| 0 |
Subject: Player prices and strategy for 2002
Posted by: beastiemiked
- [17414316] Fri, Feb 22, 2002, 13:29
Haven't had time to really look at all the prices but thought I'd start a thread where we could centralize the strategy talk and discussion on players. |
| Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well. |
| 42 | Khahan
ID: 12432113
Tue, Feb 26, 2002, 15:20
|
Hey Beastiemiked, thanks. Looks like I'll need another cheap pitcher with at least some potential.
As for schedules, I noticed that Milwaukee opens in Houston. Maybe some of those sluggers suddenly look more apealing to an opening day roster.
|
| 43 | Khahan
ID: 12432113
Tue, Feb 26, 2002, 15:20
|
Hey Beastiemiked, thanks. Looks like I'll need another cheap pitcher with at least some potential.
As for schedules, I noticed that Milwaukee opens in Houston. Maybe some of those sluggers suddenly look more apealing to an opening day roster.
|
| 44 | mrbig
ID: 481572514
Tue, Feb 26, 2002, 17:30
|
If I remember, Milwaukee played Houston a couple of times early last year. I seem to remember Wade Miller striking out somewhere around a million Brewers...
|
| 45 | sean
ID: 4038818
Tue, Feb 26, 2002, 18:47
|
The team with the best park schedule out of the gate might be Houston up until April 21st or so. They play most of those series in Enron and one at Coors..... although they do have to face St.Louis's pitching twice.
I'm planning on drafting Ensberg and Ward both. What do you guys think about Darrin Fletcher at 1.67 mil? He hit .291 18HR and .320 20 HR in 1999 and 2000 and his backups Phelps and Werth have no major league experience.
|
| 47 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 3711402623
Tue, Feb 26, 2002, 19:36
|
sean
Last I read Phelps won't likely make the team, they want him hitting every day. Fletcher's job is in danger if he does. Phelps might be the best C prospect in baseball. If you haven't seen it already, check post 34 for some C ideas. For $200k more I like Wiki. He's starting, he hit .275 with 8 hr in 160ab last year and Sportsline projects him to over 400 at bats this year.
I don't know much about Fletcher or any reasons for what his dropoff might have been.
|
| 48 | sean
ID: 4038818
Tue, Feb 26, 2002, 22:32
|
mattinglyinthehall,
Thank You for the feedback. I think I'm going to draft Kendall for right now and possibly reevaluate the catcher position (along with everything else) at the end of March.
|
| 49 | Gangman
Leader
ID: 4310591222
Tue, Feb 26, 2002, 22:45
|
Wade Miller beat the Brewers 5 times last
year, tying a NL record.
|
| 50 | tduncan
ID: 47616279
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 05:40
|
P
Schmidt, Jason SF 3,810,000
Burnett, A.J. FLA 3,720,000
Dempster, Ryan FLA 3,660,000
Anderson, Matt DET 3,500,000
Hampton, Mike COL 2,620,000
C
Gonzalez, Wiki SD 1,950,000
1B
Clark, Tony BOS 3,470,000
2B
Soriano, Alfonso NYA 3,960,000
3B
Zeile, Todd NYN 2,990,000
SS
Izturis, Cesar LA 1,890,000
OF
Ordonez, Magglio CHA 6,430,000
Cameron, Mike SEA 5,040,000
Wilson, Preston FLA 3,940,000
Hollandsworth, Todd COL 2,860,000
Total Value = 49,840,000 TSND
Cash = 160,000 TSND
|
| 51 | Gangman
Leader
ID: 4310591222
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 07:57
|
Morgan Ensberg still has to win a job (over
Chris Truby). Strange pricing on him....
|
| 53 | Mark L
Leader
ID: 4444938
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 10:00
|
Five times, big deal. The Seligs beat the Brewers 162 times every year.
|
| 54 | CanEHdian Pride
ID: 426351415
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 12:05
|
Peter N.
From what I hear Brian Moehler won't be back until late June or possibly post-ASB.
Brain Moehler
|
| 55 | ChicagoTRS
Sustainer
ID: 5031911
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 12:43
|
How much cash does everyone try to have left over after you make your initial roster?
Personally I try to limit my opening roster to 47.5-48.5 million so I have some flexibility to move to the best hitting money earner if the player is not already on my roster. There is nothing I hate more than having to make multiple roster moves to get a player I want or feel I need. Nothing worse than being 10K short of making your desired move.
|
| 56 | GolfFreak
Donor
ID: 250282822
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 15:36
|
Peter N.
Derek Bell - OF, Pittsburgh Pirates
Not only were Bell's skills questioned last season -- the worst of his career -- his attitude and durability were as well. That doesn't leave many things left to like about him.
Fantasy Spin: If he doesn't accept a job as a backup outfielder, he'll be looking for one.
|
| 57 | Gangman
Leader
ID: 36155210
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 17:32
|
For all you Wikians:
Update: Feb 24 10:05pm
Wiki Gonzalez reported overweight. He might
be too content now that he's signed through
2005 and Ben Davis is out of the picture. (Ken
Rosenthal/TSN)
Fantasy Spin: Yikes! We considered this guy a
sleeper heading into this season. Wiki isn't
the only big-leaguer in history to show up to
camp carrying a few extra lbs., but this isn't an
encouraging sign.
|
| 58 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 3711402623
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 17:40
|
ouch! just drafted him as my #2 C too. Maybe he showed up with his gear on under his clothes. Yeah, I'm sure that's it...
|
| 59 | Peter N.
Donor
ID: 2011382318
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 19:50
|
ouch! Thanks for the updates CP and GolfFreak :-) Plenty of change to come...
|
| 60 | quik_ag
ID: 368423022
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 20:13
|
Erik, Bernie:
Any chance of an opening day price change based on drafts. I think it's a great idea. It was described to some expense above.
|
| 61 | beastiemiked
ID: 14821921
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 20:16
|
No way, everybody would draft the same people. Part of the fun in drafting is picking people that everyone else is afraid of.
|
| 62 | Peter N.
Donor
ID: 2011382318
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 21:14
|
Will go ahead and remove my other post. Also decided that the Big Unit was too big for my budget....at least for this team....
Pitchers
Kevin Brown 7,270,000
Ryan Dempster 3,660,000
Kevin Millwood 2,810,000
Carl Pavano 1,500,000
Brett Tomko 1,500,000
Catcher
Brad Ausmus 1,520,000
First Base
Nick Johnson 2,120,000
Second Base
Jose Ortiz 2,710,000
Third Base
Todd Zeile 2,990,000
Shortstop
A-Rod 8,100,000
Outfield
Ken Griffey Jr. 4,770,000
Johny Damon 3,210,000
Todd Hollandsworth 2,860,000
Daryle Ward 3,140,000
Roster Value
48,160,000
Remaining Cash
1,840,000
As always, subject to change ;-)
|
| 63 | ChicagoTRS
Sustainer
ID: 58735170
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 21:22
|
I don't think the opening day price change has to be huge...just like a normal price change from last year. 150K or so for the most drafted on down. Just gives everyone a little cushion to hold onto a player a little longer. I think it makes sense in context of the game...player prices are supposed to be market driven...why wouldn't they increase if many people draft the same player? I think it makes too much sense...last year was my first year playing and frankly I was surprised there was no price increase based on the ownership after the draft.
|
| 64 | Mr. Nice Guy
ID: 421124113
Wed, Feb 27, 2002, 23:45
|
P Team Next Game ERA W SO Last Total Sell For:
Johnson, Randy ARI 04/01 SD 2.49 21 372 .0 3539.0 11,500,000
Pineiro, Joel SEA 04/01 CHA 2.03 6 56 .0 956.0 3,850,000
Beckett, Josh FLA 04/02 @ MON 1.50 2 24 .0 316.0 3,640,000
Hernandez, Carlos HOU 04/02 MIL 1.02 1 17 .0 250.0 1,480,000
Ankiel, Rick STL 04/01 COL 7.13 1 27 .0 42.0 1,350,000
C Team Next Game BA HR RBI Last Total Sell For:
Hall, Toby TB 04/02 DET .298 4 30 .0 461.0 2,550,000
1B
Pena, Carlos TEX 04/01 @ OAK .258 3 12 .0 166.0 3,400,000
2B
Ortiz, Jose COL 04/01 @ STL .240 13 38 .0 623.0 2,710,000
3B
Burroughs, Sean SD 04/01 @ ARI .0 .0 3,500,000
SS
Larkin, Barry CIN 04/01 CHN .256 2 17 .0 370.0 3,250,000
OF
Pierre, Juan COL 04/01 @ STL .327 2 55 .0 1764.0 4,730,000
Damon, Johnny BOS 04/01 TOR .256 9 49 .0 1335.0 3,210,000
Hollandsworth, Todd COL 04/01 @ STL .368 6 19 .0 496.0 2,860,000
Gibbons, Jay BAL 04/01 NYA .236 15 36 .0 530.0 1,920,000
|
| 65 | beastiemiked
ID: 14821921
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 00:32
|
TRS, a utility spot over a 4th OFer makes too much sense.
Seriously though, I haven't really put down a team yet but if there was a opening day price change my strategy would change a lot. Basically all the gainers on the first day would already have momentum and more than likely keep gaining for the first few days. Compound this to your 9 position players on your roster and that's a lot of money.
|
| 66 | ChicagoTRS
Sustainer
ID: 58735170
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 06:49
|
At least last year all of the most widely owned/drafted players were the players who gained money the first few price changes anyway...Walker, Furcal, Soriano, Branyan, Gonzalez...etc... I don't see how having a draft price change would change that much. The reason someone would be highly drafted is directly because they are underpriced...makes sense in a market driven game these highly drafted players might see a bump in price.
I agree on the utility position...
|
| 67 | Stuck in the Sixties
Leader
ID: 12451279
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 11:33
|
First draft:
Oswalt - My only pitcher above $5, I think he's still undervalued because he basically didn't pitch the first month or so of the season and TSN is obviously pegging price to last year's production.
Beckett - I saw this guy pitch in September and he's the real deal. Many pubs have him the top rookie pitcher in MLB. We'll see but hard to argue with the price.
Cruz -- Also didn't pitch until the last months and did extremely well. Blazing fastball that lineup will bring him a few wins even when he's off.
Ishii -- Unlike the new hitters (Ensberg, Burroughs), this guy is reasonably priced and has been solid in Japan for more than a few years. And 23 of the Dodgers first 40 road games are in pitcher's parks. Could be a steal.
Ankiel -- Well, ya gotta take a chance somewhere. All the reports out of Jupiter, Fla., seem to indicate that the control problems are a thing of the past. If so, Ank may be the best value on the boards. We'll see. If he's the 4 or 5 coming north, then you gotta figure he's worth the price.
LoDuca -- about the only position where I'm prepared to spend more than 4.50. This guy was so solid I can just plug him in and forget it. Also, one of my big mistakes last year was following the cheapie catcher du jour. This will avoid that mistake.
Steve Cox -- Quite a price for a guy who's a starter. But he hit .260 last year and is one of the guys I'm expecting to switch into whoever's hot coming into week 2.
D'Angelo Jiminez -- The scouts and draft mags are wild about this guy and think he's a lock to hit .300. For this price, I'll take a chance.
Bill Mueller - With his injury, last year was basically a write-off and so he's tremendously undervalued IMHO. He'll be hitting second and so will score a bunch of runs in addition to a solid OBP. With Sosa hitting behind you, the pitches tend to improve.
Furcal - The wild card here is his rehab. Is he completely healed? If so, he becomes a bargain with his ability to lead the league in SB. If he looks weak early, this is another position to switch.
Griffey - His price is reflective of last year, rather than his ability as a hitter. He wasn't healthy for 15 straight games all last year. Let's see what happens but he has the potential to be a real money train early.
Stewart - A .300 hitter who can steal 40-50 bases for just over 4.50. He was an early train last year and could do the same again this time.
Dunn -- I'm afraid of this guy. Since his price is based on a half-season worth of numbers, he's easily one of the most underpriced players on the boards. Which means that almost everyone will have him. So if there's a slow start, his price could sink like a rock. But what a swing!! Reminds me of Berkman but with more power.
Erstad -- Another underachiever who will hit leadoff this year. Although that will hurt his power numbers, he'll score a bunch of runs and if he approaches his performance of two years ago, he'll be another steal.
I'd be interested in other folks' appraisals of their lineups.
|
| 68 | smallwhirled
Donor
ID: 157582113
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 11:54
|
Beckett and Dunn are probably the 2 guys that I will stay away from on 1 or maybe all of my teams when I draft. I really don't want those widely owned guys. I hope that a Hollandsworth type can produce similarly to Dunn w/o having to throw away an early trade when Dunn is first dropped.
Oh and *wink wink* is someone going to post something about some sampled drafts? That would be nice.
|
| 69 | CanEHdian Pride
ID: 426351415
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 12:28
|
Was planning to open the season with Junior Griffey but he is already going to miss some ST games and I think that waiting to pick him up is the best option.
Griffey
|
| 70 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 3711402623
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 12:32
|
I agree. I think it important to start off focusing on making cash with your trades. I agree with TRS that based on what I consider a basic premise of the game, we should be rewarded for drafting playters that start off heavily owned, not penalized.
I assume that this really only affects hitters now because of the new pitchers' price change structure. Applying one day's worth of trade activity to represent the opening day changes would only cause 1/5 the change that we might see on an average Thursday after a week or so into the season. No?
|
| 71 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 12:40
|
No, MITH. I'd expect more pitcher price volatility in the opening few days, since trades will be much more one-directional. Early starters will be sold (before getting bought again), and later starters will be bought without the drag of prior sells.
Also, price changes have always been based on the proportion of trades made into (or out of) a player relative to the total trades made for the period. This creates the potential for greater price swings on days with light trading, especially if there is a trading theme. The total number of trades made does not have any direct bearing on the magnitude of price changes.
Thus, prior experience suggests that the first few days of pitcher repricing will see higher volatility, not lower. After a rotation cycle has been completed, more stability should set in.
|
| 72 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 3711402623
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 12:44
|
The total number of trades made does not have any direct bearing on the magnitude of price changes.
I always assumed the opposite to be the case, that days that showed minimal price resulted from minimal trading activity the previous day. Interesting.
|
| 73 | beastiemiked
ID: 17414316
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 13:45
|
You have to remember that last year was a free game and people made teams even after the season started(Day Late J). This year there will be very few late entries and probably not enough to affect prices.
The fact doesn't change that people would change their draft strategy and a lot of teams would have many of the same players on them if there was a draft day repricing. There are a lot of players that have been getting a lot hype that I think won't live up to early expectations but if there was a draft day repricing I would get them because you couldn't afford to miss out on their price gains.
|
| 74 | smallwhirled
Donor
ID: 157582113
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 13:47
|
I'd have to guess that (Day Late J) will still be around because he made a day late ultimate basketball team, and he's been on fire lately. His day late team is killing my "b" team.
|
| 75 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 13:52
|
Here are some references:
SW article from Sept. 2000, written by Dean Carrano, who was a SW writer at the time.
Peeking Behind the Pricing Curtain. This is an essay I wrote in May, 1999, when SW publicized the weekly (pricing was done weekly that year) buy and sell trades for each player. The article that Dean Carrano wrote 1-1/2 years later (linked above) essentially confirmed everything that I had figured out. Gravity was introduced in between those two pieces, though, so my initial exposition was pre-gravity.
Here is an example, which is know is oversimplified, but is aimed at highlighting this specific proportionality issue:
Consider two trading periods.
In one period, there are 100 buys, of which 10 are for Barry Bonds.
In another period, there are 1000 buys, of which 20 are for Bonds.
In the first case, Bonds got 10% of the buys. In the second, he got only 2%, even though he had more total buys.
His price gain in the first case will be 5 times greater than his price gain in the second.
|
| 76 | beastiemiked
ID: 17414316
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 14:00
|
Actually only 1 game on the slate for opening day so first repricing is kinda of a repricing on the heavily drafted players.
Drafting a team after the first Monday's games wouldn't be such a bad idea. Not only could you get a good idea of who's going up but you really wouldn't miss any pitcher starts. Plus with the 5 day price swing for pitchers those pitchers going on Tuesday you might see a nice jump that first pitcher price change. Also, you wouldn't be missing out on many points now that the hitters scoring has been reduced. I'm going to have to think about this more.
|
| 77 | Craig
ID: 31121215
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 16:24
|
Hampton w/ 2 straights starts on the road at 2.6 million seems like a major bargain to me
|
| 78 | perk9600
ID: 4542177
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 16:28
|
Good call. He does look cheap, but at home you don't want to have him for certain.
|
| 79 | biliruben
Sustainer
ID: 3502218
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 16:31
|
Hampton's road stats went to hell after the first month or two as well, iirc. I think he must have tried to modify his pitching somehow to account for the lack of movement in the thin air, and completely fouled up his whole delivery. Buyer beware.
|
| 80 | J
Leader
ID: 34451212
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 16:39
|
You can count on seeing a Day Late J again. I pretty much do it in all sports, one day late team, one reg team. Its a great way to get a head start on your roster value, which will allow you to get studs sooner than others, which makes up for the point loss of the first day or two.
|
| 81 | J
Leader
ID: 34451212
Thu, Feb 28, 2002, 16:56
|
For some reason I can never quite make it work in football though ;)
|
| 82 | beastiemiked
ID: 17414316
Fri, Mar 01, 2002, 11:11
|
"Note: Sean Burroughs (3B, SD) has been made available for purchase at $3,500,000 TSND. "
|
| 83 | smallwhirled
Donor
ID: 157582113
Mon, Mar 04, 2002, 04:43
|
When I sorted players by total TSNP, I saw Burroughs at the top of the list, above RJ, and he's got 0's.
A glitch I guess.
I signed up for only one team, I'm a cheap college student. So, I'm not going with a "Day Late SW" or anything like that. I'm just going with my gut.
RE: post #66, There are not enough trades to have a bunch of widely owend players. I'll take the lesser owned players in a heartbeat this early in the season, and I'll move into the trains....hopefully I get lucky and draft a few. If a widely owned player bombs it, he'll be dropped in a heartbeat, and I don't like playing with fire.
A few more points....
I wonder how much the guys with a ton of K's are going to get hurt this year, Burnitz for example.
Ichiro at his price is crazy, if you can't hit HR's and you're over 5 million, then you're a waste in the TSN game IMO.
I thought I read somewhere that Cruz will not be in the starting rotation to begin the season?
It's hard to not look at I-Rod's price.
I guess that's all I see right now.
;-)
|
| 84 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 1832399
Mon, Mar 04, 2002, 10:02
|
smallwhirled
Note that the gap between high BA hitters and power hitters has been closed somewhat by making outs -2 instead of -1. Consider that under the new system, Brian Giles, Chipper Jones, Gary Sheffield, Bobby Abreu and Manny Ramirez all produced within .6swp/g of Ichiro last season, though they hit 37, 38, 36, 31 and 41 HR respectivey. Ichiro hit 8hr. Also note that Jose Cruz, Jim Edmonds, Reggie Sanders, Ellis Burks and Trot Nixon all produced at least 1swp/g less than Ichiro (2swp/g less for Burks and Nixon) while they hit 34, 30, 33, 28 and 27 hr respectively.
I'm not arguing for people to put Ichiro on their teams as I personally doubt he will repeat. All of the players I mentioned above are over $5m, except for Nixon and Burks.
|
| 85 | APerfect10
ID: 3257215
Wed, Mar 06, 2002, 03:14
|
Is anyone else disappointed in The Sporting News' attempt to level the playing field. While there are advantages of having Erik B and company around, I also feel it has hurt us. It appears TSN has smartened up.
a) Highly touted prospects prices are ridiculously inflated.
(Last year you could buy Soriano & Ortiz, rookies who would be everyday players for under 1.5M, unlike this year. The cheapest everyday player I could find was around 2M)
b) The scoring method has changed and gives pitchers an advantage over hitters, compared to last year. The prices already reflect this and in previous years they wouldnt.
Now I am not saying there are no gems, but making a 'solid' opening day roster appears much harder and/or cookie cutter compared to previous years. The only area they have not repriced is players who either played a shortened season last year or were on the DL, and this area must be exploited to have a competitive roster.
IMHO, I feel TSN has gone overboard and are trying to outwit the smart players. It appears they have tried to level the playing field for wise and unwise players. Is this helping the game, or hurting it? Only time will tell, but my initial judgement is not a good one.
|
| 86 | Khahan
ID: 12432113
Wed, Mar 06, 2002, 07:35
|
MITH, personally I think Ichiro, overall, was hurt the most by the effect of the -2/out.
Its not necessarily BA that you need to look at. Take a look at OBP. The guys with OBP close to their batting average (meaning very few walks) and high amount of Atbats are the ones who get hurt the most. Out of the top 25 outfielders from last season, Ichiro (692 at bats) had a 450 point difference between his 2001 stats w/ the old forumla and the new formula. Meanwhile, Barry Bonds (476 at bats) had a 320 point difference. Shawn Green (619 at bats) had a 435 point difference. Larry Walker (497 at bats) had a 323 point difference.
The major sluggers who get walks and therefore lower their at bats will benefit the most compared to the rest of the field.
|
| 87 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Mar 06, 2002, 07:36
|
Let me get this straight.
You say TSN has done a more equitable job of pricing, and that's bad - because you want to be able to capitalize on their mistakes?
If they have "leveled the playing field for wise and unwise players", wouldn't you expect the "wise" players to do better? If anything, I would think this should benefit the "wise" player, since the "unwise" would always identify the severe mispricings after a few games, and all rosters would converge on those bargains.
Also, your assertion in (b) is false. When there have been formula changes, the draft prices have always reflected those changes.
I guess I'm having a tough time understanding the problem here.
|
| 88 | ChicagoTRS
Sustainer
ID: 59239510
Wed, Mar 06, 2002, 09:08
|
I echo what Guru said...
The tougher the better as far as I am concerned. The tougher they make it the more it should benefit the 'wise' fantasy players. If it is easy to draft a team or easy to make the same moves it lumps the average and the good players together because the right moves are simple to figure out.
That being said I think there are plenty of easy to spot bargains still...it is not all that tough to build a very solid opening day roster.
In theory I really like what they have done with the pitcher pricing changes. It is yet to be seen whether this can be expoited easily. Anything to make randro pitching rotations a weaker strategy has to benefit the 'wise' player...allows the wise player to use his pitcher trades efficiently and should really seperate that player from the people who will still blindly randro. It still remains to be seen if this is the case in execution of the new pricing formulas.
|
| 89 | APerfect10
ID: 3257215
Wed, Mar 06, 2002, 11:01
|
Guru, you make some very valid points and I agree with you almost completely. I apologize for part b) if that is incorrect. I guess I did a poor job of posting the point of my post. So I will give it another try.
TSN has TRIED to level the playing field but have failed IMO. In previous years there were a few areas a 'wise' player could exploit. ie) Everday rookies/prospects, injured players, etc. While some of these areas are fixed appropriately, others are not. Therefore leaving a small window to exploit. In previous years, there were many exploitable areas therefore leaving the 'wise' player able to partially differentiate his roster from the 'unwise'. Since that window has been decreased but still remains there, this years rosters, IMHO, needs to have any/all areas that can be exploited, in their roster, to be competitive. Maybe this has seperated the 'wise' vs 'unwise' but has it given the 'wise' room to distinguish themselves as 'elite'?
|
| 90 | Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 1832399
Wed, Mar 06, 2002, 11:27
|
Perhaps they chose instead to seperate the "wise" from the "somewhat more wise". Sure, some "wise" folks who have done their research might be a little disappointed to find Jose Ortiz and Josh Beckett (for example) at $2.71m and $3.64m when they were sure they'd be a couple of sleepers. But the "somewhat more wise" folks might be delighted to find out that their extra, deeper research paid off, as while the folks they might consider "posers" who are high on their knowledge of Beckett and last years news now in Colorado, the harder to find gems like Michael Cuddyer, who just might hat 30hr this year is a very managable $.91m. I think it is a great thing that TSN has made it more difficult for managers to "distinguish themselves as elite" with research.
|
| 91 | mr g
ID: 15311150
Wed, Mar 06, 2002, 23:23
|
first price update will be march 1, now how does that work for pitcher, will no pitcher price's move for atleast 4 more days or will it be based on pitcher purchases that night.
|
| 92 | APerfect10
ID: 3257215
Wed, Mar 06, 2002, 23:48
|
mr g, the impression I am under is the prices will change that first day based on the previous days activity like previous years. The difference this year is that the first days activity will have MORE influence on the next 5 pitcher price changes than any other day of the season.
Previous Discussion on Pitcher Repricing and the effects of it
Best of luck!
|
| 93 | mr g
ID: 15311150
Thu, Mar 07, 2002, 01:08
|
lets hope so because that's what i was thinking 2
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|