Archive for January, 2009

A Look at NL Centerfield Prospects

No Comments
January 30th, 2009 by Mays
Categories: Worth Reading

You may not have noticed, but a cluster of highly-ranked centerfield prospects has formed in the upper minors, coincidentally all with National League teams. These are players who are expected to arrive in the bigs sometime in 2009, although they might not make much of a fantasy impact this year.

Since judging prospects for fantasy requires a bit of research, let’s take a look at what’s being said about each of Dexter Fowler, Cameron Maybin, Andrew McCutchen, and Colby Rasmus. The dollar values are what I get from the CHONE projections in the Price Guide for a standard NL league, assuming everyone qualified in the OF.

Dexter Fowler $8
Fowler’s high standing comes not just from his raw abilities, but also from CHONE recognizing a favorable park situation. Despite the best projection of the bunch, he seems to still be flying under the radar a bit.

Is Dexter Fowler A Sleeper? (Crooked Pitch)
Prospects in Proper Context, Pt. 4: AA Texas League (FanGraphs Fantasy Baseball)

Cameron Maybin $1
He got a lot of attention last year as part of the package that brought Miguel Cabrera and Dontrelle Willis to Detroit. Not much happened in 2008, but there’s still plenty of hype for 2009:

A look at Cameron Maybin (Rotoprofessor)
Cameron Maybin 2009 (The Waiver Wire)
Prospects in Proper Context, Pt. 5: AA Southern League (FanGraphs Fantasy Baseball)
Minor League Talents – Cameron Maybin (Roto Savants)
Maybin? Maybe Not. (FanGraphs Fantasy Baseball)
Cameron Maybin, Keeper (Razzball)

Andrew McCutchen $0
With Nate McLouth’s breakout in 2008, the Pirates are now in the situation of having a “Gold Glove” CF blocking one of their top prospects. That might give McCutchen a little more time in the minors until they decide to put one of them in a corner.

Andrew McCutchen, 2009 Fantasy Outlook (Razzball)
What to Make of McCutchen (FanGraphs Fantasy Baseball)
All Or Nothing For Andrew McCutchen (Crooked Pitch)
Minor League Talents – Andrew McCutchen (Roto Savants)

Colby Rasmus -$2
Rasmus has to deal with an outfield crowded with decent-ish players in St. Louis. He didn’t impress in AAA last year, but still has a high ceiling.

Prospect Watch: Colby Rasmus (Rotoprofessor)
Colby Rasmus, 2009 Fantasy Outlook (Razzball)
Making Room For Colby (FanGraphs Fantasy Baseball)
Minor League Talents – Colby Rasmus (Roto Savants)

Fantasy Baseball Magazine Roundup

1 Comment
January 29th, 2009 by Mays
Categories: Reviews

Yes, fantasy baseball magazines, the item that fantasy players love to hate. Magazines have become the symbol of the fantasy-ignorant — the staple of the unprepared.

And yet, despite their poor reputation, fantasy magazines seem to be selling quite well: There’s apparently enough of a market for fantasy mags to support a half dozen different publications. I realize that there are plenty of casual fantasy fans out there to profit from, but I suspect that there are quite a few magazines sold to the “magazine-haters” as well.

I’ve heard your excuses:

“Well, I only buy it because there’s nothing else to read in the winter.”

“I only get it to give me something to read ‘away from my computer.’”

Sure you do. The truth is, while magazines are admittedly horribly out of date by April, most of them are actually pretty good at what they do. The depth of coverage is not always the best, but I don’t think that’s their point. Much of the content is contributed by high-quality writers, and is, in my opinion at least, pretty high quality.

So for those of us who can appreciate the magazines for what they offer, let’s take a look at what’s available. When I checked at my local bookstore, I found these three magazines on the rack:

The Fantasy Baseball Guide ($6.99)
The Fantasy Baseball Guide is chiefly the work of Peter “Rotoman” Kreutzer, and that alone has been enough to get me to buy it in the past. It isn’t as flashy as other magazines–don’t expect glossy pages and fancy layouts–but I think the content is top notch.

However, I hadn’t really noticed until I compared it directly to other publications, but the Guide doesn’t have nearly the features of other magazines. Some of those features are just fluff, but some of them can be useful. It is a little cheaper than other mags, so I’d weigh the price in with how interested you are in sleeper/bust list or mock auctions.

Another weakness of the Guide is that it only has 4×4 dollar values. I’m sure a lot of leagues out there are still doing 4×4, but it doesn’t seem to be that common anymore. Maybe their wanting to establish their old-school credentials, but I’d think 5×5 would be pretty easy to add in.

Fanball ($7.99)
Of the three magazines I looked at, Fanball clearly had the best range of features. In addition to the standard player stats and handful of articles, Fanball’s magazine had a mock auction, a mixed-league mock draft, and AL-only and NL-only mock drafts.* There were dollar value cheat sheets for several league configurations. Team-by-team breakdowns, sleepers, busts,

*The latter two didn’t seem that helpful to me… There is just too much that is unknown in November (e.g. free agents) for an NL-only or AL-only draft to make sense: What good is an AL-only draft that doesn’t take Sabathia or Teixeira?

Those familiar with The Bull Pen forums will recognize the work of Jason Collette, whose contributions here are solid. In fact, the writers overall seem like a respectable crew.

Of the magazines I looked at, the Fanball publication would probably get my vote for favorite.

Lindy’s Fantasy Baseball ($7.99)

By the time I got to my third (and final) magazine, I’m starting to see just how similar the magazines are. While I think it can be worthwhile to pick up a magazine, I don’t see much point of getting more than that.

One unique feature of Lindy’s that caught my eye was an article by Yahoo’s Andy Behrens discussing “Roster Churn.” It’s a look at which players were most likely to end up on winning teams last year; definitely worth reading.

Otherwise, Fanball’s fuller feature set (and equal price) would make me lean towards that one instead of Lindy’s.


I’ll keep checking around town in the next couple of months to see if I come across any other magazines. Right now Fanball’s magazine is the best I’ve seen.

Why I Never Veto Trades

12 Comments
January 28th, 2009 by Mays
Categories: Trading

What would you do if someone in you noticed the following trade pending in one of your leagues:

The Flowering Barnacles trade Jimmy Rollins to the Anchorage Funnybones for Khalil Greene.

Let’s say your league requires a majority of owners to vote against a trade for it to be vetoed. Do you vote against this trade?

Obviously, it looks completely lopsided. A team is trading a clear top-tier player for a guy with five straight mediocre seasons under his belt. Both are SS, so there aren’t even any positional considerations (like one team trading from his surplus). It’s the most far-fetched example I can think of (that maintains at least a hint of plausibility), and yet I still don’t think I could bring myself to vote against it.

The reason is simple: I cannot be sure that Khalil Greene will be any worse than Jimmy Rollins in 2009. I know what they have done in the past, but, for next year, your guess is as good as mine. It is completely possible that Rollins will have an awful year, and Greene establishes himself as a first-round talent.

Every year there are early-round picks who end up being worth nothing at all, typically due to injury but not always. And every year there are undrafted players who launch themselves into the upper echelon. At this time last year, would you veto a trade of David Ortiz for Ryan Ludwick?

What if the guy who looks like he’s getting ripped off knows something I don’t? (It wouldn’t be the first time.) Maybe the guy who trades Rollins for Greene has a hunch that leaving Petco is just the change Greene needs to establish himself as an elite slugger. Maybe he has some inside info about Rollins’s ankle.

Right now everyone is caught up in the minutiae of ranking: “Should Rollins be ranked 9th or 10th?” In reality, either 9th or 10th could end up being way off; that’s just the nature of an unpredictable game.

If you vote against a trade because you think it is unfair, I think you are presuming to know much more than you really do.

Please Stop Discussing Nelson Cruz

5 Comments
January 27th, 2009 by Mays
Categories: Sleepers

If I could choose one player who would never be discussed again on a fantasy site, my request would be Nelson Cruz. It sickens me to even write the name.

Now, don’t mistake this as a fear of having my sleepers exposed. No, the nausea I feel just comes from hearing Cruz discussed…ad nauseum.

So if you are thinking about writing about Nelson Cruz, let me remind you: Everyone else has already written about him. In case you missed it, there was at least:

Has Nelson Cruz Broken His Quad-A Ceiling (Fangraphs)
Your #1 Sleeper (RotoAuthority)
Nelson Cruz to bat clean-up (Rotoprofessor)
Sleepers Quickly Becoming Overrated (Roto Savants)
Player Profile: Nelson Cruz (FantasyPros911)
Shall We Discuss Nelson Cruz One More Time (Roto Savants)
Nelson Cruz 2009 (The Waiver Wire)

The topic is exhausted. These writers have covered every angle of the situation, and covered them multiple times. I don’t think there is anything unique left to contribute.

So, please; everyone has heard enough. Nelson Cruz is simply not a sleeper.

(And let’s hope that I don’t have to go through this again in a couple of weeks for Pablo Sandoval…)

Worth Reading: Mastersball

No Comments
January 23rd, 2009 by Mays
Categories: Worth Reading

I work pretty hard to keep abreast of what’s happening in the fantasy baseball community. I read through dozens of blog postings everyday. I check out the RotoJunkie Bull Pen and the Fantasy Baseball Cafe Forums. But there’s enough going on that it’s not surprising if I miss something from time to time.

So, until I saw a post at Advanced Fantasy Baseball this week, I had no idea that Mastersball.com had returned.

For those of you who aren’t familiar with it, Mastersball was a great fantasy baseball site with an active, intelligent forum. I say it was a great site, because a while back it became FantasyBaseball.com, which for some reason just wasn’t quite as good. When the free forums moved, I pretty much stopped checking. (For what it’s worth, Todd Zola gives a full account.)

Now the Mastersball forums are back, and Todd has been posting his thoughts on a new blog. His blog is focused on fantasy strategy — obviously one of my interests as well.

One last item: I seem to remember an archive of free article at the old Mastersball that was a treasure trove of valuable information…. I don’t know if it has been locked up somewhere as premium content, but I would love to see some of that find the light of day again.

Examining the 70/30 Split

7 Comments
January 22nd, 2009 by Mays
Categories: Price Guide, Theory

A long-standing rule of thumb for fantasy baseball auctions is that a team should optimally spend 70% of their money on hitters and the remaining 30% on pitchers.

Actually, it’s not always described as a 70/30 split. Some people think it’s closer to 67/33, some say 65/35. But I think everyone recognizes the line is somewhere around there.

Let’s examine this rule with regard to the Price Guide:

When the Price Guide assigns dollar values, it does so without respect to whether a player is a hitter or a pitcher. There is no set allocation between hitters and pitchers. All it does is look at the player’s value as a percentage of the total amount of value among all drafted players, and assigns that player the same percentage of the total draft dollars. It doesn’t matter if that player is a hitter or a pitcher.

So, using a method that doesn’t differentiate between hitters and pitchers, what does the split end up being? Fortunately, when the Price Guide displays its dollar values, it also displays how the money was distributed between hitters and pitchers. Based on the 2008 final stats, it will come up with these splits for standard rotisserie leagues:

Mixed rotisserie: 70/30
AL-only rotisserie: 72/28
NL-only rotisserie: 72/28

That looks to me like it passes the smell test. And remember, we arrived at those numbers without considering any of the other explanations for the 70/30 split (pitcher riskiness or anything else). We just distributed the dollars evenly to all players, and the numbers fall perfectly in line with what fantasy players expect.

ESPN and Yahoo
Now notice how the split ends up for 2008 Yahoo and ESPN default leagues:

Yahoo: 64/36
ESPN: 64/36

The Price Guide recommends spending more on pitchers in these leagues. Why is that? The main factor is that these leagues draft fewer hitters than a traditional rotisserie league. Whereas the traditional league drafts 1.56 hitters for every pitcher (14/9), Yahoo takes only 1.29 hitters per pitcher and ESPN 1.22. If there are relatively fewer hitters taken, it makes sense that more money should be spent on pitchers.

So keep this in mind if your fantasy auction is more like an ESPN or Yahoo league: It’s OK to allocate more money to pitchers than usual. The Price Guide should point you towards the optimal amount.

Projections
The numbers above are all based on the final stats for 2008. But for 2009, we’re more interested in what the split is for the projections. Let’s see what these splits look like with the CHONE projections:

Mixed rotisserie: 66/34
AL-only rotisserie: 65/35
NL-only rotisserie: 68/32
Yahoo: 61/39
ESPN: 60/40

Across the board, the Price Guide suggests allocating more money to pitchers. About 4% of draft dollars shifts from hitting to pitching on average.

Now this, I think, is a little surprising. Pitchers are supposed to be unpredictable, which traditionally means that you should spend less on them. But the projections factor in the risk associated with pitchers, and the Price Guide suggests that you should spend even more on them.

Here’s what I think is happening: Pitchers as a whole are less predictable, and the unpredictability leads to the pitchers being projected more conservatively than hitters.

But that is not true for all pitchers. There are a few who have consistently shown themselves to be very good. As we become less confident in their peers, these pitchers become more valuable, because we are more certain of what they can give us.

So using projections, the Price Guide recommends that you take about 4% of what hitters will earn, and instead allocate it to the top-tier pitchers. That’s not a big shift–only about $9 per team. And it isn’t spread across all pitchers, just the top 15 or so (Santana, Sabathia, Peavy, Haren, Kazmir, etc.).

Notice that the average rotisserie league split from the Price Guide is now 66/34, which is still in the ballpark of 70/30. Just keep in mind that the split for your league can vary from that quite a bit. If you are interested in what the split is for your league, just try it out on the Price Guide.

Keeping Better Players

11 Comments
January 21st, 2009 by Mays
Categories: Keepers, Strategy

Should you favor keeping better players, even if they represent a smaller savings? This issue came up in the comments on “How Do You Decide On Keepers?” and I want to spend some time addressing it.

Let’s stick with the Justin Morneau example from last time–a $20 player who can be kept at $14. And let’s pretend that we also have David Wright available at $42–the exact amount that what we have him projected at. We can either keep Morneau and save $6 or lock up Wright for no savings.

Which one of those would you keep?

Wright is definitely the better player, and our team is better with Wright than with Morneau. But this isn’t actually an either/or situation, because our final team isn’t based just on who we keep. Keeping Morneau doesn’t prevent us from drafting Wright, and keeping Wright doesn’t preclude drafting Morneau.

So we are concerned not just with how much our keepers are worth, but also with the value of players we can acquire at the draft if we kept certain players.

If we keep Morneau and draft Wright for $42, we have saved $6 overall. If we keep Wright at $42 and draft Morneau for $20, we haven’t saved anything. Keeping Morneau seems to be the better deal.

Inflation
That ignores inflation, though. Keeping players always creates inflation, and inflation has a greater effect on the top-tier players (see “Should Inflation Affect Your Keeper Choices?“). Thinking back to high school algebra, we can solve a simple equation to find the point where inflation makes keeping Wright or keeping Morneau equal propositions (i.e. the cross-over point):

$42x + $14 = $20x + $42
$22x = $28
x = 1.27

So if inflation is 27%:

We can keep Morneau at $14 and draft Wright for $53 ($42 * 1.27), paying $67 for $62 of value.

Or we can keep Wright at $42 and pay $25 for Morneau ($20 * 1.27), also paying $67 for the same $62 value.

If inflation is any amount above 27%, Wright is the better deal, even if he isn’t kept below value. But any amount below 27% favors Morneau.

The Bottom Line
I doubt most leagues have 27% inflation, except for ones that lets teams keep players for extremely long time periods at their original prices. (I’m picturing a league where Hanley Ramirez and Johan Santana are $1 keepers…) If that’s the case, then it’s unlikely that you are thinking about keeping Wright at $42.

I’m guessing that inflation in the typical keeper league is closer to 10-15%. At that rate, I think Morneau is still the easy choice.

Review: Baseball Forecaster 2009

1 Comment
January 20th, 2009 by Mays
Categories: Reviews

Once upon a time, when rotisserie baseball involved adding up stats from newspapers, books were the main source of fantasy advice. John Benson, Alex Patton, Ron Shandler, and others produced annual works that disseminated their strategies, projections, and opinions to the world.

Ron Shandler's Baseball Forecaster 2009

With the web, a new (and better) fantasy medium has emerged, and now there are hundreds of sites that do (or try do to) what the books did. Most of the books have disappeared, but Shandler’s Baseball Forecaster still endures, releasing its 23rd edition this year.

With over 270 pages, Ron Shandler’s Baseball Forecaster 2009 looks impressive. However, keep in mind that the player stats/projections make up about 80% of the book. Take away those and some pages of filler (Shandler’s been pushing “Quintinning” for years and still no one cares), and you’re left with about 20 pages of actual content. Seriously.

Those 20 pages are pretty good, though. I think RIMA, Total Control Drafting, and Portfolio3 are interesting and unique ideas, and I don’t know anywhere else that discusses them.

However, reading Baseball Forecaster is a little like playing Madden Football. Whenever you buy the latest edition, it kind of reminds you of the previous edition, except with updated players. As you get into it, you discover that there’s a lot more that’s the same than there is that’s different. If you’ve bought a copy of Baseball Forecaster in the past few years, a lot of the information in the 2009 edition will look very familiar.

My Recommendation: I realize that a lot of people buy the Forecaster purely for the projections. And that’s fine, because I think the projections are pretty good.

However, if you are wanting anything more than a $25 book of projections, I’d only buy Baseball Forecaster if you haven’t bought a copy in the last five years or so. The 2009 content is good, but very similar to previous years.

How Do You Decide on Keepers?

5 Comments
January 19th, 2009 by Mays
Categories: Keepers, Strategy

Let’s suppose that you have Adrian Beltre available to be kept at $5 and Justin Morneau at $14. Using CHONE’s projections in the Price Guide, those players would be worth $10 and $20 respectively in 2009. (For the moment, we’re assuming that both players have an equal probability of meeting their projections.) If you can only keep one, which player do you keep?

Deciding on keepers involves comparing two things: how much a player costs to keep and how much we expect that player to be worth. The player’s keeper cost will be determined by our league’s rules. The player’s expected value will come from our projections.

So for our two players, which one is the better deal?

From one perspective, keeping Morneau saves you $6 of value ($20 – $14) and keeping Beltre nets an extra $5 ($10 – $5). That would favor Morneau.

On the other hand, Beltre’s price represents a 50% savings ($5 / $10), while Morneau only saves you 30% ($6 / $20). Advantage Beltre.

Keep in mind that the goal of the draft is to walk out having accumulated the most value with the $260 you have to work with. Every time you draft a player below what they are worth, you are allowing yourself to get more than $260 worth of talent.

Since the goal is to draft as much value as possible, I think I would go with Morneau here. If you keep him, and then get no bargains at the draft (i.e. your remaining $246 gets your exactly $246 worth of players) you will end up with $266 of value. Beltre in the same situation will give you a slightly lower total of $265.

Given the prices and projections, whom would you choose?

Projections Now Editable

9 Comments
January 18th, 2009 by Mays
Categories: Price Guide, Site News

Just a note to say that I’ve updated the Price Guide with some of the enhancements I had mentioned earlier:

Keepers
Now you can mark keepers in the Price Guide. Enter the prices that players are kept at and the inflation rate is automatically calculated. All of the remaining prices are adjusted to account for inflation.

Editable stats
Do you disagree with what is projected for a player? Now you can edit the projected stats for any player. When you save your changes, the dollar values are rebuilt.

Please let me know if you notice any problems.