-
Baez will move to 3B, probably Bogaerts also...
Eckfords ⚾ on
February 26, 2013 8:08 PM
-
Wow, looking at the top 100 this way, it's amazing to see that super wave of SS prospects but so little at 1B. Remember when Jeter, Nomar, and ARod were it? http://goo.gl/jDngs
-
I definitely agree SP injuries can be devastating, but if the likelihood of injury is unknown, it seems to me drafting the best SP available, even at a high cost, makes best use of cash (assuming you need SP)
-
"History" implies the SP has shown the skills to succeed in the past. "Reliability" suggests they've been elite for multiple seasons. If the injury risk between Kershaw & EJax is the same (unknown), I'd rather pay for the elite guy
-
Reliability and history can be independent of injury risk
-
You specifically said "you're paying for history, reliability". That is your exact quote. My only comment was that paying for reliability doesn't make any sense in SPs, especially bigger $$
-
If everyone was scared off by expensive pitchers just because injury could occur, there's no way I would've been able to trade Bundy for Price. No evidence that one is more injury prone than the other. We pay for perceived performance.
-
Who are the safe or durable pitchers? As Wood said, in practice, we operate as if each of our pitchers will perform w/o injury because its an unknown variable. If/when they occur, you adjust. That's the "game" aspect of fantasy.
-
i'm not banking on anything, I'm eyes wide open that a significant number of expensive pitchers will get hurt and I just hope they aren't mine, but I'm not paying for "safe" or "durable" pitchers
-
but you wouldn't trade me Strasburg for AJ Griffin....you are absolutely banking on predicted performance and ability and not injury risk
-
a hurt $30 SP hurts more because of what you've foregone to own that $30 SP
-
they're just not, just like every other SP
-
but again, my only point is that some people pay a premium for "safe" pitchers, when in fact that's silly b/c pitchers are not safe. Coming into last year Sabathia and Haren were the picture of "safe"
-
Agree no pitcher is safe, but I'm unsure how any team would operate as if they weren't (with exceptions for those SP that injury info is linked, like Sabathia).
-
Assuming each team uses all $400, the replacement cost to fill in for an injured Kershaw ($30) and EJax ($10) is the same, right? Post-auction, replacement is based on whats available, not what you lose
-
For the most part (some exceptions) injury risk for pitchers is the same because its virtually an unknown. Have to operate (draft, at least) as if all your pitchers will be healthy. Weigh risk/reward of performance, not injury.
-
lots of pitchers are "worth" $30.
-
I didn't say no pitcher is worth $30. I just said paying for some $30 pitchers b/c they're "safe" is a fallacy
-
Very tough IMO to just blanket say that no pitcher is worth $30+, etc. of course they are. No one can tell whether Kershaw is more prone to injury than EJax, but we all know which is more valuable.
-
and i have two of them, its not as if I dont' have the risk too
-
well let me rephrase: people spending $30 on "less injury prone" pitchers are buying an illusion, every SP presents massive injury risk, the sub $10 guys aren't less likely to get hurt, their loss is less likely to hurt though
-
Why is a pitcher at $30 any more of an injury risk than a $10 pitcher, or $1 pitcher? The risk of injury should be independent of the price, right? The reward, though, is more closely tied to price. You're paying for skills, history, reliability
-
every SP over $10 presents huge injury risk, its just the nature of the beast
-
I honestly have no idea what he might go for. I'd set the Over/Under at maybe $29
-
The price of Madison Bumgarner is the most interesting one to me. Do you pay a premium for possible future upside or hold the line because he's not yet there and injuries cloud the picture?
-
than .265 but his track record of outproducing him at every age comparable year suggests both more upside and better production at his peak.
-
ultimately pretty easy to see that nothing hugely changed in Jones' numbers, except that he got an extra 100 ABs and likely had his career season. He doesn't have any upside over hitting .280 either walking 4% and K 18%; Bruce probably doesn't hit more
-
so yes, I do think he has some upside HR wise, though I would always take the under for any player an 35 HRs
-
here are the list of guys that have hit more HRs than Bruce prior to their age 26 season since 1980: http://bbref.com/pi/shareit/jnkQX
-
For what it's worth, Jones is projected to out score Hamilton by 60 points. Once you get past the top four (Trout, AGon, Jones, Hambone), things get ugly fast...
-
ultimately he is who he is K wise, though he got a bit unlucky on balls in play last year and increased his line drive rate nearly to the same as Adam Jones; he also hit more doubles than before
-
RotoWire projections (for this format) have Jones @ 922 points, Bruce @ 915. Using PECOTA, Jones scores 777 and Bruce scores 720. PECOTA has Jones for 267 TB and 239 with Bruce, which is really where the difference is. Jones is a better hitter (AVG)
-
OF is very scarce at the auction this year and I would not be shocked for several teams to still be in on Jones well past the $25 mark and at least a couple into $30.
-
I'm not saying that Bruce isn't better than Jones...he is
-
not what I said...how many more do you think he will hit in a season....do you think he will be consistently good for 40-45 HRs? He will need to really cut down on K's and get more hits to break the 1000 point barrier
-
"only" topped out at 130 more than Adam Jones scored at the same age?
-
by hitting 35 HRs
-
Bruce also knows how to strike out a whole lot more...I know Bruce is still young, but how many more HR's do you think he will hit? He has only topped out at 885 points
-
plus he's got a 10+ walk rate versus Jones in the 4s
-
I think they are, over the last 3 years Bruce has a .231 ISO against Jones .188, and a SLG of 493 against 472, while being a year younger
-
True but are their ceilings all that different? Jones has some serious power.
Eckfords ⚾ on
February 26, 2013 12:50 PM
-
It took Adam Jones until he was 26 to crack 770 points, Jay Bruce did that in each of his 23, 24 and 25 year old seasons. Very different trajectories as hitters...
-
I dunno, OF with a legit shot at 1000 points aren't that common. Is Jones really that much worse than jay Bruce? Bruce seems priced about right.
Eckfords ⚾ on
February 26, 2013 12:21 PM
-
No way Jones goes for $35. I don't see it....or should I say I won't be paying that.
-
Over on Hamilton, way under on Jones
-
Under
Caimans 🐊 on
February 26, 2013 11:46 AM
-
I think the better one is Adam Jones over/under $35
-
Over
-
Over - may or may not be worth it but crazy potential.
Caimans 🐊 on
February 26, 2013 11:08 AM
-
Over/Under: Josh Hamilton - $32
Previous 50 messages |
Next 50 messages