bogfella

Pitcher Value Touts

Recommended Posts

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.

I wasn't talking about luck either. See your point is hitters are far more safe than pitchers. My point is, maybe that's true, but it's not true to an extent you're making it to be, in my opinion. Fine, Bautista was an outlier. But guys like Cargo, McCutchen, and others were still an excellent value.

Huff had a .300/.360/95/32/105 season year just two years ago and could be had for a bargain price last year. Mark Reynolds was a bargain two years ago as well as Sandoval. Juan Pierre couldve been had undrafted in some leagues last year.

And having pitchers in 10th round that eclipse 1st rounders ? Im not sure about that. Maybe I'm in some pitcher-heavy leagues but Halladay went in the first, Wainwright in the 4th, Ubaldo, Nolasco and Kershaw in the 5th last year.

True, Latos was drafted in 19th, but so was Paul Konerko; Buster Posey, Mike Stanton and Carlos Santana were drafted even later.

I mean, yea, pitchers present an inherent risk, but are you really more likely to trust A-Rod this year than Roy Halladay ? I'm not. This year, I agree, there's a lot of good pitchers that can be had later on, but that doesn't mean that there's a lot less value in hitters that cant be had late as well.

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.

that much is true. last year I had that kind of mentality. so the first pitcher I took was nolasco in the 5th. bummer. took guys like wandy, took a flyer on kazmir...took strasburg and lilly, didnt pay for saves...and my pitching was a mess (especially whip and hrs allowed) until I traded for lincecum and hamels

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
that much is true. last year I had that kind of mentality. so the first pitcher I took was nolasco in the 5th. bummer. took guys like wandy, took a flyer on kazmir...took strasburg and lilly, didnt pay for saves...and my pitching was a mess (especially whip and hrs allowed) until I traded for lincecum and hamels

While I would agree there are a few more high value pitchers to be had in the later rounds when compared to hitters, I would also say there are FAR more traps in the late round pitching ranks. If your plan is to gather pitchers in the later rounds, you have to be able to sort through the pretenders and grab the truly high upside arms. Hitters overall are much easier to predict (potentially controversial statement, I know) so while there will always be hitting outliers up and down, there will be far more outliers in the pitching ranks (again both good and bad) - or at least those who will appear to be outliers to the majority of owners who are not as experienced or don't have the time with regard to watching/evaluating evolving pitching abilities.

This has turned into an excellent philosophical discussion B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always looked at it as a personal thing...I know me and I know that I can't spot a good arm to save my life. I've lucked into a few over the years, but I've had more bad luck that good luck when it comes to finding good pitching options. Knowing what I know about me, I draft pitching earlier than most so I can keep from screwing it up later. I did jump on the Liriano train last year, but I also liked Wade Davis B) .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to draft a top ten pitcher in rounds 4-5 (it was Wainwright last year here for me), and then go back to pitching when I see a second run on it with the high upside guys after round 10. You need an ace though to bring down your ERA, WHIP and boost your K's and Wins.

I like Gio Gonzalez and Ricky Romero for value this year.

Morrow isn't the guy to draft. When he has his stuff he can dominate (obviously) but he isn't mentally tough enough to be a true ace. If he doesn't bring his best stuff or he falters with his control he doesn't know how to battle through the game without getting rocked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How about a little Rotophilosophy 101 ...

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.

What are your thoughts?

bog, is the man. way way better than any rw staff for sp. guy should be hired on the spot. fact that this thread is not 5 stars is an absoulte insult to this mans intelligence. bog 4 president

point 1 is key. everyones draft strategy is to draft heavy on bats and wait on sp. but its so common these days. that i dont buy into the theory 100%. i always draft 1 stud sp in the early 3-4 rds and just round out my staff here and there. i can trade for bats later if im lacking power. but quality sp is hard to come. im talkin qs etc. not chasing w's. fip xfip are helpful tools. but there are so many stat nerds these days, these folks think they know everything. problem 1, you need to watch video as you cant see a visual of a player in stats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.[

I disagree. It doesn't matter how you move compared to where you were but rather how you move compared to the competition. You need to be competitive in terms of innings pitched or you will get killed in Wins and K's. If everyone (for example) is going with a 5-man rotation you can't go with a 4-man rotation and win because you'll finish too far down in Wins and K's. Also everyone else's 5th starter is doing the same (blowing up in a certain number of unpredictable starts) so it only matters that your fifth starter is blowing up less. With any number of starters you have there will always be a certain number of pitchers that will contribute negatively to your pitching percentage categories (i.e. if you have a ERA of 3.00 they will be above that ERA when they start) but that doesn't mean you don't start them because you need them to contribute to Wins and K's since you can't punt those categories.

That's basically why you want a top-10 ace in rounds 4-5. So you have an anchor that will contribute positively well below ERA and WHIP virtually every time out while dominating in Wins and K's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree. It doesn't matter how you move compared to where you were but rather how you move compared to the competition. You need to be competitive in terms of innings pitched or you will get killed in Wins and K's. If everyone (for example) is going with a 5-man rotation you can't go with a 4-man rotation and win because you'll finish too far down in Wins and K's. Also everyone else's 5th starter is doing the same (blowing up in a certain number of unpredictable starts) so it only matters that your fifth starter is blowing up less. With any number of starters you have there will always be a certain number of pitchers that will contribute negatively to your pitching percentage categories (i.e. if you have a ERA of 3.00 they will be above that ERA when they start) but that doesn't mean you don't start them because you need them to contribute to Wins and K's since you can't punt those categories.

That's basically why you want a top-10 ace in rounds 4-5. So you have an anchor that will contribute positively well below ERA and WHIP virtually every time out while dominating in Wins and K's.

Hey arch ... thanks for the feedback! The idea behind value analysis and positive/negative contribution is identifying the pitchers who are most likely to blow up in starts. Even aces have their off days (you know, thats when the lemmings flock to the forums and talk about how they "want to trade Halladay for Freddie Flashinthepan cause Halladay suxxors" However, while there is no sound way to predict a blow up in any specific start, there most assuredly are ways to predict in inordinate number of blow ups from any individual pitcher over the course of a season. I think you would agree that having those bombs on someone else's roster and not on yours is a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice write-ups in here guys. One thing to remember is how deep pitching was last season. It is going to be deep again, if not more so this season. I didn't draft my "ace" until the 7th round last year. After that I alternated between offense and pitching to close out the draft. All of my staffs were nasty, and I didn't sacrifice a high pick on a dude that, at best, will give you something TWICE a week. Remember to feast from a position of strength.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey arch ... thanks for the feedback! The idea behind value analysis and positive/negative contribution is identifying the pitchers who are most likely to blow up in starts. Even aces have their off days (you know, thats when the lemmings flock to the forums and talk about how they "want to trade Halladay for Freddie Flashinthepan cause Halladay suxxors" However, while there is no sound way to predict a blow up in any specific start, there most assuredly are ways to predict in inordinate number of blow ups from any individual pitcher over the course of a season. I think you would agree that having those bombs on someone else's roster and not on yours is a good thing.

My philosophy is that in a standard 5*5 pool you have to compete in innings pitched since Wins and K's account for 50% of the counting categories for SP's (the others being ERA and WHIP). If you are in the bottom half of innings pitched there is no way you will get enough points in ERA and WHIP to offset your deficit in Wins and K's. There will be 2 or 3 teams that will be more balanced than you (finish near or at the top in Wins and K's and finishing better than average in WHIP and ERA with their solid high value picks and top 10 ace Anchor). I am all for value analysis and sleeper picks (that is why I read your thread) so that your 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th starter (whatever the case may be) is better than the other GM's similarly tiered starter.

The top 10 ace is really important because they will log 200+ innings (having a greater effect on ERA and WHIP) and should be on a winning team. How many pitchers are there that will log 200+ innings with an ERA under 3.5 (or 3) and a WHIp under 1.15 with 200+ K strikeouts that are available after round 5? It takes a lot to offset that in value picks later on. If I pick up a top 10 SP and you don't you aren't going to beat me on the pitching side. I know the value guys too. I don't need to completely negate your value picks either since I have such a strong SP anchor. Also you are taking a risk that someone else doesn't hit on your high upside value picks before you do and then you are screwed.

Of course you never put a guy out there with no chance for the win and a good chance of bombing. Of course you shouldn't have to even if you are going with a rotation of 6. Even my 6th starter would have at least a 50/50 chance at a win with 4-6 K's.

Edited by archibjd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My philosophy is that in a standard 5*5 pool you have to compete in innings pitched since Wins and K's account for 50% of the counting categories for SP's (the others being ERA and WHIP). If you are in the bottom half of innings pitched there is no way you will get enough points in ERA and WHIP to offset your deficit in Wins and K's. There will be 2 or 3 teams that will be more balanced than you (finish near or at the top in Wins and K's and finishing better than average in WHIP and ERA with their solid high value picks and top 10 ace Anchor). I am all for value analysis and sleeper picks (that is why I read your thread) so that your 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th starter (whatever the case may be) is better than the other GM's similarly tiered starter.

The top 10 ace is really important because they will log 200+ innings (having a greater effect on ERA and WHIP) and should be on a winning team. How many pitchers are there that will log 200+ innings with an ERA under 3.5 (or 3) and a WHIp under 1.15 with 200+ K strikeouts that are available after round 5? It takes a lot to offset that in value picks later on. If I pick up a top 10 SP and you don't you aren't going to beat me on the pitching side. I know the value guys too. I don't need to completely negate your value picks either since I have such a strong SP anchor. Also you are taking a risk that someone else doesn't hit on your high upside value picks before you do and then you are screwed.

Of course you never put a guy out there with no chance for the win and a good chance of bombing. Of course you shouldn't have to even if you are going with a rotation of 6. Even my 6th starter would have at least a 50/50 chance at a win with 4-6 K's.

Don't get me wrong. I am 100% in favor of having at least 1 ace in my rotation. Honestly I can't remember when I didn't have 1 or more. But, I also think "aces" go for varying prices/draft slots so you want to make sure you get one that will at least = his draft position and hopefully be a + by outperforming his slot. A pitcher you draft in the 4th round that performs like he should have been a 2nd round pick is still a very productive value pick. As the draft/auction progresses, you simply adjust to the pitchers being considered and take the best options - those most likely to outperform your investment.

As for IP and W ... I agree on IP wholeheartedly. If you don't get the innings you will have trouble competing. Obviously the slug you sometimes see referred to as an "innings eater" who doesn't strike out many and puts up an inflated WHIP and ERA over 200+ innings is of no real use and in fact probably hurts your team. W's are a different story. I really don't chase wins although I will slightly move up a pitcher's ranking if he's on a better team because they are somewhat more likely to generate wins. I just adjust the other way too if they are going to ugly up other categories.

arch, I think we are pretty much saying the same things here - just wording them differently. Value is determined in a lot of different ways and a guy who is only going to pitch 80 innings, even with a good WHIP, ERA and K/9 is not going to be as valuable in most formats (although in some deeper leagues a middle reliever that fits this description can be very helpful - it all depends on the situation).

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 let 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?

The analysis in point 1 seems to be flawed. Assuming that you play in a league with capped games played every category is really a ratio. If you goal is to have 750 runs but you only have 1500 games to do it in then your goal is .5 runs/game same as ERA is a ratio. If you look at it this way you can see how the player who puts up an 0-4 with nothing else is hurting you in the runs category. Its the same as a pitcher going 9 innings and gets 1k. He hurts your K category. A stat neutral sample using my made up data would be 2 games where he scored 1 run. One factor going the favor of the support of Bogs point is that in a one game sample a hitter is limited in 4/5 how many deviations he can be below average where a pitcher can in theory be many deviations worse. If we compare a 5 game hitter sample (which is really the equivalent of a start) how does a 2/16 1R 1RBI stretch hurt compared to a the 4 Inn, 5ER start? both have the ability to hurt you greatly.

That said thanks for the analysis in the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The analysis in point 1 seems to be flawed. Assuming that you play in a league with capped games played every category is really a ratio. If you goal is to have 750 runs but you only have 1500 games to do it in then your goal is .5 runs/game same as ERA is a ratio. If you look at it this way you can see how the player who puts up an 0-4 with nothing else is hurting you in the runs category. Its the same as a pitcher going 9 innings and gets 1k. He hurts your K category. A stat neutral sample using my made up data would be 2 games where he scored 1 run. One factor going the favor of the support of Bogs point is that in a one game sample a hitter is limited in 4/5 how many deviations he can be below average where a pitcher can in theory be many deviations worse. If we compare a 5 game hitter sample (which is really the equivalent of a start) how does a 2/16 1R 1RBI stretch hurt compared to a the 4 Inn, 5ER start? both have the ability to hurt you greatly.

That said thanks for the analysis in the thread.

Agree. There is no way you can argue that when a player scores 0 runs on a given day, it "isn't hurting you" in the R cat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The analysis in point 1 seems to be flawed. Assuming that you play in a league with capped games played every category is really a ratio. If you goal is to have 750 runs but you only have 1500 games to do it in then your goal is .5 runs/game same as ERA is a ratio. If you look at it this way you can see how the player who puts up an 0-4 with nothing else is hurting you in the runs category. Its the same as a pitcher going 9 innings and gets 1k. He hurts your K category. A stat neutral sample using my made up data would be 2 games where he scored 1 run. One factor going the favor of the support of Bogs point is that in a one game sample a hitter is limited in 4/5 how many deviations he can be below average where a pitcher can in theory be many deviations worse. If we compare a 5 game hitter sample (which is really the equivalent of a start) how does a 2/16 1R 1RBI stretch hurt compared to a the 4 Inn, 5ER start? both have the ability to hurt you greatly.

That said thanks for the analysis in the thread.

The difference is that while an 0-4 hurts BA, 0 R, 0 RBI, 0 HR and 0 SB simply do not add to your totals while bad WHIP and bad ERA actually detract from your already accumulated totals. True you do suffer from lost opportunity in an AB capped league or even a games played capped league. As you say, the standard deviation for pitching categories is also much wider but you also have to factor in IP caps if those are also part of your league rules. Bad IP for WHIP and ERA subtract from the number of available innings to recoup the damage done - and IP is generally a much smaller number than ABs (even if the AB cap is an extrapolation of games played).

I know this isn't the classic approach to stat evaluation. In general, I have just enjoyed considerable success by minimizing the damage done by bad pitchers while investing less in the pitcher roster spots compared to other teams in my leagues (value drafting). It takes considerably more time in analysis because pitchers are more difficult to predict but it has paid off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The difference is that while an 0-4 hurts BA, 0 R, 0 RBI, 0 HR and 0 SB simply do not add to your totals while bad WHIP and bad ERA actually detract from your already accumulated totals. True you do suffer from lost opportunity in an AB capped league or even a games played capped league. As you say, the standard deviation for pitching categories is also much wider but you also have to factor in IP caps if those are also part of your league rules. Bad IP for WHIP and ERA subtract from the number of available innings to recoup the damage done - and IP is generally a much smaller number than ABs (even if the AB cap is an extrapolation of games played).

I know this isn't the classic approach to stat evaluation. In general, I have just enjoyed considerable success by minimizing the damage done by bad pitchers while investing less in the pitcher roster spots compared to other teams in my leagues (value drafting). It takes considerably more time in analysis because pitchers are more difficult to predict but it has paid off.

I dont see the difference between lowering your number and missing an opportunity to add to it. As I said earlier all categories really are ratios in capped leagues so a zero does worsen you average. In runs you are trying to get to 750 in 1500 games whereas in ERA you are trying to keep the runs below 600 in 1400 (very rough numbers). If both players the same deviation below average for the same percentage unit (in my example an inning is about equal to a game) they will have the same negative effect. A pitcher has a greater chance to be more deviations below the mean but that has nothing to do with 0 runs being stat neutral (in the same sense a pitcher is limited moreso in how many deviations he can be better than the mean).

The concept of trying to avoid pitchers who blow up seems to be an inituitive one. And doing so by drafting high upside guys later instead of safe but bad pitchers also makes sense as a strategy. If they pan out you win big, if they fail you go to waivers and take a guy only a bit worse than your safe option in the later round. I would think that your success in your leagues and particularly with your pitching staffs would be a result of your amazing ability to evaluate these high upside guys and know which to get to round out your pitching staff than because of some stat neutral methodology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont see the difference between lowering your number and missing an opportunity to add to it. As I said earlier all categories really are ratios in capped leagues so a zero does worsen you average. In runs you are trying to get to 750 in 1500 games whereas in ERA you are trying to keep the runs below 600 in 1400 (very rough numbers). If both players the same deviation below average for the same percentage unit (in my example an inning is about equal to a game) they will have the same negative effect. A pitcher has a greater chance to be more deviations below the mean but that has nothing to do with 0 runs being stat neutral (in the same sense a pitcher is limited moreso in how many deviations he can be better than the mean).

The concept of trying to avoid pitchers who blow up seems to be an inituitive one. And doing so by drafting high upside guys later instead of safe but bad pitchers also makes sense as a strategy. If they pan out you win big, if they fail you go to waivers and take a guy only a bit worse than your safe option in the later round. I would think that your success in your leagues and particularly with your pitching staffs would be a result of your amazing ability to evaluate these high upside guys and know which to get to round out your pitching staff than because of some stat neutral methodology.

Well, there is stat positive pitching too. A pitcher who generates a good WHIP and/or ERA is stat positive. The more good innings, the more the positive just like the more Rs, HRs, RBIs and SBs, the more the positive. The difference is (imho) that when a hitter does not generate these stats, you don't actually lose something (other than opportunity - they don't subtract from your already accumulated stats - whereas with a pitcher, a poor performance does actually make your accumulated WHIP and ERA worse as opposed to leaving it unchanged. Somehow I have to get that stat back ... however, I do understand that the difference is not as great as it could in a league where you have a ceiling on games/at bats where you have a limit on opportunity.

Thank you for the compliments on my evaluation success! I guess the methodology is not so much a "way" to do better in the pitching categories but is more a reason to pay more attention to those categories. Without trying to the define the ways to evaluate pitching I suppose I could just say, "don't acquire pitchers who will sabotage your stats" but that's way too simple for my windy tendencies LOL

I just see so many owners who spend all of their time focused on hitters with the "I can always get pitchers later in the draft" philosophy and then they suffer from getting smoked in the pitching stats and wasting all that good hitting on their way to a middle of the pack finish. I 100% agree you can get pitchers later in the draft but the later you want to get them, the more you have to really study the art to make sure you are getting good ones!!! B)

Edited by bogfella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I want to highlight the last line in the previous post ...

I 100% agree you can get pitchers later in the draft but the later you want to get them, the more you have to really study the art to make sure you are getting good ones!!!

I am feeling prophetic LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think I want to highlight the last line in the previous post ...

I 100% agree you can get pitchers later in the draft but the later you want to get them, the more you have to really study the art to make sure you are getting good ones!!!

I am feeling prophetic LOL

This is the crux of all of this. You want to draft pitching late? That's fine. You better pick the right guys. Hence a thread that says value +/-/= to the ADP. Would someone please start a thread that tells me what pitchers are going too low or high? Oh Wait, that's this thread. I'm one of Bog's biggest fans. He's not always right, but I will say this much "Bogfella is better than any single expert out there on pitching." I firmly believe this. We have an expert at our disposal. Let's give him the nice debate (which I am loving) or ask him about specific guys to get a gauge on them. Absolutely great thread and the banter is priceless for someone who is less knowledgeable on baseball (like myself).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All great posts. I'm in a pitcher friendly points league tho so any strategy flies out the window. 5 player keeper, 12 team league, of the 60 keepers I think 30-33 are pitchers. I'm keeping 2 hitters and Josh Johnson, Gallardo, Hamels. I'm then starting out with 2 hitters, then a butt load of pitchers. I know pitching is deep this year, so my personal strategy was to have my 3 aces then pick up about 4-5 sp3-5 types with upside. I figure if my 3 stay healthy and 2 or 3 of my upside guys breakout, I'm golden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my reallllly deep leagues I may target one of either James Shields or Wade Davis. I am a believer in Davis' potential and it isn't some run-of-the-mill #5. He may not have a #1 ceiling but there is no reason he can't deliver solid stats. David Price wasn't all sunshine and rainbows in 2009, either.

Shields experienced a good increase in velocity on his FB. He saw his best K-Rate and definitely got a little unlikely. Neither of these guys will single-handedly win your league but the could be decent back of the rotation guys.

I think Harang could bounce back decently in Petco. His K-Rate needs to return to career norms but he was unlucky last year and Petco is Petco. Finally, I like Travis Wood if he earns a rotation spot. He doesn't walk that many guys, his K-Rate should bounce up a little, and he was even a little unlucky last year.

None of these guys are exciting of course, but I used the exciting + on Chacin, Minor, Hudson, Kennedy, Marcum, etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

shields is a popular target due to his fip/xfip. but im not buyin until real late. but he dont really dont k many batters. i prefer a guy like clayton richard over james shields, myself. or a carl pavano etc

+Carl Pavano

-Josh Beckett=Im not buying it. If he goes higher than 6th-8th rd its a waste of a pick. I like Lackey more than I like Beckett

+Jason Hammel=Popular pick last yr but didnt pan out. His ERA about a full run higher than his FIP/XFIP. But for season thats been his trend the past 2 yrs. Not sure why that is exactly. But Im taking a late rd flier on Hammel in all my lgs

Edited by billz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a couple more for the discussion ...

+ Edinson Volquez - I expect him to come blazing back and his limited numbers last year could make him a big bargain

+ Rick Porcello - look for the Ks to jump up and his overall numbers to be solid as he matures. Last chance for buying cheap

= Cole Hamels - you saw the real Hamels last year ... similar numbers and better run support should make him a good play

- Carlos Zambrano - some people still think he can be a top of the rotation guy ... not me

- Jeff Niemann - expect some regression here ... another one who is likely to be overrated on draft day

Any thoughts?

Edited by bogfella

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't remember if Dallas Braden was mentioned in this thread, but how do you like him this year, Bog?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How about a couple more for the discussion ...

+ Edinson Volquez - I expect him to come blazing back and his limited numbers last year could make him a big bargain

+ Rick Porcello - look for the Ks to jump up and his overall numbers to be solid as he matures. Last chance for buying cheap

= Cole Hamels - you saw the real Hamels last year ... similar numbers and better run support should make him a good play

- Carlos Zambrano - some people still think he can be a top of the rotation guy ... not me

- Jeff Niemann - expect some regression here ... another one who is likely to be overrated on draft day

Any thoughts?

agree with volquez, Z and niemann.

disagree with porcello...he is a negative in Ks, and its tough for me to expect good ratios to offset that, his fip isnt impressive either.

might be worth a flyer in a keeper in the very late rounds, but I just don't see it...

Ill prolly agree with hamels as well. about equal in terms of value. I dont think he repeats his 2010 season tho in terms of era/whip- I think those are inevitable to go up. the Ks will probably stick tho.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't remember if Dallas Braden was mentioned in this thread, but how do you like him this year, Bog?

I'm not a huge Braden fan. He does pitch in a friendly park but I don't see a lot of upside. I would expect mediocre ERA and WHIP with a relatively low K total so that would put him in the back of the rotation in most leagues.

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...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.