-
Cool graph: http://goo.gl/bc9Ra
-
of course the struggling Minor is shutting out the Yankees...
-
Harper. Again.
-
Seems like Knights had a solid two year game plan last year too which is paying off. Very much still in it
-
Joes have made biggest jump by far. Been contending all season
-
I don't know which names some of those translate to, but I do find it interesting in terms of the fluidity, or lack thereof, as we're getting the 2nd full season for some teams
-
(9) Knights, (10) Joes, (11) my franchise, (12) Crying
-
(5) Only the Lonely (6) Players Playin (7) Chiefs (8) Clark/Addison
-
found the standings: (1) durham, (2) lucky, (3) WAR, (4) Syndicate
-
I think you emailed them to me at some point too, I just have to dig them up. Also the name changes kind of wreak havoc with me
-
I'll see if I can dig up the standing. Not sure if I have them. Maybe they are archived on the site too. Let me check...
-
i finished fourth last year...shocking, i know....
-
I didn't sacrifice this year, the roster I inherited had no chance to compete. I do find it interesting that some folks don't like my roster for 2013, which is great, to each his own
-
Lucky, do you have the standings from last year? I'm curious about which teams last year have vaulted up and vice versa. I seem to remember that the top 4 from last year looked a lot like this year. Interested in what folks are learning re: building
-
you know better than anyone that I am not looking to trade him for peanuts because of the injury
-
true...you do have all of that value down there, but you had to sacrifice a full year at least to get those top level prospects that sill may not be enough to compete for the title in 2013
-
Upton is injured its not as if he just isn't producing. Happy to take him off your hands if you don't believe the same
-
and hey, if this league wants to vote of Trout at $20, that's fine, I've got a ton of value with Stras (32), Sale (9), Shark (2), Bauer (6), Bundy (3), Brett Anderson (3) etc...
-
well I know for a fact that Upton is not producing at the $40 level
-
so in fact, 4 of the last 6 guys picked #1 would easily go north of $40 in today's auction, I don't get how you're saying none of them are producing at that level
-
same for Price, Strasburg and Harper, except that they got voted off and some other values got kept at nice prices
-
I couldn't disagree more Lucky. Upton is borderline untouchable at $40,if our league had been around then he'd be sitting at $15 and the steal of the auction
-
as much as it hurts to agree with Lucky, I love his rule of everyone getting to add a dollar to any given players salary. Trout would probably then have to be kept for $33 which is still a steal assuming everyone allocates their dollar to Trout
-
I agree!!! must have a full year of service time...I guess Trout would still be eligible for the vote off though by year end
-
ooo, can we go back to talking about how much we hate the vote-off rule. Trout should not be eligible.
Caimans 🐊 on
June 12, 2012 5:15 PM
-
I'm paying $15 for name alone
-
talk about short-lived...this is B Rob's swan song
-
BRod leading off and playing 2B tonight!
-
I admit, if the vote off rule didn't exist, it would have a dramatic impact on my willingness to hold prospects, even higher priced ones. However, the rule exists and it adds a nice twist to this league.
-
That's just it. Other than Trout (short-lived because he is a likely vote off candidate), who of those guys is producing $30 of value above their price? None.
-
there are always serviceable players at the ML level, but you have to work and wait to find guys that outproduce their price by $30
-
looking at the recent record of #1s (Price, Upton, Strasburg, Harper) you're hitting north of 50%, and none of them took 5 years to reach the majors
-
I'm happy to carry him for 5 years in the event that he's a superstar, which is what you're playing for with #1 overall picks, if he isn't he'll be cut long before it
-
So you're willing to carry around a $14 Correa in 5 years when he's just hitting the big leagues all while you're scratching and clawing to make it to the top? He'll become expendable, which makes those $4 Denard Spans more attractive than you think...
-
I do think this league pays too much attention to lesser prospects that aren't going to be impactful
-
that's why you have a 40 man roster...
-
Most prospects, even great ones, take several seasons before they are really productive. Therefore, they have be cheap enough to hold on to while a contending team is buildling around them to compete.
-
I said the same thing about Trout @ $20 last year and am eating my words, but the point is that Trout and Harper are exceptions. There's a short list of players who have produced this much this early in their careers.
-
Prospects are only currency if they are priced low enough to make the wait worthwhile. Guys like Correa, Bradley, maybe even D. Brown have virtually no value (today) because they are priced too high for even a rebuilder to wait on the production, if any
-
We agree, which is exactly why I expect you to sell off about half of your prospects this off season. Most of them won't be productive enough fast enough to help you win in 2013
-
and you don't win the league with a bunch of Denard Spans, you need to have a mix of proven production plus players that far exceed their value
-
I don't really understand why you're saying that "landing expensive prospects rarely pays off". What is expensive, and what is paying off? They're currency
-
Both Trout and Harper are exceptional cases though - they were high priced prospects that turned into immediate studs. That rarely, rarely happens, which is why landing expensive prospects rarely pays off because of the wait time before they earn their $
-
as the owner of said $20 Trout for much of His Ottoneu career, I remember the same sentiment - I caught some significant flack for that price. I don't regret it at all - if anything, I definitely regret trading him this offseason.
Caimans 🐊 on
June 12, 2012 3:29 PM
-
$523 is impressive. Probably a record for quite some time (unless Trout goes for $70 next season and is traded at the deadline to someone...)
-
Yep, inflation factored in. I'm bringing back my boys, full squad!
-
Durham's at $523, that is outstanding
-
does that account for inflation of $50-60?
-
& whoever gets voted off.
-
Cutting McCann (love ya, but too expensive), Hunter, Papelbon, Aramis, and Chipper frees up $79 alone. That helps. Still leaves me with a full squad with the exception of a 2nd catcher.
Previous 50 messages |
Next 50 messages