-
I lost Lawrie last year, and he fell off big time this year. Same thing very possible with EE.
Caimans 🐊 on
January 15, 2013 1:59 PM
-
then again - easy to see where I put my value - I've already dumped CC and Josh Johnson at sub $40 this offseason
Caimans 🐊 on
January 15, 2013 1:58 PM
-
I still think Strikes is going to get stuck with some guys he's trying to drive up the prices on. I can assure you I will not have any $60 players, and that probably goes for $50 players as well.
Caimans 🐊 on
January 15, 2013 1:50 PM
-
Eliminating the "vote off" is a big (nice) change. Will make a big difference going forward. It's nice to know "your" guys are your own
-
I'd love to still have my 2 guys: Strasburg and A Jones.
-
Not sure where guys like Desmond, Jones go. How much will Hanley go for? Verlander, Kershaw, Trout may be the only $60 guys
-
Not saying I wouldn't like to own Desmond, I'm just not sure enough about what I'm paying for to really pay big for him.
Eckfords ⚾ on
January 15, 2013 12:23 PM
-
Desmond surprised me. Not as much as Avila in retrospect, though.. (I joined post-arb last season)
-
Second year in a row where the guy voted off my roster is not someone I even remotely want to draft. : )
Eckfords ⚾ on
January 15, 2013 12:03 PM
-
It does if they get VOTED OFF!!!! I'm not bitter.
-
You build a good team by collecting values. That doesn't change year to year.
Eckfords ⚾ on
January 15, 2013 11:44 AM
-
But as one of the more player-poor rosters, I can tell you that a) I need OF help badly, and b) I'm still not going to drop $42 on Adam Jones.
Eckfords ⚾ on
January 15, 2013 11:43 AM
-
The disconnect with the roster projections -- which Trey and I have talked about -- is that he's projecting aggressive cuts when our owners have shown pretty conservative tendencies as far as keeping borderline overpriced players is concerned.
Eckfords ⚾ on
January 15, 2013 11:42 AM
-
According to Lucky's roster estimates, I'm the only poor team.
-
There goes Hanley...
-
I sent the rosters out yesterday; you can see my projections, etc. I may be wrong on my cuts but we'll know pretty clearly after the deadline.
-
My projected cuts were aggressive but I have most teams with $110+. The difference is available roster spots. The teams that have cash but fewer available spots with drive the inflation in my opinion
-
Maybe I haven't spent enough time analyzing everyone's rosters, but I don't see a whole lot of teams that are flush with cash.
-
Not trying to drive up any markets; just stating what I think is going to happen in the "market" after spending weeks looking at the rosters. Cash + Limited Roster Space + Scarcity = Inflation
-
Won't be surprised one bit to see Kershaw, Verlander, and maybe a few others go north of $60. Escalation is going to happen.
-
But talking up inflation does potentially improve the David Price market
-
It's not just arms, either. Teams truly in contention (especially those with nearly full rosters) are going to spend what it takes to get the best player available. There are only so many 1,000+ pt players left.
-
Elite arms have been scarce for 3 years and no pitcher has ever gone for $51
-
Yes, I meant Over, sorry. The inflation factor is simple economics - there are several teams flush with cash with few remaining roster spots. Elite arms are scarce, and the price will rise, by quite a bit possibly.
-
What Trey means by inflation is that he's going to use the fact that his lineup is comprised entirely of cheap prospects to price enforce every half-decent player up for auction.
-
while I expect some inflation, can't imagine spending 1/8 of my budget on any pitcher except maybe Verlander
Caimans 🐊 on
January 15, 2013 10:27 AM
-
Exactly - I'd rather take my chance with lesser pitchers than invest so much of my budget - I think my most expensive starting pitcher was $37 last year
Caimans 🐊 on
January 15, 2013 10:27 AM
-
Yeah I don't care how elite a talent Verlander is, investing $59 in an elbow is never smart.
Eckfords ⚾ on
January 15, 2013 10:18 AM
-
I'm sure you mean the over. I expect inflation, but not the serious inflation some of you think, mostly those who have a bunch of bargains and would love to see inflation.
Caimans 🐊 on
January 15, 2013 10:08 AM
-
I'm taking the Under on Kershaw as well. Continue to believe we will see serious inflation. Felix may look good at $48 when all is said and done.
-
Then I suppose Jeff Samardzija at $4 is like an uber-bargain...?
-
Cliffy Lee at 37 is gonna look like the bargain bin in about two months.
Eckfords ⚾ on
January 15, 2013 9:40 AM
-
DON'T GET MY HOPES UP BY SAYING UNDER
-
Whoa when did that Shields trade happen? Totally missed that.
Eckfords ⚾ on
January 15, 2013 8:46 AM
-
Close to moving Fernando Rodney and possibly Alen Hanson if you want to throw some bids in.
Eckfords ⚾ on
January 15, 2013 8:46 AM
-
$51 sounds about right actually.
Eckfords ⚾ on
January 15, 2013 8:44 AM
-
Over.
Eckfords ⚾ on
January 15, 2013 8:44 AM
-
Under
-
Under
Caimans 🐊 on
January 15, 2013 8:06 AM
-
Auction Over/Under - Clayton Kershaw: $51
-
True. I operate under the assumption that all my players are available at all times. Lots of prospect research this off-season but even I was surprised to hear that about Fried
-
That is Trey's way of saying send me an offer...I am more than willing to move him
-
I was admittedly on the fence about keeping Max Fried at $4. Then I read BA call him the "best LH high school prospect since Kershaw". Yes, big variables in between, but I'm now sold.
-
In other news, I just sent out the current rosters (with projected cuts, etc.). There are some strong teams (on paper). More than ever, I continue to think we will see serious inflation in the auction.
-
I'm not smart enough to follow Nate's genius league breakdown here, but it's a great analysis. Glad to see our league in the top 10. Will be interesting to see where it ends up in 2013.
-
Pardon the interruption - I haven't been and promise I won't start linking to every post, but this one is pretty neat, I think. http://ottoneufan.tumblr.com/post/40523382560/2012-fangraphs-points-league-power-rankings
-
Don't write off starling as is he needs to retire just yet, he has a ton of potential to go along with playing time.
-
I agree. Definitely going for 2013 value. I also still have 9 Quality prospects to build with or trade with. Losing taijuan hurts, but Bradley and Perez are easily replaced value wise, especially this year.
-
For the record, Durham, I think Marte isn't a great fit for this format, either. But it is a present value vs. future value debate, and each side can choose what to value more heavily. It may turn out in 3 years to be a foolish trade, but not now.
-
Agree with Crying completely
Previous 50 messages |
Next 50 messages