Sign in to follow this  
Sidearmer

2020 Draft/Auction Strategy Thread

Recommended Posts

LABR is a 12 team NL only auction draft, how would you adjust prices for an 11 team league?  Less players drafted, but less money to spend overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, murraygd13 said:

LABR is a 12 team NL only auction draft, how would you adjust prices for an 11 team league?  Less players drafted, but less money to spend overall.

If you are asking the difference between a 12 team Standand ALL MLB league and an 11 team NL Only league then I'd think that the stars will go for a significant amount more due to smaller team and fewer of the superstars overall.

I'd imagine things would be pretty inflated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, CrypTviLL said:

If you are asking the difference between a 12 team Standand ALL MLB league and an 11 team NL Only league then I'd think that the stars will go for a significant amount more due to smaller team and fewer of the superstars overall.

I'd imagine things would be pretty inflated. 

No 12 team NL only versus 11 team NL only. or 12 AL vs. 11 team AL only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, murraygd13 said:

No 12 team NL only versus 11 team NL only. or 12 AL vs. 11 team AL only.

The same should still apply, with less teams the star players will go for more. A 1-team difference shouldn't make THAT big of a difference, but maybe add $5 or so to the stars? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, murraygd13 said:

LABR is a 12 team NL only auction draft, how would you adjust prices for an 11 team league?  Less players drafted, but less money to spend overall.

 

This is a quick answer on my phone but essentially remove 23 $1 players and 8.3% inflation to the top guys since $260 is missing. Not perfect but easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had an absolutely NUTS auction draft last night on Y!.

The league was a 12 team, AL-ONLY, H2H Points (as equally balanced between hitters and pitchers as could be). Auction Draft.

In the first few rounds players were going for normal/just a little bit above their price. For instance, I got a steal with Lindor at $41, Trout went for around $60, Bregman and Jo-Ram went for $40. I got Stanton at $11, Judge went for $21, and I got Gallo for $15.

All of the sudden, the **** hit the fan.

It was like all 12 managers realized at the same time that there wasn't enough elite talent to go around.

Moncada (I got) went for $37, Eloy (I got) went for $44, Josh Donaldson $31, Bo Bichette for $39, Greinke for $35, Jose Berrios $33, and the list goes on and on.

$0 players like Mike Friers were going for $10. Everybody had cash.

The moral of the story? Know your league especially if it's an AL/NL only. Buying players early before people get in tune with the situation might be the best strategy. 

Boy do I wish I bought Altuve at 26, Breg at 39, Jo-ram at 39 instead of spending equal $$$$$ on middle players.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Ks do not count against a hitter in points leagues, do you still draft hitters first? Most points leagues favor starters otherwise it seems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never really done an auction draft before, the one time I did I was really awful at it. Involves more strategy but may give it another try

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, I assume this is happening everywhere as QS is so common now.  Last year finding QS was hard, but a lot of owners out there weren't necessarily expecting it to be THAT hard. All of a sudden now all of my leagues are valuing SP who get QS very high and it's very difficult to get them in trade, regardless of the player or price.

What is a strategy you can employ when your team has precious few QS and you either don't want to overpay on draft day or there just plain aren't any to be had?  Is there a zig when others are zagging?

Of course the big issue is accumulating strikeouts.  If you're okay with middle of the pack in QS or even just below, it can be tricky to accumulate the K's in a non-daily league or a league with a small bench.

To illustrate, here's an example of what I'm facing this weekend.  My only SP keeper is Walker Buehler.  A TON of SP were kept and the top options are Luis Castillo, Aaron Nola, and Trevor Bauer. That's it.  12-team NL Only.  The only QS pitchers after that are crusty vets and injury-plagued guys.  I saw this to coming to some degree, but I could not make any trades happen.

Sure, I could pivot to high-strikeout middle relievers, but certainly others will have the same strategy, or make the same pivot midstream which will boost those relievers to the prices of low-to-mid tier starters.  As huge a fan as I was of QS just a few years ago, now I'm not sure it's the right thing for all leagues.

What Plan B strategies are you considering with the dearth of QS?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Squeeealer said:

What Plan B strategies are you considering with the dearth of QS?

If teams are chasing quality starts that desperately, it seems like they'd be vulnerable in ratios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Hanghow said:

If teams are chasing quality starts that desperately, it seems like they'd be vulnerable in ratios.


Agree. Maybe if a team starts out the draft gunning for the premium relievers they could pull it off rather than waiting to see how it goes. But my god, depending on relievers LOL  I'm not sure I'm smart enough or crazy enough to pull that off.

Edited by Squeeealer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I am in a 12 team mixed auction draft league is the only way to win stars and scrubs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Squeeealer said:

Agree. Maybe if a team starts out the draft gunning for the premium relievers they could pull it off rather than waiting to see how it goes. But my god, depending on relievers LOL  I'm not sure I'm smart enough or crazy enough to pull that off.

The way I see it, ratio-helping non-closing relievers are some of the most volatile and available assets during the season. I don't know if it's viable in every league, mind you, but I think you can attack WHIP and ERA at low cost if everybody else is rostering mediocre starters in a bid for one category.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, B&F said:

If I am in a 12 team mixed auction draft league is the only way to win stars and scrubs?

 

Image result for 8 ball yes.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, B&F said:

If I am in a 12 team mixed auction draft league is the only way to win stars and scrubs?

No and we need more information.

I do some 12 team leagues, but their deep as can be on Y! with 30 man rosters, 3 IL spots, 1 NA spot and lots of starting positions. In this style of league an extreme stars and scrubs approach would be really risky. 

However, in a 23 man roster 12 team league with limited starters like the public Y! leagues, then yeah, stars+scrubs seems like a really nice idea as the waiver wire will be loaded with talent. 

Still, this doesn't mean it's the ONLY way to win. I've won numerous leagues going more balance, just make sure your 'balance' isn't a bunch of $15 guys, but rather a couple $30 guys, a lot of $20 guys, and some $10 or so guys as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Curious about people's general Nomination strategies here.

 

I tend to nominate ONLY guys I don't want, and usually specifically guys who I expect to draw a large response (the best X I don't want in most cases).  This usually results in some positive value opportunities later in the draft, as it encourages "my" guys to fall.

 

But I've been considering a different option this year.  In my NL Only league in particular, there is a general strategy of "Overpay for the best available players" because most teams have MULTIPLE undervalued keepers.

 

So, I'm thinking, should I nominate some of the "value" guys I see out there early, when many people are trying to "Save" for Superstar X, and sneak them through for a few $ under market instead of rolling the dice on whether they make it to me later for super cheap.  Might be useful to be looking at a few studs on the board still when I've filled in a few usual late draft "Value" slots earlier than usual.

Edited by Heretic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Heretic said:

Curious about people's general Nomination strategies here.

 

I tend to nominate ONLY guys I don't want, and usually specifically guys who I expect to draw a large response (the best X I don't want in most cases).  This usually results in some positive value opportunities later in the draft, as it encourages "my" guys to fall.

 

But I've been considering a different option this year.  In my NL Only league in particular, there is a general strategy of "Overpay for the best available players" because most teams have MULTIPLE undervalued keepers.

 

So, I'm thinking, should I nominate some of the "value" guys I see out there early, when many people are trying to "Save" for Superstar X, and sneak them through for a few $ under market instead of rolling the dice on whether they make it to me later for super cheap.  Might be useful to be looking at a few studs on the board still when I've filled in a few usual late draft "Value" slots earlier than usual.

 

Exactly.  If you wait on guys it only creates a situation where people realize they have too much money and have nothing better to do than overpay for what remains. Sometimes severely.  Nothing like 2nd tier guys going for as much as the elites.

But your fix is spot on.  It's those super boring middle of the road guys that you're targeting you should throw out before the studs go.  Only three #1 SP available in your NL Only?  Throw out Kyle Hendricks first.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Squeeealer said:

 

Exactly.  If you wait on guys it only creates a situation where people realize they have too much money and have nothing better to do than overpay for what remains. Sometimes severely.  Nothing like 2nd tier guys going for as much as the elites.

But your fix is spot on.  It's those super boring middle of the road guys that you're targeting you should throw out before the studs go.  Only three #1 SP available in your NL Only?  Throw out Kyle Hendricks first.

 

I'm thinking even lower than that.  4th OF types, SP like Pablo Lopez I'd be fine with for $3.  If they suck, I drop them, like I would have the late draft "Lotto ticket" guys anyway

Edited by Heretic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Heretic said:

 

I'm thinking even lower than that.  4th OF types, SP like Pablo Lopez I'd be fine with for $3.  If they suck, I drop them, like I would have the late draft "Lotto ticket" guys anyway


Because he wants to actually accomplish something with the strategy like getting a guy for cheaper than he'd go 20 minutes later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Squeeealer said:


Because he wants to actually accomplish something with the strategy like getting a guy for cheaper than he'd go 20 minutes later.

 

He is me I think in this case, but point taken. 

 

Like I said, I'm knocking this around in my head right now, and the examples I'm looking at are more the borderline keeper types I'm dropping (guys like Lopez who COULD grow into a value at that price).   The idea was more around the value add of having an "extra" keeper by trying to slide those guys in right at the start.  Then, shifting to the Hendricks layer shortly thereafter, given that even though I'm not going to nominate them, I am going to buy a few of the stars.

 

In theory it would be more of a get "slightly better than good enough for $3" unnoticed, or sell them for $5 (aka over value) and hamper someone else.  Hendricks or others who would be in the "Target" category for others, even if they're not the "Stars" aren't going to sneak through in the same fashion.

Edited by Heretic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Heretic said:

 

He is me I think in this case, but point taken. 

 

Like I said, I'm knocking this around in my head right now, and the examples I'm looking at are more the borderline keeper types I'm dropping (guys like Lopez who COULD grow into a value at that price).   The idea was more around the value add of having an "extra" keeper by trying to slide those guys in right at the start.  Then, shifting to the Hendricks layer shortly thereafter, given that even though I'm not going to nominate them, I am going to buy a few of the stars.

 

In theory it would be more of a get "slightly better than good enough for $3" unnoticed, or sell them for $5 (aka over value) and hamper someone else.  Hendricks or others who would be in the "Target" category for others, even if they're not the "Stars" aren't going to sneak through in the same fashion.


Those same guys would be available at the end of the draft. Opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen some, what I think very low prices published for closers this year. Also the prices on closers in the CBS mock and LABR seemed low.  I know saves aren't what they used to be, but saves is still a category. Especially in AL or NL only leagues, everyone thinks saves are easy to come by. In only leagues the pool is half as deep so it's tougher to grab guys in season.  Maybe I'm just slow to react to the market. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve always found merit in just buying a guy early.  Everyone throwing out players to eat up salary and saving money, just go out and your guy even if he’s a little overpriced.  For example, Sign Freeman then throw out a first basemen if your goal is to eat up salary.  Rizzo and Alonso will eat up more $ than Sale and Judge.  Freeman sets up a foundation and you don’t have to worry as much about getting stuck in the middle.  
 

When there’s two or three studs left in a position, the most expensive is usually the last to be nominated.  People are more likely to stop bidding when they know they have an out.  When that last ace or stud at a position is nominated tho... fomo kicks in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, murraygd13 said:

I've seen some, what I think very low prices published for closers this year. Also the prices on closers in the CBS mock and LABR seemed low.  I know saves aren't what they used to be, but saves is still a category. Especially in AL or NL only leagues, everyone thinks saves are easy to come by. In only leagues the pool is half as deep so it's tougher to grab guys in season.  Maybe I'm just slow to react to the market. 

 

In Only leagues, the good MR who are likely to take over Closer roles are useful Ratio Stabilizers.  In my case, I usually find 20 saves amongst the MR I roster for other purposes throughout the year.  So, yeah, I usually don't bother overpaying for Closers.  If you're already drafting the Hector Neris' of the world then the upcoming saves are nigh free.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.