RotoGuru Baseball Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread


0 Subject: Gurupie 20 -- 2016 Regular Season Discussion

Posted by: Species
- Dude [07724916] Tue, Mar 29, 2016, 15:42

What a preseason.

Blockbuster trades.

No less than FIVE teams making moves back-and-forth in an all out war against the tyranny of blue hen's back-to-back titles!

....and two very good drafts. Great job, everyone.

With a GREAT thank you to Tosh, the totality of our preseason is over (thank gawd!). Tosh has re-entered our entire keepers, draft and roster moves in ESPN, and now the remaining player universe is on waivers.

Please check your rosters for accuracy!

But outside of any corrections there, the season is open for business. Waiver claims, trades and free agent moves are all ready to go.

I would encourage any and all managers to post their draft / preseason thoughts -- good moves, shrewd trades, ballsy trades and thoughts on preseason favorites all welcomed.

Good luck to all. I look forward to a very fun, competitive season.
Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
[Lengthy or complex threads may require a slight delay before updating.]
506mjd
      ID: 509211014
      Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 18:01
502 I'm going to ask this question one more time. Where's the written rule that says I can't use the 3rd round pick I got from slizz to cover one of my prospects?

I made the deal as a third rd pick as I assumed I'd be able to use that pick, plus my 2nd and 3rd to cover my 3 prospects.

I've been in this league for over 5 years now and still don't fully understand the prospect rules despite reading them no less than 20 times.

There are some unwritten or unclear prospect rules that need clarification. Especially as it pertains to all traded p-draft pick scenarios.
507Khahan
      ID: 367431722
      Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 21:04
504 - I understand for the sake of uniformity that a rule change like this should be for the next draft (2018). But honestly, I dont see how any trades would be affected even for the 2017. I'm fine with making this change for the 2018 draft rather than pushing it for 2019. If somebody has a trade that was made that would restrict them under the new rule I'd understand and gladly reconsider changing it to 2019. But barring that, 2018 seems fine. I just dont see how this proposed rule change would negatively affect anybody.

From post 3, here are our relevant current rules for prospects:

2) Prospect Keeper Deadline: Managers designate their Prospect Keepers. They may designate up to 3.
3) Prospect draft picks are assigned and the Prospect Draft is commenced per our rules below.

Prospect Draft: The Prospect Draft will be held during the preseason after keepers are finalized (but before the Supplemental Draft).
Prospect draft picks are assigned after your prospect keepers are announced. So if you have 3 prospect keepers, you dont have a prospect draft pick to trade. You may trade a pick at any time, but if you have traded a prospect draft pick, you may only declare two keepers. If youve traded two picks, you can only keep one and if youve traded all three, you may keep none. Once prospects have been declared and draft picks assigned, a manager may again exceed three prospects via trade.


I propose the following changes:
2) Prospect Keeper Deadline: Managers designate their Prospect Keepers. They may designate up to 3.

Simply put, eliminate any reference to a max number of picks and tie all prospects to slots. No matter what, we cannot 'create' a new slot. If I trade and acquire 5 prospects I need 5 slots to keep them. So if also trade and acquire 2 more slots for 5 total, the league is STILL at 60 slots. 2 other slots had to be given up. There is simply no way the league can suddenly have 61 or even 59 prospect draft slots. Whether those slots are used as picks or to keep a prospect doesn't matter. We get 60 slots as a league and they can be shuffled up any way trading shuffles them.

So the rules should be:
1. each manager gets 3 prospect slots
2. slots can be traded
3. slots can be used for either picks in the prospect draft or to name a prospect as a prospect keeper
4. Your total number of prospect picks and prospect keepers cannot exceed the total number of draft slots you have.

Very simple and straight forward.
508youngroman
      ID: 57047243
      Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 04:22
Khahan - under your proposed rules

which kind of prospect pick would be needed to keep a 4th prospect? is a 3rd round enough or must it be a 1st or 2nd?

what if I trade away my 1st and 2nd round picks for two 3rd round picks. can I still keep 3 prospects with my three 3rd round picks?
509Khahan
      ID: 51116166
      Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 07:07
P-keepers would slot into the highest available pick. So if you have 4 prospects, any 4th pick acquired will do. You'd assign all picks to each manager. Then each manager declares prospects keepers up to the total picks they have. You would then assig each prospect to the highest available keeper slot. Any slots left over become our prospect draft.
510Species
      ID: 07724916
      Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 13:10
506: If I am understanding your point of view correctly, you are trying to argue that you should be able to keep 3 prospects AND still be awarded your own first round pick. Is that correct?

If so, I disagree with you and think, in that particular aspect, the rules are clear:

At the prospect draft keeper deadline, all managers must have no more than 3 keepers on their prospect list. They may keep all three or none as long as none have been traded, (see below) but they will only get as many draft picks as it takes to max their prospects at three, barring a trade.

You only get as many draft picks as it takes to max your prospects at three

Obviously it says "barring a trade". I suppose that nebulous verbiage could conceivably be used to support your argument, but that aspect of the rule has ALWAYS been ADMINISTERED as a separate action.

Not once has someone declared keepers and voiced: "and I'm using so-and-so's 2nd round pick to keep Ken Griffey, III, so I will have my own first round pick."

I am really sorry that you made a trade under a false assumption. I really am. We will fix it.
511Bean
      ID: 41052279
      Fri, Dec 16, 2016, 14:48
Since we can trade prospect slots, what prevents us to trade away regular keeper slots? Suffice it to say, I just don't get it, any of it.
512Nerfherders
      ID: 33543714
      Mon, Dec 19, 2016, 19:36
510 - I tried this once... I had three prospects I wanted to keep, so I wanted to trade my first round prospect pick because I wasn't going to use it, and I was told, "That's fine, but you have to drop one of your prospects in order to do that." That turn of logic made no sense to me and still doesn't.

That prospect pick should be a commodity like everything else in this league, and trading it despite already having 3 prospects doesn't necessarily break the rule of 60. If the team it's being traded to already needs two prospects, they are simply moving up in the draft, getting two first rounders instead of a 1st and 2nd. You aren't trading slots as much as trading for opportunity - opportunity to get a better prospect, not more prospects.
513Tree
      ID: 48192723
      Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 13:43
I like the slot idea.

Five slots, can be any combination of prospect keepers and draft picks, after calling up the 10th keeper(s).

You can exceed five slots, but must be down to five by the time of the draft.
514 taxman
      ID: 371026520
      Fri, Dec 23, 2016, 21:54
If you have an opening this year I am interested
515Khahan
      ID: 367431722
      Sat, Dec 31, 2016, 23:11
I'm wondering what people would think of a category change for 2018 or 2019 if we moved from Saves to holds + saves.

We had this discussion in 2016 for ribc and it was met with very mixed results - almost 50/50 if I remember right. I'm just going to quote my arguments from the ribc thread where this was discussed:

"Saves is a very narrow category. Its easy to manage in 10 and even 12 team leagues. But when you start getting into leagues the size of ribc they can be problematic. Closer changes due to injury usually means the fastest on the draw benefits. ... Opening the Saves category to Save + Holds would presumably open up the very limited market and make a whole category much less volatile and susceptible to injuries, committees, or poor performance. Saves stands out because it truly is different from the other 10 categories. No other category has such a narrow focus with a rules-driven small pool.

Saves + holds creates a larger pool of players to take from so you are not necessarily down with no way to dig out just because 1 of 2 or 3 people you drafted solely for a specific category got injured. It alters the supply in the supply/demand equation. Last season(2015) there were 89 MLB players who had double digit steals. There were over 100 with double digit HR. There were 37 with double digit saves. There were 69 with double digit wins. But those pitchers with double digit wins - most who were drafted were expected to contribute to K's and ERA and/or WHIP. In fact only 5 of those pitchers didn't break triple digit K's.
There were 85 pitchers with double digit holds last season. This means you go from having a limited pool of players (89 total last year (2015), many of which were not even viable until after the season started) who are drafted primarily for a single stat*, to a pool of around 170. So if one of your drafted picks goes down and you are on vacation or in a meeting or asleep or just not the first one there, you aren't screwed.

Last year when Kimbrel got traded (so that was actually 2015), the Soria owner in each league lost unless he was the first to grab Grilli. And when Grilli went down, that owner lost unless he was the first to grab Jim Johnson. At least with an expanded pool if you dont get a guy who steps in, you can still actually manage your team and get players who will contribute to the category. The fact that its narrow creates a bit of strategy during the draft. It can create a bit of speculation during the season. But the reality is what it creates the most of is - luck of the draw. More than any other stat, losing a closer costs a team because unless you are lucky enough to be first to the WW, you are not replacing any of those stats.

It would suck going from Paul Goldschmidt down to say Brandon Moss. But at least Moss can fill in 1st base and continue adding to the HR and rbi totals, even if its not at the same pace as Goldschmidt. But if Kimbrel goes down this year, unless you drafted Uehara you lose. "


* - generally speaking yes, closers are drafted for saves and saves alone. What they contribute to k's, era/whip will determine which closer you are taking first, second, third etc. But if they weren't in a position to get saves either immediately or as a handcuff for the near future, you most likely aren't drafting relievers. There are of course exceptions, but they can be counted on your hand.


Considering many of the first in the ribc discussion thread were G20 members and were in favor of the change I'm curious what we, as a league, thought of the idea.
516Species
      ID: 07724916
      Mon, Jan 02, 2017, 15:34
The largest difference between G20 and RIBC is the keeper factor. Moving to Saves plus Holds takes a certain amount of the keeper / dynasty factor out of the equation. Do we want that?

Admittedly there is a certain percentage of saves that turn over each year......so perhaps the argument self-corrects itself.

I guess my personal point of view (not in any official-like commissioner capacity) / question is: does this make it more easy or difficult? Does it encourage trading and offer chances for teams both on the way up and on the way down in their team journeys?
517Khahan
      ID: 367431722
      Mon, Jan 02, 2017, 16:30
Last year there were only 42 players who achieved double digit saves 21of which were still under 20 saves. We are a 20 team league. This means whoever happens to have/draft 2 closers who a) dont get injured and b) dont lose their jobs has an inherent advantage over other teams just by virtue of luck during the season.
The size of our league puts us at odds with more traditional set ups right away because there is an inherent imbalance that exists. In fact in 2016 there were only 13 closers who kept the closers job job all season (including players like Melancon who were traded and stayed a closer). That means only half the league at most were able to hold onto even 1 closer.

Is there a correlation:
The following teams had more than 1 'whole season closer':
species (1st)
roto guru (3rd)
blue hen (4th)
team tosh (7th)
Munson Mobsters (8th)
Bean's Rockies (10th)


Every single manager who managed to have 2 full season closers on their roster on the last day of the season finished in the top half. Its really not a matter of is 'is saves + holds better/preferable to just saves.' Its a matter of resources. A flat 'saves only' category simply doesn't have enough resources.

And its not just simple 'addition' by adding holds where all the closers get thrown into a pool with all the hold guys. Now we are looking at picking and choosing viable closers and viable set up men to fill out our rosters as opposed to - guy I'm stuck with Tony Cingrani, hoping to fill out a category and grab 2-3 points at the bottom of the rung.
518blue hen
      ID: 5254718
      Tue, Jan 03, 2017, 09:57
Extremely opposed to this change.

I have about a thousand reasons for this, but I'll limit it to a couple, using Khahan's own quotes.

Saves + holds creates a larger pool of players to take from so you are not necessarily down with no way to dig out just because 1 of 2 or 3 people you drafted solely for a specific category got injured.

If you want a league where it's easier to find players, G20 might not be the right choice for you.

Last year there were only 42 players who achieved double digit saves 21of which were still under 20 saves. We are a 20 team league. This means whoever happens to have/draft 2 closers who a) dont get injured and b) dont lose their jobs has an inherent advantage over other teams just by virtue of luck during the season.

Two ways you can win here: by drafting players unlikely to get injured or lose their job, or by paying attention and picking up replacements when it happens. Both are much more skill-related rather than luck related. In fact, since holds are more random and fluctuate from year to year, it's far more luck-based if you include holds.

Personally, I'd rather be in a 9 category league without saves before replacing saves with S+H.
519Khahan
      ID: 4807310
      Tue, Jan 03, 2017, 11:09
Two ways you can win here: by drafting players unlikely to get injured or lose their job, or by paying attention and picking up replacements when it happens. Both are much more skill-related rather than luck related. In fact, since holds are more random and fluctuate from year to year, it's far more luck-based if you include holds.

I wont disagree with your preference against the idea. I know it can simply boil down to a personal choice. But I have to strongly disagree with this statement that its more skill intensive. How is it skill intensive to a) draft a closer that doesn't get injured and b) be the first to the punch when a new and unexpected closer is named?

Yes, it takes a deeper knowledge to know who to handcuff or who is likely to get named and simply have him ahead of time. But the change to s+H takes just as much knowledge. You need to know who the good set up men are. You need to recognize a newly available commodity like Brad Hand (22 H+S, 2.92 era 1.11 whip 111k's in 98.1 IP) as being more valuable than what was expected of old established commodities like Huston Street. The need for knowledge and research is still there.

And please name me one other stat that is handled like saves and has as limited of a pool of players as saves. Going into a season, even assuming 4-5 teams have a 3 person closer by committee right there is MAYBE 45 (not even going to get into actual viable players you would want to roster) players who can contribute to that stat. What other stat is so limited? K's, era/whip? Every single pitcher contributes to them. W's? A few hundred to choose from but 70 contributed double digit wins

What about runs? 99 players contributed 70+ runs in 2016.
Rbi's? 96 contributed 70+ rbi's
SB - 79 contributed double digit steals
HR - 111 players hit 20+ HR

So lets review and tell me which counting stat stands out as simply lacking in resources when we go into a draft:
Saves - 45 total
wins - 70 viable
runs - 99 viable
rbi's - 96 viable
sb - 79 viable
hr - 111 viable

Going to saves + holds increases that 45 to the mid 90's. Right in line with every other counting stat. I can't argue with your dislike of the idea and I wont try. But simple logic and stats tells us this is a change that is a long time coming.
520blue hen
      ID: 5254718
      Tue, Jan 03, 2017, 13:06
I don't want to recognize Brad Hand. I barely want to recognize AJ Ramos
521Bean
      ID: 27592412
      Tue, Jan 03, 2017, 14:12
Never liked the saves category, would like to see it go away in rotoguru leagues if not replaced with S+H. Too many league results are determined by people who simply load up on relievers that get the "closer job" out of the blue, and are then able to win the news cycle race. Even if you dont need saves you gain trade fodder.

If all players are put on waivers permanently, it would "fix" this problem. However, streamers would do their best to never let that happen in a democracy.
522Bmd
      ID: 825715
      Tue, Jan 03, 2017, 20:03
Closers are easy to find in a big league like this. The high turnover is great for competing teams. I really don't like holds.
523Species
      ID: 07724916
      Fri, Jan 06, 2017, 11:37
One counter-argument to post 517:

I think the reason that most of the top 10 teams had more than one "full season" closer was because they were (mostly) the main teams that concentrated on competing well in saves, and hence they paid the price to do so. That was done via the use of high draft picks or by making trades to acquire them.

I kept one closer, traded a prospect pick for another one and further spent a high 2nd rounder to acquire a third closer (that did not make the 'full season' list).

Unless you have a young Jansen-type closer, teams not in contention SHOULD be speculating in potential closers and trading them to contenders. With the turnover, in my view it creates opportunity for all 20 teams if they are wise enough to choose the right speculative buys.

The more I think about it, the more I think the S + H idea takes away from trading. Am I missing something?
524Khahan
      ID: 5609611
      Fri, Jan 06, 2017, 12:10
The more I think about it, the more I think the S + H idea takes away from trading. Am I missing something?

Again, look at the resource pool numbers I posted. People trade in season for HR and that has the largest pool of viable candidates. Increasing the smallest pool to bring it in line with other stats wont hurt trading.

I honestly don't think trading will be hurt or helped by this. The 2 main positives of this category are that it eases the effect of injuries (bringing it more in line with other stats) and reduces the impact of the 'race to the keyboard' when an injury occurs or a role change happens.

There are some drawbacks, though none on the level of the 2 positives I pointed out. There are other positives, but none on the scale of injury/race impact.

I think the reason that most of the top 10 teams had more than one "full season" closer was because they were (mostly) the main teams that concentrated on competing well in saves,/I

Yes, this is true, but it is a correlation that shouldn't be ignored. It is also just 1 season. I'd be curious if that correlation held true over most seasons.
525blue hen
      ID: 5254718
      Fri, Jan 06, 2017, 12:52
I don't follow what you mean with the resource pool numbers. Those are arbitrary numbers. S+H means Betances will have consistent value, and a team won't trade for him hoping for an increase in value, which is the reason most trades happen.
526blue hen
      ID: 5254718
      Fri, Jan 06, 2017, 12:55
Who is my second "whole season closer"? I had Britton, but only got partial seasons from Allen and Jeffress, plus 11 total from Bailey, Estevez, Maurer, and Feliz.
527Khahan
      ID: 5609611
      Fri, Jan 06, 2017, 13:51
Those are arbitrary numbers

No, those are actual numbers. Pull up a list of player stats and check them for yourself.
528blue hen
      ID: 5254718
      Fri, Jan 06, 2017, 14:24
What about runs? 99 players contributed 70+ runs in 2016.
Rbi's? 96 contributed 70+ rbi's
SB - 79 contributed double digit steals
HR - 111 players hit 20+ HR

99, 96, 79, 111 are actual numbers.

70, 70, 10, and 20 are arbitrary.
529Species
      ID: 07724916
      Fri, Jan 06, 2017, 14:53
The 2 main positives of this category are that it eases the effect of injuries (bringing it more in line with other stats) and reduces the impact of the 'race to the keyboard' when an injury occurs or a role change happens.

I guess I get where Khahan is coming from with the whole scarcity issue, and comparing the number of viable players who can assist in a particular category and comparing them to one another. But:

1) That doesn't mean that each category HAS to be 'fair' or more even in regards to the viable contributors to said category.
2) That is part of the tradition of Fantasy Baseball. I hate having to manage for SB and it is often my achilles heel / downfall in fantasy leagues. For 2016 I refused to fall into that trap and got Dee Gordon to anchor that category and later traded for Rajai Davis to supplement. Like with saves, it is the price you have to pay to win.

I would agree with the "race to the keyboard comment" if it were 3 years ago. These days, nearly every decent set up man or bullpen committee member who might have a chance for saves is already rostered.

The only exceptions to that, typically, are non-strikeout/mediocre ratio guys behind highly established, top-tier closers. Sure, once in a great while when a Kimbrel gets hurt out of the blue there could be a run to pick up an Uehara-type. But as soon as there are whispers that a closer might have a sore elbow (days or weeks before that closer actually hits the DL), those setup men are long gone.

----------------------

But these are just my opinions as one team out of 20. We need to hear the points of view of more managers. Please.
530Khahan
      ID: 5609611
      Fri, Jan 06, 2017, 15:06
Fair enough BH. I had to start somewhere for my list though, so I chose what I felt was a viable number for each counting category where it feels like that player is making a contribution or breaking even rather than hurting you if you had somebody else off waivers. But lets just go at it without any arbitrary numbers:

148 players had 1 or more saves
549 players had 1 or more wins
601 players had 1 or more runs
583 players had 1 or more rbis
497 players had 1 or more HR
378 players had 1 or more SB

So just going by a raw, "how many players actually contribute anything to this category" saves is less than half of the next lowest (its actually less than 40% of the next lowest).

Its not a matter of 'wanting it easier to find players' as BH puts it in 518. Its a matter of wanting a player pool that doesn't create an unfair balance by virtue of its size. Its a matter of wanting skill and knowledge to be the primary determining factors in the final standings for a category over luck and speed to the keyboard. I have yet to see a counter argument to that point.
531blue hen
      ID: 5254718
      Fri, Jan 06, 2017, 16:06
Speed to the keyboard is a skill. You can't lump it in there with luck. Most of us have full time jobs, and many of us have kids, and there are plenty of blockers in our lives. I don't think people should be penalized for making G20 a life priority. I spend time looking at the waiver wire, you spend time researching Cuban defectors. We shouldn't and aren't tilting things in favor of one or the other.



532blue hen
      ID: 5254718
      Fri, Jan 06, 2017, 16:07
I also want to say that I appreciate Khahan taking time to think about how to improve G20. That's always welcome here.
533Nerfherders
      ID: 33543714
      Fri, Jan 06, 2017, 17:20
I'd be in favor of S+H, even if the only reason was to spice things up a bit. It would make dealing with relievers a little more interesting and perhaps a little less aggravating, especially at the trade deadline or during the off-season.

From my own selfish point of view, it would certainly help me since I punted saves last year and don't look to keep any closers. I only have or ever had 1 reliever on my roster the entire season. It is probably my biggest missing piece right now, and would be easier to manage if Holds were added.

And just as a piece of reference, here is the average saves by point total from 2012-2015:

115
101
97
94
87
81
78
67
61
56
50
46
43
39
37
33
29
19
13
6

The leader in the category averages 115 saves. If you can assume an average closer gets 30 saves, one will get you 4 points, 2 will get you 12 points, and 3 puts you in contention for #1. This tells me that there are 4 teams every year with at least the equivalent of 3 closers, which means that the other 16 teams are fighting over the other 18. In fact, the top 5 teams on average account for 43% of all the saves. As Khahan points out, there's just not enough resources to go around.
534Khahan
      ID: 367431722
      Fri, Jan 06, 2017, 18:27
Thanks BH. I realize not everybody considers S+H to be an improvement. But its always good to discuss things.

And Nerf - thanks for the data. Being a stat driven activity, more data only helps. Seeing as how you looked at a 4 yr spread, I'd say we have a more solid foundation to examine.
535Nerfherders
      ID: 2211442615
      Sun, Jan 08, 2017, 17:22
I take that from my own personal player rater. I do a 4 year average of finishes to know what breakpoints I need in every category. I actually have all the data going back to 2003, but saves are one stat that are not going to change that much from year to year.
536blue hen
      ID: 5254718
      Mon, Jan 09, 2017, 14:06
You have data from 2003?!?!? At the very least, I'd love to see the league records...
537Khahan
      ID: 55046914
      Mon, Jan 09, 2017, 15:46
I would love to see the data as well. It would be very interesting, regardless of what it shows on the issue at hand.
And to be clear, I'm not suggesting this change for 2017. I'd even be willing to consider it something that doesn't go into effect until 2019 if it does get to a vote and pass. It would be a change in player value that we would all need to absorb.
538Nerfherders
      ID: 33543714
      Mon, Jan 09, 2017, 17:55
It's not in an easily digestible form as it is in a long list and doesn't even have team names attached to the stats from 2010 on. It's 2600 lines right now. I can post it if you really want to see it. You'd be amazed what the winning ERA's were back 10-12 years ago.

There used to be website Ref kept with all those stats. Maybe that was just for football? I know he gave me all the data (or showed me where it was) when I first started in the league so I could do my own analysis.
539blue hen
      ID: 5254718
      Mon, Jan 09, 2017, 18:00
Yes, post it in another thread. Definitely want to see the top 10 in each category.

I have a spreadsheet that does a decent job matching up teams to franchises. I'll send it your way.
540Nerfherders
      ID: 33543714
      Mon, Jan 09, 2017, 18:02
I did some digging and found the website. It still exists!

http://www.angelfire.com/games5/gurupie/baseball.html

There was even a trophy and a plaque. Who knew?
541blue hen
      ID: 5254718
      Tue, Jan 10, 2017, 09:47
Not bad. Looks like Twarpy once got 99 in pitching, which is the record. BH has had perfect hitting twice.
542Blue hen
      ID: 410452818
      Tue, Jan 10, 2017, 22:16
Looking to deal for a stud SP. Can include Joey Gallo, Sonny Gray, Troy Tulowitzki, Zach Britton, Adam Duvall, or picks.

Also looking at options to trade Jose Altuve. Impress me.
543Fosten
      ID: 4097314
      Sat, Jan 14, 2017, 22:45
Trade Announcement
Fosten trades
Justin Verlander
Craig Kimbrel
2017 1st round Prospect Pick
2017 2nd round Prospect Pick
2018 1st round Prospect Pick
Meatwads trades
Yu Darvish
Justin Upton
Francis Martes (p)
2017 2nd round Supplemental Pick

Trade Announcement
Fosten trades
2017 3rd round Supplemental Pick
Guru trades
Jose Berrios (p)

After much due diligence, I am happy these deals finally came to fruition. Obviously moving p-picks is never easy, but considering Darvish was one of my big off-season targets, I am excited we could make this work. Not sure what to expect from Berrios this year, but I still like his chances long-term. I would like to express my gratitude to both Meatwads and Guru for being fun and easy to work with, and I would highly recommend these gentleman as future trade partners. Thanks again. That said, the Munson Mobsters still have some off-season items for sale: Robertson, Iglesias, Renfroe, Kang, Shelby, Skaggs, ArchieB. These mid-range players could be packaged with a stud keeper or traded for picks. Inquire within. Happy New Year to all.
544Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Sat, Jan 14, 2017, 23:04
confirmed
545Meatwads
      ID: 142562814
      Sun, Jan 15, 2017, 00:41
Confirmed
546Judy
      ID: 35493114
      Sun, Jan 15, 2017, 21:04
531

"Speed to the keyboard is a skill."

Only if you are near the d***ed thing. I cannot tell you how many times I read about a closer going down or a closer in waiting changing, run to the computer and find the guy has already been taken that day.

Most days there are many hours where I do not have access to a computer so being speedy has nothing to do with it if it is not there to dash to.

I support S+H as a category for both here (especially) and RIBC.
547Bean
      ID: 27592412
      Mon, Jan 16, 2017, 14:26
<546>Was wondering if there were any other enlightened people on these forums. Camping in front of a PC all day might be considered a skill by some. However, I don't see it becoming an Olympic sport anytime soon.
548Species
      Dude
      ID: 07724916
      Mon, Jan 16, 2017, 19:26
543: Audit time!!

If I am following these trades correctly, the participants (from a Prospect standpoint) end up with the following:

Fosten ends up with Bradley Zimmer (whom he already had), Jose Berrios and Francis Martes.

He has also traded away all 3 2017 prospect picks.

I hope he knows that he will have to 10th keeper all three of them, because to fulfill his trades he can have zero prospects after the dealine. As I have explained in the past, the owning of another team's prospect picks has NO bearing on whether you are ever awarded prospect picks.

Meatwads ends up with Franklin Barreto and Lucius Fox. He has not traded any of his own picks plus owns a treasure trove of other teams' picks. As things stand now, he can keep both Barreto and Fox and he would be awarded his first round pick in the next draft.

Guru ends up with Almora and Phillips and if he does nothing else would be awarded his first round pick.

-----------------------------------

Fosten emailed me a few days ago, but I was busy and did not sit down to go through his scenario in advance. It is my guess that he did not intend to end up with 3 prospects that he could not keep after the trade deadline. As such, I am making the following Commissioner's Ruling:

Since Fosten attempted to clarify our rules for his trade in advance, I am giving him a one-time opportunity to re-work either of his trades. However, this MUST come with the 100% agreement of his trade partners. It is not their fault if Fosten did not correctly understand the rules. They are under NO obligation to do so.....Fosten will have to live with the consequences if he cannot renegotiate a new trade. I am setting a deadline of January 31, 2017 to re-negotiate either of these trades.
549Species
      Dude
      ID: 07724916
      Mon, Jan 16, 2017, 19:40
It is my guess that he did not intend to end up with 3 prospects that he could not keep after the trade deadline.

That should read: "...after the prospect keeper deadline."
550Fosten
      ID: 550431817
      Mon, Jan 16, 2017, 19:41
I believe I traded two 2017 p-picks? And one p-2018 pick? Would I not have one 2017 p-slot left for Zimmer?
551Species
      Dude
      ID: 07724916
      Mon, Jan 16, 2017, 19:52
Traded your 3rd to Guru......
552Species
      Dude
      ID: 07724916
      Mon, Jan 16, 2017, 19:53
LOL.......oops. 3rd round supplemental.

hahahaha.....ok, my mistake :)

Let this be a lesson to you all though! Pay attention! ;)
553Fosten
      ID: 550431817
      Mon, Jan 16, 2017, 19:57
All good Species. Thanks for double checking.
554Meatwads
      ID: 142562814
      Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 10:05
548 -

Just for my own sanity, I want to clarify something. You mentioned my prospect situation, specifically Lucius Fox. Since he went on to post a paltry .582 OPS in Low-A ball last season, odds are not good I will be keeping him. If I were to release him, that would also open up my 2nd round p-pick. So I will be entering this p-draft with three 1sts and two 2nds, as well as Barretto.

All that being said, I am currently in the midst of a mega rebuild, and am interested in more p-picks. Either 2017 or 2018. I'm also interested in 2019 picks, after the draft occurs and they become tradeable. I'd also be willing to trade for an elite prospect and forfeit my 2nd p-pick. Basically my entire roster is on the trade block. CYelich probably being my franchise player at the moment, thus the hardest to acquire.

That leaves guys like BPosey, CDavis, BMiller, CGomez, JVerlander, KJansen, CKimbrel, EDiaz, DKeuchel, MPineda, VVelasquez, AWainwright, etc. Feel free to reach out to me if anyone is interested in mixing it up.
555 slizz
      ID: 3556212
      Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 14:58
Now that football season is all but over (well...lets be serious, it was over for Bears fans after week 5) its time to focus on baseball! Like everyone in this league, I'm sure you're as excited as I am!

Off-season Trade Snippets

Man...I can't remember an offseason (during football season) where as many big deals have happened:

-Madbum for Buxton and Ray: Was a massive risk on my part. Credit to Nerf for pulling the trigger because as much as I love Buxton, the OB% could be a bit of a concern. I really really need Buxton to be close to September Buxton all season!

I think he is just scratching the surface of his talents...so hopefully he rewards me!

-GO's megadeal with Khahan for for Kershaw: GO is now a top 5 contender....Khahan has a surplus of young talent on the rise.

MJD shipping the early part of his draft to Species for Aaron Sanchez: Species can now defend his title by capturing some saves early in the draft by building depth! MJD now has two frontline starters he can potentially count on from 2017-on to go with his solid core he's building.

Fosten, Meatwads, and Guru megadeal: What a deal...its tough to evaluate it until Meatwads drafts, but all teams involved are happy.

SLIZZ OFFSEASON TRADE COMMERCIAL

Not that it should come as any surprise, but here are my likely keeps:

1B - Eric Hosmer
3B - Nolan Arenado
SS - Carlos Correa
OF - Gregory Polanco
OF - Byron Buxton
UT - Anthony Rendon
SP - Stephen Strasburg
RP - Wade Davis

1 more - probably a SP

As I've stated at season's end...I have a surplus of keepable players to sell. The leftovers are so good that I'm quite confident I could field a fringe top-10 team with them! ;)

That said, I have two (2) big names that can be had and I don't anticipate both being on my opening day roster. I'm not just dangling them out there to see what I can get:

STEPHEN STRASBURG, SP, WSH

I don't need to hype him up, we all know what he can do. Ideally, I would love to consolidate Strasburg and Rendon into something bigger.

ANTHONY RENDON, 3B, WSH

No, I do not hate the Nationals. Rendon just entered his prime years (26 years old) towards the end of last season. If Rendon still had 2B eligibility, he would be a keeper for me and off the table. He doesn't...he's at the hot corner where I happen to have the best hitting 3B in all of baseball, Nolan Arenado. Rendon is a top 45 Dynasty Keeper luxury (to me) who offers you a 20/20 infield bat with solid OB%. As of now, he's my 9th keeper, but I do not want to use that keeper spot on Utility.

That said, I am looking for a top prospect in exchange for Rendon on his own.

THE REST:

HITTERS:
Albert Pujols, 1B, LAA: The machine can still knock em in. While he isn't what he was in STL, he is good for 30 HR and 100+ RBI's. Would be looking to recoup what I paid for 1/3rd of a seasons' rental in a 4th round pick

Hernan Perez, 3B/OF, MIL: I honestly picked him up to stream and he never made it back to the WW. with 2B/3B/OF eiligiblity, he was highly effective for me all year as a swiss army knife who gave me Starling Marte-like production:

Hernan Perez's Best Starling Marte Impression

Looking for mid-rd pick.

Yulieski Gurriel, 3B, HOU: I forgot I had this guy. Seriously!

What is known about Yulieski Gurriel is he hit .335 in his 15 seasons in the Cuban league with 250 home runs and 1,018 RBI. Last year, Gurriel had 15 home runs in 174 at bats with an average of .500 (not a typo). He bats right-handed and the dimensions at Minute Maid Park seem to play to his strengths. Of course, numbers in Cuba are to be taken with a grain of salt as the parks are smaller and it is not known the level of competition he has faced.

Also, trying to predict how a player will transition to the majors along with the culture of being a major league player is hard to do. Gurriel is 32 years old, or at least this is what is being reported, so there should not be the fear of facing the top level of competition as he has played in the World Baseball Classic and in the Olympics.

Gurriel had a higher average than Yoenis Cespedes (.319) with his slugging percentage only five points below the All-Star Mets outfielder. But his numbers are below Jose Abreu. Gurriel is ahead of Yasmany Tomas...


Surprise me!

Domingo Santana, OF, MIL: Santana has the physical profile to become a Fantasy difference maker. 25 HR power and double-digit steals in the top half of a lineup have plenty of value. Towards the end of the season, he was getting on base at a clip of .345% in 246 AB. At only age 24, he makes for a fine keeper with tons of upside. Kind of like Carlos Gonzalez years ago...Looking for draft pick compensation.

Jacoby Ellsbury, OF, NYY: Mid-late round pick. For someone looking for a 9th keeper cheap, he is your guy.

PITCHERS:

Sean Manaea, SP, OAK: Leaning towards keeping. Former #1 overall Rule 4 draft prospect until he got hip surgery. Pitches in Oakland, 8k/9, awesome ERA and WHIP, and I only expect him to improve. Of course, I'm open to packaging him for an upgrade where possible.

Robbie Ray, SP, AZ: I traded MadBum to squat on his rights for an offseason...but the more I read the more I like. Juiciest K/9 ratio in baseball after the late Jose Fernandez. If he can eliminate his hard hit % (worst in baseball), his #'s across the board should rise.

Drew Smyly, SP, SEA: We all know Smyly has the potential of a frontline starter. That said, Smyly has yet to put it together, consistently, over the course of a season...you'll get one starter where he's Scherzer-esque followed by an egg. I think with another year of seasoning and now moving from the scary AL East to the rather pedestrian AL West, (& playing 1/2 his games in pitcher-friendly Safeco) he makes for a solid 8-9th keep with upside.

CLOSERS:

Wade Davis, RP, CHC: Likely keeping. Most consistent RP and second best in the biz behind Britton.

Seung-hwan "The final Boss" Oh, RP, STL: Competing for my last keeper spot. Would like to make the decision easier. As a probable 1st round s-draft pick, am looking to trade for a 2 round discount (rd 3).

Tony Watson, RP, PIT: Pirates closer. Good ratios, 35-40 saves.

Mauricio Cabrera, RP, ATL: The next Chapman? 103mph fastball and delivers the goods.

Carter Capps, RP, SD: A personal favorite of mine...health issues? yes. His 2015 ratios are the best of any closer / RP...even dwarfs Betances.

PROSPECTS ON MY ROSTER:

Rowdy Tellez, 1B, TOR: The premier power hitting 1B in the minor leagues. With Encarnacion departing and only Smoak in his way, now is the chance to get your hands on the games next great slugger. Had a .900 OPS in 2016.

Alex Verdugo, UT, LAD: Got him as a pure upside play, much like Species got Lewis Brinson the season before. As per Keith Law one year ago: Only Corey Seager has a higher ceiling among Dodgers position-player prospects than Verdugo, who has special ability at the plate and when he's throwing, although ultimately he's going to end up in right field. At the plate, Verdugo has great bat speed and the ability to make quick adjustments, reacting well even when seeing an off-speed pitch in a fastball count. He started slow in Great Lakes, but those adjustments kicked in around the Midwest League All-Star break, after which he hit .349/.372/.460 with only 16 Ks in 200 plate appearances. He was then promoted to Rancho Cucamonga and raked.

He looks like a 20-homer, high-batting-average hitter who can play plus defense in a corner with a 70 arm and add a little value on the bases.


I'm hoping he rises to the Top 10 (much like Bogaerts leap from the 80's to #1 overall) when Law releases his top prospects in the coming weeks.

Willy Adames, SS, TB: With the WW picked dry, I am going with pure upside.

Like I said earlier, my team is loaded with talent that can help those in need of filling out their keepers. Please email me if interested!!!

jayrsherby@gmail.com
Rate this thread:
5 (top notch)
4 (even better)
3 (good stuff)
2 (lightweight)
1 (no value)
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.

RotoGuru Baseball Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread




Post a reply to this message: Gurupie 20 -- 2016 Regular Season Discussion

Name:
Email:
Message:
Click here to create and insert a link
Click here to insert a block of hidden (spoiler) text
Click here to insert a random spelling of Mientkiewicz
Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)


Viewing statistics for this thread
Period# Views# Users
Last hour11
Last 24 hours22
Last 7 days44
Last 30 days1413
Since Mar 1, 2007337653180