F@ndemonium

Members
  • Content Count

    318
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by F@ndemonium

  1. Myself and a fellow owner recently have engaged in a bit of a spat concerning "fair value" (stemming from his offer, and my subsequent counter). We both feel the value the other presented is fairly one-sided. Which offer below would the community consider "fair" value (in a vacuum). 16 Tm/H2H/Points/Dynasty His offer: (his) Joc Pederson, Robbie Ray & Rich Hill for (my) Carlos Carrasco, Jesse Winker, & Joe Ross vs My offer: (my) Carlos Carrasco, Steven Matz, Drew Steckenrider, Luis Oviedo, Rule IV Draft (1.15) for (his) Jack Flaherty, Robbie Ray, Trevor May & Chris Paddack
  2. 16 Team Dynasty/Points/H2H Receive: Javier Baez Aaron Nola Mallex Smith Brent Rooker Gave: Jose Altuve Anthony Rendon Wil Myers Robbie Ray Matthew Boyd Scott Oberg Feedback is welcomed!
  3. While a .250 avg is certainly within the realm of possibility, his 50.9% pull% & 31.5 IFFB% suggest that he would likely require some refinement to his current approach to meet a much higher ceiling (.275) Even so, the current profile is enticing enough to get excited about considering how talent-starved the current fantasy landscape is at the catcher position.
  4. Even if he is a catcher hybrid/utility type player, there is a strong likelihood that he could amass enough starts annually at catcher to retain eligibility. There is talk of him playing some at the keystone and outfield, providing potential for him to even see more regular at bats than traditional backstops. Unless he makes some adjustments at the plate he will struggle to hit for high average, however the combination of power & speed is tantalizing enough to make him worth a roster spot.
  5. Team A for me. The scoring differences between the top and mid-level catchers are too close to make a significant difference. During a championship push, acquiring a top flight catcher should be the final piece to your roster puzzle, but otherwise take the upside value in the interim.
  6. When owning premier talent, such as Rizzo & Bauer, typically the savvy play (if your even wanting to trade them) is by moving each independently (as opposed to a "package offer") The context of your offer or how to accurately evaluate would be dependent on your league size/settings....However in a vacuum it would seem that Rizzo for Dahl, Smith & Whitley isn't terribly far off. With already much depth to your farm, you may want to start leveraging some of those minor leaguers into high upside major league talent. Several of your existing prospects carry helium, but still have many hurdles to clear prior to a debut, so you may want to capitalize on the current market, while mitigating your potential fail rate. GL
  7. On the surface you did well, acquiring the "best" player, however based on roster construction I question how much you truly improved your lineup. Freeman will assumably slot into your util spot, pushing Braun to a regular starting role (yuck) in the outfield. Having Soto in the outfield and Braun at Util (or a different bench bat) gave you more flexibility, plus you lost Tatis in the process. Freeland was a nice sell. I prefer Flaherty moving forward, however I'm not sure you maximized your asset value here. Just my two cents GL
  8. I'd take Turner personally, but argument could be made for Betts. How much time Lindor ultimately misses, and how quick it takes for him to reassert himself into game shape would make me shy away. Reports are that Turner is going to be more aggressive on the base paths this year, which should hypothetically place him atop the leaderboard for stolen bases. He and Betts are premier bats, but having the extra year of control at a relatively decent cost, combined with his production arrow pointing up, is enough to make me lean his direction.
  9. 16 Tm/33 Active/25 Minors/H2H/Points Starting Lineups are: C, 1B, 2B, SS, 3B, LF, CF, RF, Util, Util, SP (x5), RP (x3) Team in sig Team 1: Steven Matz, Jorge Polanco, Matt Barnes & Alek Thomas Team 2: Chris Archer, Elvis Andrus, Ty Buttrey & Xavier Edwards I'm a bigger Matz believer than most (maybe minus PECOTA), and Polanco's second half has me intrigued at the very least. The Redsox don't seem anxious to pay for saves, and despite the hiccups in command, Barnes seems capable of being a solid big league stopper (I also own Brasier which handcuffs likely in-house options). I prefer Edwards to Thomas, but they aren't terrible far off in my valuations & prospects at a non-elite level aren't deal breakers for me. Am I selling too low on Archer or does this sound justifiable? Appreciate all responses.
  10. Jesse Chavez is a low profile name to put on the radar for speculative saves in deeper leagues. Jose LeClerc was speculated to be traded during the off-season, and could still be on the move prior to the trade deadline. Last season, Chavez adjusted his arm angle, which produced an uptick in velocity & greater movement on his fastball. The results were stellar as he posted both career bests in ERA (2.55) & BB/9 . He figures to play a prominent role back end of the Rangers bullpen, and is a LeClerc injury or trade away from more significant value.
  11. Normally evaluation is based on settings, but regardless of format Ray is the more valuable asset IMO. Moncada likely switching to third base doesn't help your squad, already owning Machado. In a points league he is also a negative drain due on the high strikeout numbers. The power/speed combination is intriguing, however until he shows signs of skill maturation I'd steer clear
  12. Team 1 receives: Jose Altuve, Madison Bumgarner, Wil Myers, Kyle Seager, Luis Oviedo & Scott Oberg (Team 1 owns Wade Davis) Team 2 (my team) receives: Javier Baez, Aaron Nola, Mallex Smith, CJ Cron & Brent Rooker Team in sig Points/ H2H/16 Team/58 Total Players (25 minors) Thanks in advance!
  13. Wanted to share from experience, as a LM, what was worked well for our format. "Rule Change Proposal Process" (Hope this provides some positive takeaways for your league) Owners are given the ability to propose changes or introduce innovative concepts for league improvement. They must not only propose a change, but also describe in detail how the change positively impacts THE LEAGUE (not solely themselves individually), context of proposed operation, supporting data, and what pain point the proposal solves. A committee of league appointed owners (3) in addition to the commissioner flesh out proposed ideas, before deciding which are feasible. If outlandish or attempting to drastically alter the league fundamentals, then it never makes it on the ledger. Never good to reinvent the wheel for an established format (which as you mentioned owners took time to build). Once posted for vote, there is a 60% or better approval needed from the league community in order to be implemented. The problem your leagues faces, is that your LM is not really identifying or fixing the route cause, which his the quality of ownership. Simplifying rules does not improve the level of competition, nor solve the problem..."Good" owners will still ultimately be better. As previously mentioned, turning over the "bad ownership" with stronger players, or at least communicating to the weaker folks that they need to put forth greater effort, would seemingly be the first step in repairing the competition levels. If the vast majority feel that they need rules to be simplified to allow them to compete, than perhaps that platform isn't necessarily a good fit for yourself, or the other strong owners. Altering the rules to appease the weaker folks will only end with the stronger owners eventually walking away.
  14. Based on the lineup & rotation of your counterpart, one has to wonder if they are asleep at the wheel or perhaps just have an extremely strong minor league system (if farm exists)? Typically, from my experience, its a losing proposition to be on the "4" part portion of a four-for-one trade. In the context of team need I suppose your peer should at last entertain that offer. Hampson, McNeil & Wood are solid assets to own, though playing time of the two two-baggers and injury concerns for the latter are risk factors that a savvy adversary would weigh. Wood's velocity decline last season is glaring, as is the hard hit rate ascension to a career worst 37.9% and the less ideal pitching environment he faces this season. Personally speaking, I'd need less risk & higher ceiling secondary pieces if I'm moving Altuve (and receiving Ozuna as the centerpiece of the return) The offer is not insulting, however I would not be anxious to accept if on the receiving end. A quarter & three Nickels doesn't equal a dollar
  15. I would hesitate making this move personally. Hypothetically you could acquire a piece greater than what the opposing owner would likely include to bridge the gap with the saved capital, as similarly to yourself, most would view these arms on relatively the same tier. The NL East is, dare I say, a tougher environment on arms than even the once feared AL East this season. Even more-so if Harper or Machado signs with the Phils. The Yankees are also a better run producing team than the Amazins', so if "wins" are incentivized then advantage Severino again. Scoring & contract length comes into play as well but overall the Severino deal seems like much better value here. What an additional piece would look like depends on your teams roster construction & team need, but for myself, it would have to exceed the type of player that the $30 lost team salary would net. GL
  16. Below are some pointers to share RE: Prospects Snag high ceiling talent wherever you can. Often the players closer to debuting will be selected first, however high ceiling players that are farther away carry a fair amount of helium and/or trade value, so make them priority. I tend to use prospects as assets or trade chips to get larger deals completed, as its easy to replenish farm systems with talent emerging annually. Don't navigate away from moving farm talent. Don't hesitate to also snag players closer to the show who may offer lower ceiling. Less risk with a shorter path to value. Not every player has to be a "stud" Many former high profile talent ultimately land in this bucket if they hit a stumbling block during their ascension into the higher minors. Take advantage of the lessened hype, and obtain those who will produce statistically sooner rather than later. Also, assume failure among your prospects. Be realistic in acknowledging that all your minor leaguers will not reach their optimum ceiling. Overvaluing prospects is often a losing proposition. RE: MLB The better path taken during a start-up is to have a strong mix of youth and veteran talent, however if your peers drastically reach on younger talent, then have no reservations about snagging the highly productive 30 and above crowd, and accelerate a path toward being your leagues inaugural champion. Its more important to be "Good" than "Youthful". Don't have visions of constructing a team to dominate for the next decade of every star that is 25 & under. Too many variables season-to-season. Streamline a gameplan, with a championship in focus, and stick to it. Best of luck to both you and your new league
  17. Depends on your team direction and the scoring settings. If your rebuilding, then certainly explore this. If your looking to compete this season than it would be a "pass". Points league is probably a pass regardless of direction as well. So a few variables to consider. In a vacuum, Nola carries more value since he produces the immediate return. That puts you in the driver season of negotiations. Prospects fail, even the best of them, so asking for surplus prospect value (Rodgers, Franco, Kiriloff) is justifiable. Assuming that your league has a balanced scoring system, I would try to acquire a high level pitching prospect or young arm with upside at the MLB level as the third piece, while forfeiting one of the sticks (i.e. Rodgers). Keeps your positions more balanced, and gives you a potential replacement for the lost Nola value. GL
  18. I'd be happy with adding any of the following, in the order below: 1) Garcia (Wsh): Advanced beyond his years...More power to come as he matures. Will fill the stat sheet nicely in his hay-day. 2) Larnach: The jewel of last years draft class. Sweet southpaw swing that generates easy plus power. Future fantasy stud that performed well at multiple levels during '18 pro debut 3) Lavigne: Power hitting prospect with eyes on Coors is always worth putting on the radar, and you may have a void (or Voit) at 1B. Friendly offensive environment of the Pioneer League inflated his numbers some, but his wRC+ ranked second among the leagues qualified hitters. 4) Edwards: Makes solid contact, has a stellar eye (more walks than strikeouts) and can flat out fly on the base paths. Not likely to ever hit for much power, but ultimately we can dream on a .290 average, 10-12 home runs and 50 SB in a perfect world. 5) Diaz: Solid, but not spectacular skill set. 20 HR upside, an above average BA, and a few stolen bases. Ranked higher than most due to proximity to the SHOW. Will contribute this season. GL with your decision!
  19. If your willing to part ways with Vlad, it would behoove you to communicate his availability to entire league before settling on any one deal. The helium and trade market that he currently demands is outrageous (almost comical) and will almost certainly create a bidding war among several owners. Your also in the drivers seat if you emphatically believe that you will not be competing till next year. No reason to accelerate any negotiations, since your teams clock is 2020. Plenty of time to field and identify the best offer. I'm with @parrothead in that you should shoot for the stars. While Machado is certainly a favorable return , and one that you may ultimately circle back to.... play the field before being quick to hit accept with such a coveted asset. It will also allow you to (hopefully) see where Machado lands so you can make a more educated decision in the end! GL
  20. For a points league, Albies offers significant value (power/speed blend), however the volume of secondary assets your giving up here maybe a bit excessive. Don't wanna sell those complimentary pieces short. Decision is dependent on roster construction, but if you could complete the deal while holding O'Hearn and/or Barreto then I would proceed forward. Myers, Honeywell and Castro for Albies & Manning seems closer to fair market given Albies second half struggles. While you don't want to let small parts hold a deal up (which I consider O'Hearn & Barreto to be), I'd probably inquire about subtracting a piece from your side or adding a piece on the other side prior prior to green lighting this.
  21. I concur. Bregman is the play here. Not as detrimental to your cap & will contribute with more regularity. Also factor in that the NL East is an extremely strong hitting division, with the infusion of talent on the Phillies (furthermore if they sign one of the "big 2"), Nationals and Braves. I don't see deGrom replicating last years production. Take the high profile bat, at the cheaper price point!
  22. With the Phillies having eyes on contending, and Miami in an obvious rebuild, with little in the pipeline in terms of front-line starting pitching....todays trade would seemingly accelerate his clock to the majors. Questions about the elbow still persist, and I fear TJ could be in the not-so-distant future which clouds future speculation, however its encouraging that he passed the physical today. If he proves healthy, then its quite the haul for the "Fish" today!
  23. ^ I agree....Its certainly more justified in deeper formats (was thinking more 14+), however its typically never a good sign if your the one giving up the top three assets in a deal regardless of league size.
  24. Aside from firmly grasping the settings, theres also something to be said about identifying the personalities of your peer group to determine team direction. Through networking/communicating with fellow league mates you can identify what players/positions are over/under valued, and proceed accordingly. Also nice to build rapport to assist in future trade negotiations. As previous contributors mentioned, the psychology in a dynasty is often (to a fault) synonymous with placing surplus value on youth. “Contenders” & “Rebuilders” will often covet similar players, age 27 or below, which saturates the market, and creates greater acquisition value opportunities within veteran talent. Being north of 30 years old is not a death sentence….Don’t be afraid to take the elder statesman to accelerate your clock towards capturing a league championship. At least one owner in every dynasty league tends to put meteoric value on acquiring the “next big thing”, so capitalize off that inflation. Players will often carry more helium as a minor leaguer, than what they ultimately materialize into at the professional level. If you own a coveted prospect, explore trade options to optimize value. The minor league pool is bottomless. There will always be opportunity to backfill if you do your due diligence. Hope this helps!
  25. Your not joking, the Bregman team is in pretty rough shape....keeping Newcomb...eww I'd favor the Bregman side, but I'd be inclined to think that Team 2 could afford to throw in one or two of their minor leaguers to offset the difference (considering they can only keep 3). Fisher shouldn't be near keeper status in a keep 3 farm league. A deal of McKenzie, Kieboom, Hoskins & Chapman for Bregman would certainly be equal out value on both sides. Just hope that your not Team 1! LOL