball vernacular.

6.12 Rafael Furcal: A healthy Furcal is historically a 3rd or 4th round selection, but he slipped because he is coming off of a back injury, and once you hurt your back, you are forever considered injury prone. There is also some residual hesitation as many felt as though they were burned by Furcal last season with the frequent reports of his imminent return, only to be saddled with a zero for the week as he was not activated. That said, he looked great in the playoffs and as a free agent, his medical reports could be requested by any organization and he was aggressively courted by multiple teams, so that is a good sign with respect to his health.

7.01 Jermaine Dye: Pretty much a pick based on needs, specifically power as Dye should continue to knock 30-something out of the yard.

8.12 Felix Hernandez: The King’s selection was buoyed by the Papelbon Plan. As will be explained, it did not HAVE to be Hernandez, just a pitcher of his ilk. The good thing is he has some untapped potential over and above what is to be expected out of a pitcher taken at this point. If he can get his walk rate back to 2006 and 2007 levels, the improving Seattle defense should benefit his hits allowed on balls in play, pushing him into the lower portion of the top-tier of starting pitchers.

9.01 Carlos Pena: Power still needed to be addressed and I was quite pleased to welcome Pena to the fold, albeit with some trepidation as my batting average would now be at a little risk if either Ramirez or Phillips has an off-year.

10.12 Ricky Nolasco: With apologies to Neil Diamond, “I’m a Believer”. The Monkees may have covered it, but trust me, Diamond wrote it. Anyway, there is definitely some cause for concern as Nolasco pitched 212.3 innings following a lost 2007 where he was shelved with elbow issues working only 55 innings in the Majors and Minors. His K/BB is excellent, though as a fly ball pitcher, he is prone to the long ball.

11.01 Chris Young: I’m a believer, part 2. I probably should refrain from drafting Young to gauge how others slot his value. When healthy, I believe Young has the goods to be a top-10 fantasy performer. The issue is health and goes beyond the horrific accidental line drive he took to the face off the bat of Albert Pujols.

12.12 Bengie Molina: As a teaser to what I did in subsequent drafts in the “Dead Zone”, I am not thrilled with the back-end catching options as opposed to previous seasons where I always seem to have a few guys I like late. As such, it was time to draft the requisite Molina, and I was fortunate enough to get the best of the bunch. Bengie should help bolster my fledgling batting average as well as chip in with some welcome pop.

13.01 Mike Napoli: Napoli is going to be the sexy catcher pick come the spring. He has 20+ HR potential and will swipe some bases. His average is volatile, but last year he was a victim of bad luck, hence the real low mark.

14.12 Matt Capps: Pretty much a classic Zola pick – a middle tier closer with the job. Capps can get anywhere from 25 to 40 saves and I would not be surprised. But he has the job, though he is a candidate to be moved to a team that would use him as a set-up guy.

15.01 Alex Gordon: Showing signs of finally reaching the potential many predicted and the dual 1B/3b eligibility is nice. In addition, the recent focus on power means a little more help in steals is needed, and Gordon will swipe 15 or so.

16.12 Paul Konerko: Screw batting average. While Konerko is on a 4 year tailspin, he is probably at the point where the production levels, if not improve a tick over last season.

17.01 Nick Swisher: Truth be told, these back-to-back picks of declining cornerman was an effort to hit on one of the two, figuring corner and/or outfield is plush enough a position to backfill from waivers.

18.12 Jair Jurrjens: There is no truth to the rumor that Jurrjens has requested a restraining order from me. As the saying goes, what’s not to like? An acceptable K/BB and he keeps the ball in the yard, the perfect recipe for a 4th or 5th fantasy starter.

19.01 Randy Johnson: Why not? Pitchers at this point are fungible and I am treating the draft like you have the ability to shift players on and off a reserve list.

20.12 David Dejesus: Basically looking to add some batting average while still adding something to the counting stats. Not flashy, but solid. Though, come to think of it, why didn’t I take the poster boy for this description, Randy Winn?

21.01 Ryan Theriot: Theriot is being undervalued, or maybe I am overvaluing him, as I see a decent batting average and 20 SB from shortstop. You’ll see his name a lot in the next few days as I review other teams.

22.12 Jeremy Guthrie: Guthrie is one of those guys that many avoid as his K-rate is not to the level most like, but has had a string of successful seasons because of a low hit rate, sort of like Jon Garland a few years ago. If Guthrie has been lucky and struggles, I will drop him.

23.01 Manny Corpas: Obviously, closing speculation is very difficult in December, but Corpas has the skill set to be useful even if he doesn’t close as he can be used during weeks the starting pitcher matchups are not attractive.

SUMMARY:

C B Molina, Napoli
1B/3B Pena, Gordon, Konerko
2B/SS Phillips, Reyes, Furcal
OF C Lee, Victorino, Dye, Dejesus, Swisher
UT Theriot
SP F Hernandez, Nolasco, C Young, Jurrjens, R Johnson, Guthrie
RP Papelbon, Capps, Corpas

Your turn, what do you think?

Mocking the mocks -- Todd's Drafting Strategy

noreply@blogger.com (Mastersball_Todd) — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 04:14:00 +0000

‘Tis the season. - no, not the holiday season, the other season, mock drafting season. And as the saying goes, if you can’t join them, mock them --- or something like that. It comes with the territory, accept an invitation to an expert mock and be prepared to be mocked. Get ready to have your credentials questions and brace for the inevitable “I dare you to join my league” requests.

Here is the problem – those that look at mocks view them in a myopic manner, focusing on individual picks they feel go too early, or question how a player they like can go so late. What they ignore is the fact we are building a team, not producing a top-300 list. Each draft has its own personality, punctuated by a unique ebb and flow. Isolated picks cannot be judged in a vacuum. The pick must be considered as a single piece of a larger puzzle.

I had the pleasure of participating in four drafts this past week and I would like to share the results with you, or at least as much as I can get away with as a couple were for industry publications and as such I need to respect the fact that others are paying for the information. But before I post the actual results, I want to review my general drafting philosophy as it has significantly altered over the years.

One of my first analytical studies with the original Mastersball site was looking at a typical draft pool to investigate the concept of positional scarcity and apply that to drafting strategy. What I did was take end-of-the-season values and assign the top ranked player to TEAM 1, the second ranked to TEAM 2, etc., filling out a standard 23-man roster for 12 squads. As long as the team had a legal roster spot available, I assigned the highest remaining player to the team “on-the-clock”. If there was not a legal spot, I moved down the list until the player legally fit. What I found was I rarely had to skip more than a couple of places to find a qualifying player. My conclusion was positional value was aptly distributed throughout the draft-worthy pool so you do not have to reach for a scarce position early. There are ample players left at the end to fill the scarce spots.

So I put my money where my mouth was and entered the World Championship of Fantasy Baseball, a high-stakes contest that has since folded, but whose place was effectively taken by the National Fantasy Baseball Championship, an entity you will become very familiar with as I am an avid participant. Anyway, using my “take one off the top” philosophy, I had five outfielders and my utility by the end of round eight (pause for laughter). It did not take me long to realize my strategy needed some tweaking. Okay, it needed a complete overhaul.

What I failed to account for was my experiment utilized fixed values. We all value players differently and we all have our own drafting strategies. What this does is render a player pool that features a bunch of players that only we like at the end. Putting it in terms of dollar values, a player drafted in the last few rounds is akin to an end-gamer, one that will cost a buck or two in an auction. In the aforementioned draft, I became nauseous seeing others scoop up outfielders I had pegged as $6 or $7 players with their last pick, while I was taking the scrubbiest of $1 middle infielders. So the first adjustment I made was to always have a couple of outfield spots available late.

The next revelation I made was observing a very interesting phenomena with respect to how value lays out in a typical draft. I will expand on this concept as part of the upcoming Draft Kit, but the primary principle is if you graph a draft plotting each round pick using pick number versus expected value earned, you find a significant slope in the first round, a lesser slope in the second, and even lesser slope in the third, but then each round was fundamentally flat, where the difference in value between consecutive players was well within the margin of error associated with player valuation. In other words, there really is no “most valuable” player left on the board, there are several players with basically the same value. The point being, there really is no difference between a $19 player and a $17 player, or a $9 player and an $8 player. How they fit into the overall scheme of your team is far more important that the few cents of value.

This epiphany resulted into my adopting a tiered approach to drafting. I purposely say adopt and not develop as I was by no means the first employ this tactic, though I do believe I was the first to graphically display rounds in terms of value. The key of the tiered approach is to identify an area where you expect several players of the same position or same categorical contribution to be picked. The idea is you can target a player from that group, enabling a player from a different position or skill to be taken during a spot where you do not observe a viable tier. Practically speaking, perhaps you anticipate being able to pick a viable second baseman in round 8 as there are 4 or 5 that you figure will be available at value at that point. Now let’s say you were unable to find a tier to target a third baseman anywhere in the draft. When you pick in the 4th round, the top-ranked player is a second baseman, but there is a third baseman a couple spots away. The tiered approach dictates bypassing on the “more valuable” second baseman and sliding to the “less valuable” third baseman. The same idea can be applied to categories. Say you feel there is a plethora of cheap power late. Your tiers point towards an outfielder in the 3rd or 4th round. The top outfielder on the board is a power hitter, but a couple of spots down are Jacoby Ellsbury or Shane Victorino. The play here is to shun the power and get the speed, even at the expense of some raw value, as you can pick up a $9 power outfielder at the end but not a $9 speedster.

Now is the part that I did develop, or at minimum, I had not seen discussed previously. The ultimate strategy goes beyond just tiered drafting. You need to combine the tiered approach with anticipating the composition of the players available towards the end of the draft and make sure you have the necessary slots open to best take advantage of your sleepers, or whatever you want to call them. Remember that buck or so you sacrificed by skipping to the less valuable third baseman? You can more than make that up in the end by taking the $9 cornerman or $10 outfielder with your last pick, BUT ONLY IF YOU HAVE THE AVAILABLE SPOT!!!!

There is another element of drafting that must enter into the equation, namely balance. It is not entirely about value, but how you piece the value into a balanced squad. You need to balance the positions as already discussed. You need to balance hitting versus pitching. You also need to balance power versus speed and starting pitching versus closers. You are weaving an intricate web that goes well beyond “taking one from the top.”

Let’s bring this back to “mocking the mock.” Looking at an isolated pick is not fair if it was purposely made in context with the big picture. So instead of questioning a particular player in a particular spot, take the time to look at the team as a whole and look for the strength and weaknesses. Then go and see if that can be traced to a pick you consider being a mistake. And finally, figure out what you would have done differently, based on the ensuing action. Trust me, it is a lot more useful than calling out a ‘so-called’ expert. Though admittedly, it might not be as fun.

Next I will start unveiling the intricate webs I spent the week weaving.

As always, comments are encouraged and I will do my best to stop back and address them. And if you have not read the welcome message yet, I respectfully urge that you take a couple of minutes to check it out.