2012 Fantasy Baseball Thread

[cs3]

Originally Posted by Kneel B4 Zod

I have him as the 5th or 6th best SP)

first of all this is just not going to happen.
you realize that hes not pitching more than 160 innings right?
that right there precludes him from even sniffing the top 10, even if he keeps up his 11+K/9



anyway to answer your question i need to know if its roto or H2H.
(in H2H hes not worth jack this year so I'd be trying to trade him if he reallycan bring you back $30 of value, which i doubt)

[cs3]

Originally Posted by ZBTHorton

Yeah, but when Ellsbury comes back to realistic expectation HR wise he won't really be a 36$ player. I don't mind your idea though, I'm not huge on paying for catchers. Just thought Wieters was good value for 6.

even if his HR's drop in half hes still worth over $30
110R/80rbi/16HR/.300/40-50 SB is still elite and easily a top 10 hitter.




but to answer 4 High's question:
Ellsbury 23
Upton 24
Stanton 17
Leubke 4
Holland 1
Sanatana 1

[cs3]

Originally Posted by ItsRainingMen

upton > cargo

pedroia > kinsler

but cargo and kinsler have had the higher fantasy peaks so far

[-C-P-]

Originally Posted by ZBTHorton

Beyond whether it was written somewhere, you have a gripe because it's the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.

Why is it so dumb? I've seen the non-snake draft for keeper leagues elsewhere. I don't really see why it is so bad...good chance that winning teams with 10 keepers absolutely crush the bottom teams. Specifically, I'm imagining my team last year that luck boxed Tulu, AGon, Bautista, Ellsbury in rds 1,2,3, and 5. It would be years before the bottom dwellers competed with this team. The non-snake draft at least gives the bottom teams a chance to compete. Its not like guys outside the 100-120 being kept are going to be elite talent...it basically gives them first shot at mid round vets and high upside rookies (and I'm guessing the real elite guys are already being kept). I don't know what the buyin/experience factor/baseball nerdery level is for that guy's league but its gonna be hard to keep league members who are perpetually at the bottom (a salary cap might mitigate this somewhat). Gonna be even harder to find owners willing to take over team with 10 sucky keepers.

His only real beef is if the rule was never written or disclosed, or against the will of the league IMO.

[Kneel B4 Zod]

Originally Posted by cs3

first of all this is just not going to happen.
you realize that hes not pitching more than 160 innings right?
that right there precludes him from even sniffing the top 10, even if he keeps up his 11+K/9

yes. here I'm trusting the math of last player picked which weights the effect of innings on rate stats (and obv counts counting stats)

curious how you are doing your ranking. gut feel or ???

[Kneel B4 Zod]

Originally Posted by -C-P-

Why is it so dumb? I've seen the non-snake draft for keeper leagues elsewhere. I don't really see why it is so bad...good chance that winning teams with 10 keepers absolutely crush the bottom teams. Specifically, I'm imagining my team last year that luck boxed Tulu, AGon, Bautista, Ellsbury in rds 1,2,3, and 5. It would be years before the bottom dwellers competed with this team. The non-snake draft at least gives the bottom teams a chance to compete. Its not like guys outside the 100-120 being kept are going to be elite talent...it basically gives them first shot at mid round vets and high upside rookies (and I'm guessing the real elite guys are already being kept). I don't know what the buyin/experience factor/baseball nerdery level is for that guy's league but its gonna be hard to keep league members who are perpetually at the bottom (a salary cap might mitigate this somewhat). Gonna be even harder to find owners willing to take over team with 10 sucky keepers.

His only real beef is if the rule was never written or disclosed, or against the will of the league IMO.

this is why keeper leagues without substantial yearly increases/prices to pay for keeping players aren't ideal. the idea of just keeping Pujols in perpetuity at the same cost every year is dumb and makes for a stale league. and forces ridic rules to level the playing field

either way I wouldn't play in a league where rule changes where made without a voting process. this is particularly important in keeper leagues

[nickthetick]

Originally Posted by -C-P-

Why is it so dumb? I've seen the non-snake draft for keeper leagues elsewhere. I don't really see why it is so bad...good chance that winning teams with 10 keepers absolutely crush the bottom teams. Specifically, I'm imagining my team last year that luck boxed Tulu, AGon, Bautista, Ellsbury in rds 1,2,3, and 5. It would be years before the bottom dwellers competed with this team. The non-snake draft at least gives the bottom teams a chance to compete. Its not like guys outside the 100-120 being kept are going to be elite talent...it basically gives them first shot at mid round vets and high upside rookies (and I'm guessing the real elite guys are already being kept). I don't know what the buyin/experience factor/baseball nerdery level is for that guy's league but its gonna be hard to keep league members who are perpetually at the bottom (a salary cap might mitigate this somewhat). Gonna be even harder to find owners willing to take over team with 10 sucky keepers.

His only real beef is if the rule was never written or disclosed, or against the will of the league IMO.

I just don't see why mediocrity should be rewarded. But not knowing about the rule is equally is bad. It seems like the rules are being tailored to certain people as the league goes on.

Ex: Last year: It's a H2H Points league. I did my research and saw that pitchers were weighted very low, pretty much half of hitters. I drafted accordingly and didn't pick a pitcher till the 12th round (One idiot drafted Halladay in R1). After the draft, I get a message saying the pitcher values were wrong and they would be changed. What ensued were weeks of arguments which resulted in a slight upgrade in pitching values even though at least half of the league was against changing at all.

Just too many politics.

[-C-P-]

Your league manager sounds terrible. I understand your position on mediocrity and all, but if you take that position, you better be prepared for the league to unravel quickly or to be constantly scrambling for new fish (and they'd have to be fish to be willing to accept a terrible team with virtually no way to turn things around anytime soon). Myself, I'd rather trade some short term equity to keep a consistent league together. Especially where I think I still have a significant edge. Also, if this is just a relatively casual league with a bunch of friends, I don't want to CRUSH everyone...I want everyone to have fun and still want to donate $$$ to me year after year.

[nickthetick]

Meh, one part of me is infuriated and wants to leave, and the other half wants to come back and win the league again.

While I'm here, might as well get some advice.

Help me pick 2 keepers out of:
Ethier
Ichiro
Markakis
Chris Young
Prado
Jhonny Peralta

Leaning towards Ichiro and Ethier/Young.

[Biesterfield]

Def not Ichiro

[Gary Wise]

Nick, leave the league.

[PoseidonCubed]

Ethier and Young prob. Bleh.

[nickthetick]

Originally Posted by Gary Wise

Nick, leave the league.

Probably the best advice, but I don't know if my competitive side will let me.

And lol, just learned that were contracting 2 teams, now everyone at the top gets an extra stud. Too funny.

[Gary Wise]

Originally Posted by nickthetick

Probably the best advice, but I don't know if my competitive side will let me.

And lol, just learned that were contracting 2 teams, now everyone at the top gets an extra stud. Too funny.

Your competitive side shouldn't allow you to be taken advantage of, which is what's going on here. There are thousands of leagues available online. Go join one.

[nickthetick]

Originally Posted by Gary Wise

Your competitive side shouldn't allow you to be taken advantage of, which is what's going on here. There are thousands of leagues available online. Go join one.

You live up to your last name.