bogfella

Pitcher Value Touts

Recommended Posts

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree with every single one of these. Clay is a good young pitcher, but he will be drafted for last year's numbers, and frankly, he won't deliver even close to those. Not with that K-Rate.

As I mentioned earlier, I don't dislike Sanchez's value. But, this is the + I probably disagree most. He has a great K-Rate and I am a total sucker for high-K pitchers. However, his FIP was right in line with his career average last year, and yet this was his best ERA yet. By far. He walked 4 and a half guys per nine innings last year. Look for that WHIP and ERA to do some major regression. He will have a good K-Rate but look for an ERA more around 4.

I love Hellickson. I am a Rays fanboy and I have a mancrush on Hellickson. But he will be overvalued this year. Guaranteed. Think Brett Anderson last year.

I also disagree on Hamels. He had a K-Rate over 9 last year, he has had a FIP under 4 for 5 straight years, and most notably.......he is the FOURTH STARTER on his team. You realize what kind of goobers he will be facing? He will definitely improve on those 12 wins.

Thanks Bogfella for responding about Scherzer and Morrow. And yes, it was Dustin McGowan. I got confused haha.

I'm nowhere near a pitching expert but I guess I'll give my own +'s and -'s

+ Clay Buchholz - It seems as though his season last year has been completely ignored due to his lack of K's. 17-7 with a 2.33 ERA and yet I see him ranked around John Danks, Brett Anderson, CJ Wilson, Josh Beckett, Phil Hughes, Brett Myers, Hiroki Kuroda rather than the top tier pitchers. What gives? I know he only had 120 Ks but I'm sure he can improve on that. Plus, he's on the Red Sox and he has the potential to win 20-22 games if plays somewhat like he did last year.

+ Gavin Floyd - Ranked near Ian Kennedy, Edwin Jackson, and James McDonald, Floyd had two or three fantastic months last season yet, like Buchholz, he's fairly lower than he should be considering his hot streak last year. I know there's plenty of reason to believe he just can't be consistent, but you never know, right?

+ Jeremy Hellickson - He came in last year as a starter and gave up only 6 runs and had 25 Ks in 26 innings. I'm very happy his stint in the bullpen shot up his ERA.

+ Jonathan Sanchez - Just a gut feeling he'll surprise and improve upon last season (his win total, I mean, and then have a similar ERA, etc.)

- Cole Hamels - Now the 3rd or 4th pitcher and I'm not sure he'll care to perform like an ace. Speaking as a Phillies fan. One of Oswalt or Hamels will disappoint and I think it'll be Hamels.

- Homer Bailey - He performed well again in September for the second time in two years but I'm having a hard time believing in him.

Edited by floridamach1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, but I respectfully disagree with every single one of these. Clay is a good young pitcher, but he will be drafted for last year's numbers, and frankly, he won't deliver even close to those. Not with that K-Rate.

As I mentioned earlier, I don't dislike Sanchez's value. But, this is the + I probably disagree most. He has a great K-Rate and I am a total sucker for high-K pitchers. However, his FIP was right in line with his career average last year, and yet this was his best ERA yet. By far. He walked 4 and a half guys per inning last year. Look for that WHIP and ERA to do some major regression. He will have a good K-Rate but look for an ERA more around 4.

I love Hellickson. I am a Rays fanboy and I have a mancrush on Hellickson. But he will be overvalued this year. Guaranteed. Think Brett Anderson last year.

I also disagree on Hamels. He had a K-Rate over 9 last year, he has had a FIP under 4 for 5 straight years, and most notably.......he is the FOURTH STARTER on his team. You realize what kind of goobers he will be facing? He will definitely improve on those 12 wins.

Wow, I feel small haha. Thinking about it, you're right with each evaluation. I slightly disagree about Hellickson and I think he could be one of those pitchers that just come in and dominate right away... I'm going to try not to share my opinion on pitchers from now on haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry, but I respectfully disagree with every single one of these. Clay is a good young pitcher, but he will be drafted for last year's numbers, and frankly, he won't deliver even close to those. Not with that K-Rate.

As I mentioned earlier, I don't dislike Sanchez's value. But, this is the + I probably disagree most. He has a great K-Rate and I am a total sucker for high-K pitchers. However, his FIP was right in line with his career average last year, and yet this was his best ERA yet. By far. He walked 4 and a half guys per nine innings last year. Look for that WHIP and ERA to do some major regression. He will have a good K-Rate but look for an ERA more around 4.

I love Hellickson. I am a Rays fanboy and I have a mancrush on Hellickson. But he will be overvalued this year. Guaranteed. Think Brett Anderson last year.

I also disagree on Hamels. He had a K-Rate over 9 last year, he has had a FIP under 4 for 5 straight years, and most notably.......he is the FOURTH STARTER on his team. You realize what kind of goobers he will be facing? He will definitely improve on those 12 wins.

I agree on the points about Buchholz & Hellboy being overvalued, and I think Buchholz will likely be somewhere around a top 30-35 pitcher - but he's going to be drafted as a top 20 SP (although it's finally starting to head down), so there's little value to be had. Both will be great long-term plays (as Buchholz's progression is coming, and Hellboy is just starting at the MLB level with great tools & makeup), but the redraft ADP so far is killing their value for 2011.

Re: Hamels, I was down on him to start 2010 value-wise, until he developed a 3rd pitch. Well, he did a good job of that, and also found more velocity (which was unexpected). I do think he's going to be undervalued slightly, but I don't put as much stock into the 1st vs. 4th starter angle, for one simple reason - other than the first couple weeks of the season, and then the first 10 days or so after the All-Star Break (when teams reset their rotations), many teams are not in sync rotation-wise. Because of different days off, pitchers being pushed back, being the Opening Day starter might mean you face the other team's ace 9-10x - but it's not like a playoff setting, where #4's face #4's, etc.

I do think people look too hard at W's and #'s beyond a pitcher's control, so guys like Hamels & Tommy Hanson are going to be undervalued somewhat - but because they play for contenders, that nudges them up, and negates some of the difference. I just don't put as much stock into the #1, #2, #3, #4 slotting. I do think #5 makes a difference - but because of the risk of skipped starts and being pushed back from a 2-start week into a 1-start week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PhilaFanBoy- Disagreement is what this whole thing is about B) Don't be afraid to make your opinions.

RRF- Agreed on the mismatching of starters for the most part, and Hamels is still good enough where I am sure he will face Aces from time to time, but my point is that a team is more likely to use their Aces against another team's Ace, whenever possible. For example, the Marlins are more likely to throw JJ or Nolasco out there than Anibal Sanchez, if at all possible, against Lee, Halladay or Oswalt. Thus, it is more likely, given that scenario, that Hamels gets Nate Robertson, which is pretty good for his odds of a win.

That being said, I agree that wins are overrated. However, it gives CC and Hughes a lot more value to have nearly 20 wins (not that their other stats weren't useful). I personally play in QS leagues almost exclusively. I think QS are still a lousy indicator sometimes because it amounts to a 4.50 ERA, but that's besides the point. Sure, wins are over-valued in their own right, but if it's a Cat. in your league, ya gotta chase it.

But, back to Hamels, I do believe he is a great value. He is being drafted as barely a top 20 SP, if that, and I think he will match that mark. I wouldn't be surprised to see Oswalt surprise some people and fall off a little bit. His K-Rate was a little inflated last year. But he and Hamels are definitely under-valued in the shadows of Halladay and Lee. The Phillies have a legitimate shot of having 4 Top-20 SP which is unreal.

As for Hell-Boy, I love his stuff. His control is already elite for someone his age, he strikes out a batter per inning. These are great. The only thing that may hold his value at a decent level is his struggle in the bullpen last year. Otherwise, we could see a Daniel Hudson situation, where the guy is a huge sleeper and he goes wayyy too early for my taste.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree on the points about Buchholz & Hellboy being overvalued, and I think Buchholz will likely be somewhere around a top 30-35 pitcher - but he's going to be drafted as a top 20 SP (although it's finally starting to head down), so there's little value to be had. Both will be great long-term plays (as Buchholz's progression is coming, and Hellboy is just starting at the MLB level with great tools & makeup), but the redraft ADP so far is killing their value for 2011.

Re: Hamels, I was down on him to start 2010 value-wise, until he developed a 3rd pitch. Well, he did a good job of that, and also found more velocity (which was unexpected). I do think he's going to be undervalued slightly, but I don't put as much stock into the 1st vs. 4th starter angle, for one simple reason - other than the first couple weeks of the season, and then the first 10 days or so after the All-Star Break (when teams reset their rotations), many teams are not in sync rotation-wise. Because of different days off, pitchers being pushed back, being the Opening Day starter might mean you face the other team's ace 9-10x - but it's not like a playoff setting, where #4's face #4's, etc.

I do think people look too hard at W's and #'s beyond a pitcher's control, so guys like Hamels & Tommy Hanson are going to be undervalued somewhat - but because they play for contenders, that nudges them up, and negates some of the difference. I just don't put as much stock into the #1, #2, #3, #4 slotting. I do think #5 makes a difference - because of the risk of skipped starts and being pushed back from a 2-start week into a 1-start week.

Maybe it would be a good idea to mention some of my evaluation standards so everyone knows for certain what I am referring to when I mention a #1 or #5 or assign a + or - to a pitcher.

When I refer to a #1, #2, or #3 etc, I am almost always speaking of their anticipated role on my (or your) fantasy team and not their position in their MLB's rotation. I really pay almost no attention to where they pitch in MLB since off days, rainouts, manager preference for who to use against a specific opponent and any number of other factors almost guarantee that after the first week one team's #3 will almost never face the opponents #3. Besides, lets say you view Hamels as Philly's #4 ... he is a #1 or #2 on most MLB teams while there are teams that have a rotation includes for example (imho) a #2, a #4, and three #5's. Measure value based on where you would like the pitcher to fit in on YOUR team.

As for + or - I will tie that to the #1, #2, #3 etc value system. When I assign a + I am saying I think the pitcher might surpass his draft value. For example, that could mean that I think I can get him as my #4 starter but he will produce numbers comparable to a #2 starter in the league. If virtually all of my starters surpass expectations I am fairly likely to do very well in the pitching categories, however if someone drafts a guy to be his #2 and they only perform like a typical #4 (that pitcher should have been listed as a - here) then it could be a long season. Taking it a bit further, within the rotation position, I'll use Lincecum as an example. Obviously he is likely to be a #1 on his fantasy team. However, the past couple of years, you may have had to spend a 1st round pick to get him (or he was the most expensive pitcher in an auction). This year, projections say he might go as late as the 3rd or even 4th round and a handful of pitchers will go before he does. If you think you will get 1st round production from him in 2011 he should be a +, if you think he will produce 3rd round value he should be an =, and if you think he will regress and not even live up to the 3rd round pick, he should be a -.

+'s and -'s are not whether a pitcher is good or bad, its how their actual value compares to their draft position/cost. I base almost all of my analysis on these factors. Its why I give considerable weight to upside. If a guy is not really capable of improving on what he did last year or the last couple of years, its almost impossible for him to get a + since he will probably go close to his last season value in a typical draft. Conversely, if a guy put up numbers I think could drop off considerably, I will avoid him completely since he will probably be drafted too high to be a value. And, finally, if I think the pitcher's abilities make him a serious candidate to put up much better numbers this year, I will be angling to get him on my roster.

Ok, enough of my famous rambling LOL ... hopefully that explains my approach somewhat. Just beware, upside and downside are not exact sciences. I have done this for a very long time and I certainly make mistakes in my analysis of any specific pitcher but it all comes down to knowing what to look for and when you have that you will be right far more than wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I will also weigh in on a couple of names being tossed around ...

I do think Hamels will be a small + ... he is generally being drafted in the 20ish range and I think his value might be borderline top 10 so he could outperform his draft position/cost.

As for Hellickson, he is one of the ultra hype boys. If you believe he can step in and be a dominant pitcher ala Lincecum or Strasburg when they debuted then you could consider him an = since he will be drafted in mqny leagues as if thats what he'll do. However, if he just puts up very good numbers (he's human) you will probably overpay to have him on your team. Getting your picture on a mag cover as the next coming makes it very hard to be a + in drafts. Obviously, his value is likely to be better in keeper and dynasty leagues where you can still get benefits down the road but he is also likely to go even higher in those types of leagues. I like the guy but quite frankly there are other kids I like even better and I will be able to get them cheaper - in some cases, much cheaper - so he is not real likely to be on any of my teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of people seem to think Buchholz is grossly over rated. I think it's getting to the point that he is very fair value. MDC has him as the 25th pitcher off the board. I have seen a good amount of Buchholz starts. The guy clearly got "lucky" last year. But watching him pitch opens your eyes. He has a very effortless fastball. When he throws it doesn't seem he throws it that hard, all of a sudden its a 95 mph heater in there. His curveball was off last year, but it has a ton of movement and it can be a plus pitch. His slider usage went up last year, and it's been a dirty pitch his whole career. If he uses it more that can offset a lot of suggested regression. His change up is also very good. He has 4 above average, and 2-3 plus pitchers. A lot of made about his low k-rates. I have no way of explaining that, but just watching him pitch, his stuff is better than that. IMO his k/9 is around 7.5 this year. His ground ball % is 50. He doesn't give up a ton of line drives or fly balls. In the 5 months he had at least 4 starts and 24 innings pitched, he didn't have an era above 3.08. Talk about luck all you want but over 5 months the kids era wasn't above 3.08. Yes i felt the need to state that again. At this point, I think some regression will also offset by how he will mature. He's going to only get stronger, better, and smarter. His defense behind him will be good. This guy has a skill set for around a 3.30ish era. With some bad luck it probably gets to about 3.65. With good luck he's in the low 3's. Wins are always a variable, but a good pitcher with the offense they have is probably looking at 17-18 wins. If he gets to 200 innings this year, and fulfills my 7.5 k/9 prediction, that's 167 k's. Not bad. When all is said and done, I'm going to give him a baseline of (17-8), 3.30era, 170 k's, 1.20ish whip. Any one can say wow Red Sox nation, your just an over hyping Red Sox fan. Well when a kid throws 95 with great off speed, and has a great offense and defense behind him, and gets 50% ground balls, im not sure exactly how much he can regress. 2.33 is certainly crazy. I don't think any AL pitcher, even Felix, without luck gets that. But the numbers i gave him are certainly obtainable, and would make him a top 15 pitcher. This may have nothing to do with the thread topic, but since everyone is putting their 2 cents in about Buchholz, i figured i'd throw mine in too.

Edited by Red Sox Nation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A lot of people seem to think Buchholz is grossly over rated. I think it's getting to the point that he is very fair value. MDC has him as the 25th pitcher off the board. I have seen a good amount of Buchholz starts. The guy clearly got "lucky" last year. But watching him pitch opens your eyes. He has a very effortless fastball. When he throws it doesn't seem he throws it that hard, all of a sudden its a 95 mph heater in there. His curveball was off last year, but it has a ton of movement and it can be a plus pitch. His slider usage went up last year, and it's been a dirty pitch his whole career. If he uses it more that can offset a lot of suggested regression. His change up is also very good. He has 4 above average, and 2-3 plus pitchers. A lot of made about his low k-rates. I have no way of explaining that, but just watching him pitch, his stuff is better than that. IMO his k/9 is around 7.5 this year. His ground ball % is 50. He doesn't give up a ton of line drives or fly balls. In the 5 months he had at least 4 starts and 24 innings pitched, he didn't have an era above 3.08. Talk about luck all you want but over 5 months the kids era wasn't above 3.08. Yes i felt the need to state that again. At this point, I think some regression will also offset by how he will mature. He's going to only get stronger, better, and smarter. His defense behind him will be good. This guy has a skill set for around a 3.30ish era. With some bad luck it probably gets to about 3.65. With good luck he's in the low 3's. Wins are always a variable, but a good pitcher with the offense they have is probably looking at 17-18 wins. If he gets to 200 innings this year, and fulfills my 7.5 k/9 prediction, that's 167 k's. Not bad. When all is said and done, I'm going to give him a baseline of (17-8), 3.30era, 170 k's, 1.20ish whip. Any one can say wow Red Sox nation, your just an over hyping Red Sox fan. Well when a kid throws 95 with great off speed, and has a great offense and defense behind him, and gets 50% ground balls, im not sure exactly how much he can regress. 2.33 is certainly crazy. I don't think any AL pitcher, even Felix, without luck gets that. But the numbers i gave him are certainly obtainable, and would make him a top 15 pitcher. This may have nothing to do with the thread topic, but since everyone is putting their 2 cents in about Buchholz, i figured i'd throw mine in too.

He was lucky last year and people will draft him based on his stats. No one is arguing his talent or his potential but he will most certainly be overrated on draft day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How close to accurate is ADP on MDC? They have Hellboy at 188th overall. That doesn't seem really that high for a solid pitcher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How close to accurate is ADP on MDC? They have Hellboy at 188th overall. That doesn't seem really that high for a solid pitcher.

It is what it is. They don't make up the information...they just use the averages from their draft. That doesn't mean that it will happen in your league. A young guy like Hellickson will probably have a wide range. Some people will chase his upside and some people will be scared off by a young guy pitching in the AL East. I could see him going any time after 120, but I agree that he's a great pick at 188.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How close to accurate is ADP on MDC? They have Hellboy at 188th overall. That doesn't seem really that high for a solid pitcher.

All ADP's are dependent on the default list of the website. Just because he is going 188th overall at MDC doesn't mean much. I use MDP (currently average of MDC and Couchmanagers) which has Buchholz at 79 overall and Hellickson at 185.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All ADP's are dependent on the default list of the website. Just because he is going 188th overall at MDC doesn't mean much. I use MDP (currently average of MDC and Couchmanagers) which has Buchholz at 79 overall and Hellickson at 185.

Sounds like someone else eats at the Cafe B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I'd rather gamble on Seattle's Michael Pineda way late in the draft than Hellickson. I do like Hellboy, but I think 2012 will be his real breakout. I think Pineda makes the rotation. Pitching in Safeco = good for pitchers, although W's will be hard to come by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Still no mention of Justin Verlander...any insights?

I would probably have to put him in the = category. He's a solid top of the rotation pitcher who will make positive contributions across the pitching stats. He's not likely to be in the elite group but he's a very small step below, and imho that is generally where he will be drafted this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a little Rotophilosophy 101 ...

Today's topic ... Why is pitching value more important than most owners realize?

The Bogfella philosophy suggests that owners will typically do better if they spend a bit more time building a good pitching staff as opposed to focusing almost exclusively on hitting and then filling in with whatever pitchers are available when they have the hitters they wanted. The reasons are twofold:

1. Pitching categories are more heavily influenced by poor performance. Think about it. If a hitter goes 0-4 your team batting average takes a small hit but the other categories are stat neutral. You don't add runs or RBIs or HRs but you don't subtract any stats from those categories either. When a bad pitcher throws a horrible game, a lot of stat negative activity impacts your team's overall performance. A bad start can actually undermine a good start. Bad start equals fewer innings, more hits, more walks (less competitive team WHIP), more runs allowed in those fewer innings pitched (less competitive team ERA), fewer strikeouts because of the fewer innings, and a reduced chance to collect a win. In essence, the gem your good pitcher just threw yesterday is erased by the implosion contributed by a bad pitcher today. Whereas a bad hitting day only negatively impacts 1 category, a bad pitching outing negatively impacts several categories and can reduce the positive impact of your good pitchers. Therefore, an ace surrounded by a collection of mediocre or worse stiffs will be far less productive - trust me, those stiffs can obliterate the great numbers provided by the ace - than a staff that is made up of exclusively of solid, if not spectacular, pitchers.

2. Value drafting/buying of pitchers actually improves your hitting. How can that be? Well, if you consistently draft or purchase pitchers who provide higher value (they outperform their draft slot/purchase price) you are, in fact, conserving draft positions or payroll to spend on those bigger name hitters you want to achieve that league championship. That is why you should always favor pitchers with that scary label "high upside" as opposed to known dogs. Look at it this way. Which is the better pick? Pitcher A and pitcher B both had almost identical stats last year ... 170 IP, 1.45 WHIP, 4.50 ERA and 125 Ks. Pitcher A has been around for 10 years and has pretty consistently generated those kinds of numbers. His starts tend to be fairly consistent with 5 or 6 innings, 7 or 8 hits, 3 or 4 walks 3 or 4 runs and 4 or 5 Ks. However this will be Pitcher B's 3rd year in the majors. He is flashing a better change, when he's on he shows improving command of the strike zone. His starts last year were more inconsistent, some great, some not so great but the better starts were coming more and more often and his overall numbers were better than the previous year. Which pitcher do you go after? You'd be surprised how many owners will spend a later round pick on the "known commodity" who has more name recognition, has a reputation for being pretty productive - even though that was several years ago when he stumbled into a higher number of wins - and who generally didn't get dissed on forums because he didn't often throw in the surprise horrible outing. I say, always take pitcher B! His upside is a better bet than the proven mediocrity of Pitcher A. Obviously you don't want to be sucked in by a less experienced arm with few or no indications that improvement is imminent, but with a little observation or knowing where to look for informed analysis, you can sort them out.

That's why +, -, and = value analysis is so important to a successful fantasy season.

What are your thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great thoughts, Bog. I favor 2. much more. For those who took Lince in the 1st last year, wow. I took Ubaldo with the 98th pick and I was able to take Miggy in the 1st round. I will take Miggy/Ubaldo over Lince/Laroche or Lince/Pena any day, obviously. Finding value in pitching is easier than in hitting, IMO, and it is essential to build a solid team.

What are everyone's thoughts on Mike Minor this year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great thoughts, Bog. I favor 2. much more. For those who took Lince in the 1st last year, wow. I took Ubaldo with the 98th pick and I was able to take Miggy in the 1st round. I will take Miggy/Ubaldo over Lince/Laroche or Lince/Pena any day, obviously. Finding value in pitching is easier than in hitting, IMO, and it is essential to build a solid team.

What are everyone's thoughts on Mike Minor this year?

I can see the appeal of point 2, but don't overlook point 1. Most owners don't consider the impact of positive, neutral, and negative stat contribution. As I pointed out, hitters generally (other than BA which is smaller because of the number of ABs your team compiles compared to IP) have only positive (they contributed something) or neutral (they didn't contribute anything that day). But what if every time a hitter took an 0fer, a HR, an RBI, and a R were subtracted from your total stats? That would be a negative contribution in those categories. When you think about it, a bad pitcher does exactly that in both the WHIP and ERA categories (the bad performance creates a negative contribution) while also almost always negating any chance for a W and accumulating fewer Ks - especially over the long run. That is why a bad pitcher is so much more devastating to a team when compared to a bad hitter.

EDIT: Oh, and I would put a + on Minor. He has that preferred upside to be sure and his overall numbers last year could push him back a bit in many drafts. Definitely someone to watch.

Edited by bogfella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can see the appeal of point 2, but don't overlook point 1. Most owners don't consider the impact of positive, neutral, and negative stat contribution. As I pointed out, hitters generally (other than BA which is smaller because of the number of ABs your team compiles compared to IP) have only positive (they contributed something) or neutral (they didn't contribute anything that day). But what if every time a hitter took an 0fer, a HR, an RBI, and a R were subtracted from your total stats? That would be a negative contribution in those categories. When you think about it, a bad pitcher does exactly that in both the WHIP and ERA categories (the bad performance creates a negative contribution) while also almost always negating any chance for a W and accumulating fewer Ks - especially over the long run. That is why a bad pitcher is so much more devastating to a team when compared to a bad hitter.

EDIT: Oh, and I would put a + on Minor. He has that preferred upside to be sure and his overall numbers last year could push him back a bit in many drafts. Definitely someone to watch.

I agree that a bad start by a pitcher hurts the ERA and WHIP just like a bad day for a hitter hurts his BA. However, you say it does not affect the runs, hrs, and rbis while saying a bad start by a pitcher negates the chance for a W and he gets less IP and Ks.

That seems a little contradictory. A hitter who goes 0-4 negates his chance for a hr and most likely runs, rbis and stolen bases.

I can see a bad pitcher hurting two stats compared to a bad pitcher hurting one stat. If you do the negative impact on counting stats for a pitcher, you would have to take into account the negative impact on the counting stats for hitters.

Good topic by the way. It has already helped me with my slow offline draft and it will help me when I do more drafts.

Edited by 4BDN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree that a bad start by a pitcher hurts the ERA and WHIP just like a bad day for a hitter hurts his BA. However, you say it does not affect the runs, hrs, and rbis while saying a bad start by a pitcher negates the chance for a W and he gets less IP and Ks.

That seems a little contradictory. A hitter who goes 0-4 negates his chance for a hr and most likely runs, rbis and stolen bases.

I can see a bad pitcher hurting two stats compared to a bad pitcher hurting one stat. If you do the negative impact on counting stats for a pitcher, you would have to take into account the negative impact on the counting stats for hitters.

Good topic by the way. It has already helped me with my slow offline draft and it will help me when I do more drafts.

Obviously, on the surface you are right - failing to get a W is not technically a negative. I guess I just look at it as a lost opportunity to contribute a positive. That pitcher probably won't have another chance that scoring period to contribute or even erase the negatives while a hitter is likely to play 4 or 5 other days.

Its just much harder to make up for a 4IP 8H 5ER 3BB 3K pitching line compared to an 0-4 hitting day. And long term the difficulty becomes more and more evident.

Good discussion!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK ... here we go ... quick quiz ...

You just read a report that one of your starting pitchers is being scratched from his next start. Nothing serious but he is not going to be pitching next week. Today is the day you need to submit your lineup for next week. Which of the following do you insert into your rotation for the coming week?

A. Aaron Cook @ COL vs SF (Matt Cain)

B. Charlie Morton @ STL (Jaime Garcia)

C. Jason Marquis @ PHI (Cole Hamels)

D. Bill "Spaceman" Lee @ Vermont (vs a Pina Colada)

Even though he hasn't pitched in almost 30 years, I would argue that Lee is the best choice LOL. True, he won't contribute anything but he won't hurt you either. Think about this when your 22nd pick in the draft rolls around ... "is there ANY situation where I would EVER want to risk having this guy in my lineup???"

At least when I consider which hitter to stick in my lineup I can hope he accidentally drives in a run or steals a base B)

Edited by bogfella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK ... here we go ... quick quiz ...

You just read a report that one of your starting pitchers is being scratched from his next start. Nothing serious but he is not going to be pitching next week. Today is the day you need to submit your lineup for next week. Which of the following do you insert into your rotation for the coming week?

A. Aaron Cook @ COL vs SF (Matt Cain)

B. Charlie Morton @ STL (Jaime Garcia)

C. Jason Marquis @ PHI (Cole Hamels)

D. Bill "Spaceman" Lee @ Vermont (vs a Pina Colada)

Even though he hasn't pitched in almost 30 years, I would argue that Lee is the best choice LOL. True, he won't contribute anything but he won't hurt you either. Think about this when your 22nd pick in the draft rolls around ... "is there ANY situation where I would EVER want to risk having this guy in my lineup???"

At least when I consider which hitter to stick in my lineup I can hope he accidentally drives in a run or steals a base B)

I don't know my league has negative points for amount of drinks with umbrellas drank by your pitching staff a year so Spaceman could hurt me there :) .

I generally don't even look at any guys like A-C for roto leagues. They can make for a decent spot start in a H2H league, but generally I'm going to try for upside with my last couple pitching spots knowing that they're not likely to make the lineup unless I have injuries to guys higher up the depth chart. Chances are by the time we get to the 22nd round, I'd much rather take a shot at a prospect I think might get the call. Good points here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great thoughts, Bog. I favor 2. much more. For those who took Lince in the 1st last year, wow. I took Ubaldo with the 98th pick and I was able to take Miggy in the 1st round. I will take Miggy/Ubaldo over Lince/Laroche or Lince/Pena any day, obviously. Finding value in pitching is easier than in hitting, IMO, and it is essential to build a solid team.

thats way too simplistic imo. value is everywhere. just last year, bautista, cargo, huff, kelly johnson, heyward, posey, stanton etc. provided great value for where they were picked. true, there arent tons of ELITE hitter talent to be found in the later rounds, and on average your arms in the later rounds are better than hitters in the later rounds. but thats also true for any rounds ! there's a reason top 20 hitters go in top 25.

anyhow, you say miggy/ubaldo... but I drafted a-rod and nolasco last year...and another guy drafted halladay in the first and cargo

[krs]now what the F am I supposed to do ?[/one]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thats way too simplistic imo. value is everywhere. just last year, bautista, cargo, huff, kelly johnson, heyward, posey, stanton etc. provided great value for where they were picked. true, there arent tons of ELITE hitter talent to be found in the later rounds, and on average your arms in the later rounds are better than hitters in the later rounds. but thats also true for any rounds ! there's a reason top 20 hitters go in top 25.

anyhow, you say miggy/ubaldo... but I drafted a-rod and nolasco last year...and another guy drafted halladay in the first and cargo

[krs]now what the F am I supposed to do ?[/one]

I think you are missing my point. I wasn't talking about luck. Who could have known that Bautista would outperform A-Rod? I'm not talking about anomaly-Brad Anderson seasons. Bautista, Huff, KJ all had career years. Prospects like Heyward, Stanton and Posey often do provide great value as they come into their own. However, there are always the Sniders and LaPortas of the world. You can't cherry-pick outlier years for players.

Back to the point, the bolded statement is the definition of value. On average, you can find pitchers much much later in the draft (or cheaper) who will have stats closer to, or better than, the top picks. Don't believe me? Compare Greinke Kershaw. Compare Verlander to Latos. At least recently, it is easier to target pitchers who will provide great VALUE by delivering top-notch statistics without using a top pick. That is why I say I favor the 2nd point Bog made. I would rather take the safest early round pick. And if a 10th round pitcher can give 1st round pitcher stats, I would rather take the hitter in hopes there will be some statistical disparity between the 10th round hitter and the 1st.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Bogfella's point. One bad pitcher can blow it for the whole staff. There's no bench in my big keeper league so it magnifies that point. I'm keeping Lincecum and Sabathia and then I'm going to be forced to load up on pitching early and often.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...