Auction Leaguers - money off the table

[da_big_kid_94]

Made reference to this thought in another thread and subsequently thought I really need to follow through on it. Throwing out names like Pujols and Halliday and Lincecum and the like to get money off the table is something this side of a self fulfilling prophesy - that is, you're not getting money off the table with these guys - somebody's already budgeted a number for these types ... the money's already spent. Just a question of who utters the last bid.

Begs the question - whose names SHOULD you throw out to get money off the table? If you accept the idea that not all the owners in your league view all players the same, here's one man's view on some names that should be thrown out early in your auction (and it is no coincidence that many, if not all of them, have some questions about them for 2011):

• Grady Sizemore
• Adrian Gonzalez
• Carl Crawford
• Paul Konerko
• Carlos Quentin
• Chase Utley
• Justin Morneau
• Brandon Webb
• Johan Santana
• Matt Cain
• Miguel Cabrera
• Erik Bedard
• David Aardsma
• Jonathan Broxton
• Jonathan Papelbon
• Jordan Zimmerman
• Jake Peavy
• Shin-Soo Choo

Thrown out early enough, these types of names may give you an indication of where your auction may be headed this year.Any others?

[Captain Hook]

The phrase "getting money off the table" as Todd alluded to in his auction article has become slightly overused. In fact there are many reasons you want to nominate players that OTHER people will spend THEIR money on.

Sure it can be the Pujols, Halladay, Hanleys of the world - IF you are not interested in owning them then you want your competitors to roster them AND hopefully overspend for them while they are at it.

Kid's list is also good - as long as they are players YOU are not interested in competing for OR if there are two players at the same position, you might want to nominate the slight lesser of the two to hopefully establish the market price for the second and let you judge whether to try and roster them later.

Later in the auction it can be the best player at a position that other people you need but you don't so you know you won't get stuck with a third catcher for instance but those without one or maybe two catchers may be forced to battle each other for Jorge Posada or Yadier Molina. YOU want to take THEIR money out of their pockets and onto the table.

[mjlewis]

The phrase "getting money off the table" as Todd alluded to in his auction article has become slightly overused. In fact there are many reasons you want to nominate players that OTHER people will spend THEIR money on.

Sure it can be the Pujols, Halladay, Hanleys of the world - IF you are not interested in owning them then you want your competitors to roster them AND hopefully overspend for them while they are at it.

Kid's list is also good - as long as they are players YOU are not interested in competing for OR if there are two players at the same position, you might want to nominate the slight lesser of the two to hopefully establish the market price for the second and let you judge whether to try and roster them later.

Later in the auction it can be the best player at a position that other people you need but you don't so you know you won't get stuck with a third catcher for instance but those without one or maybe two catchers may be forced to battle each other for Jorge Posada or Yadier Molina. YOU want to take THEIR money out of their pockets and onto the table.

I'm not so sure about this. If you already have your SS/MI slots filled and Hanley and Tulo are still out there... would you rather have them be nominated and make two other teams spend their $40-50, or would you rather have them go as long as possible without being nominated and make 11 other teams all hold $50 back in case they can get one of those guys? I think the more uncertainty that you can introduce into other peoples' minds, the more likely you are to get the midrange players you want at a good price and the better off you are.

And if you think about it, where do you see the biggest overbids and the people who are in the most trouble? It's the ones who saved their money into the middle off the draft to get the one star player at some position who hasn't been nominated yet and didn't end up getting him, and now they end up paying $30 for Carlos Pena because they have money left over and nowhere to spend it. That guy is way more screwed than the one who had to spend his $50 early for Pujols and knows where the rest of his auction is going...

- Mike

[da_big_kid_94]

I'm not so sure about this. If you already have your SS/MI slots filled and Hanley and Tulo are still out there... would you rather have them be nominated and make two other teams spend their $40-50, or would you rather have them go as long as possible without being nominated and make 11 other teams all hold $50 back in case they can get one of those guys? I think the more uncertainty that you can introduce into other peoples' minds, the more likely you are to get the midrange players you want at a good price and the better off you are.

And if you think about it, where do you see the biggest overbids and the people who are in the most trouble? It's the ones who saved their money into the middle off the draft to get the one star player at some position who hasn't been nominated yet and didn't end up getting him, and now they end up paying $30 for Carlos Pena because they have money left over and nowhere to spend it. That guy is way more screwed than the one who had to spend his $50 early for Pujols and knows where the rest of his auction is going...

- Mike

You are making the point on so many levels:

• If your SS/MI slots are already filled, most leagues will not let you throw out a name of a player you can't position on your active roster. So you can't throw out Hanley ot Tulo to get money off the table - you need someone else to do that. Assuming of course your UT isn't filled
• Someone has gone into your auction with the idea that they need Tulo and have to have him - his budget is already determined before the first name gets thrown out - 10 other teams are not holding back $50 to get Tulo - and as you say - if he's going for 50, you're not getting any money off the table - because at least one person was determined to get him at 50 when he walked in the door.
• Again, when these types of names come out in the draft is irrelevant - the budget has already been committed and it's just a question of that player's name coming out.

So, assuming they are available, if the first six players nominated are Pujols, Halliday, Lincecum, Felix, Tulowitzki, and Ramirez, I contend no one got any money off the table - the money for these 6 was already spent and it's doubtful you got any bargains. However, if Sizemore, A Gone, Morneau and Utley are interspersed in there, then you will most likely get some money off the table because they aren't a "sure" a thing as the big 6 listed - and it's the amount of money spent on the "less than sure things" that gets money off the table.

And of course, if you make this a keeper league ... that can also make the cheese more binding.

[Todd Zola]

The phrase "getting money off the table" as Todd alluded to in his auction article has become slightly overused. In fact there are many reasons you want to nominate players that OTHER people will spend THEIR money on.

Sure it can be the Pujols, Halladay, Hanleys of the world - IF you are not interested in owning them then you want your competitors to roster them AND hopefully overspend for them while they are at it.

Kid's list is also good - as long as they are players YOU are not interested in competing for OR if there are two players at the same position, you might want to nominate the slight lesser of the two to hopefully establish the market price for the second and let you judge whether to try and roster them later.

Later in the auction it can be the best player at a position that other people you need but you don't so you know you won't get stuck with a third catcher for instance but those without one or maybe two catchers may be forced to battle each other for Jorge Posada or Yadier Molina. YOU want to take THEIR money out of their pockets and onto the table.

I'm not so sure about this. If you already have your SS/MI slots filled and Hanley and Tulo are still out there... would you rather have them be nominated and make two other teams spend their $40-50, or would you rather have them go as long as possible without being nominated and make 11 other teams all hold $50 back in case they can get one of those guys? I think the more uncertainty that you can introduce into other peoples' minds, the more likely you are to get the midrange players you want at a good price and the better off you are.

And if you think about it, where do you see the biggest overbids and the people who are in the most trouble? It's the ones who saved their money into the middle off the draft to get the one star player at some position who hasn't been nominated yet and didn't end up getting him, and now they end up paying $30 for Carlos Pena because they have money left over and nowhere to spend it. That guy is way more screwed than the one who had to spend his $50 early for Pujols and knows where the rest of his auction is going...

- Mike

With the disclaimer that each room is unique and what "works" in one may not work in another and vice versa....

The problem here is Hanley and/or Tulo are not going to last very long, they are going to be nominated. Personally, I am not going to be the one to nominate them if my SS is full just because I already have someone, because of the reason I just mentioned - someone soon is going to table their names.

Also, I am not so concerned with playing mind games with the rest of the room. I want to learn something for MY team. if I like Fielder and don't like Howard, but also want to know what I have to spend on Halladay/Linececum etc,, but don't want to just put Fielder up for bid, I'll put Howard out.

All that said, I also believe you first few nominations could be players you want. I'm not in NL Tout so I can say what I would do. I want Ty Wigginton. I want his flexibility. So I will put him out early. I did this a couple of years ago with Marcos Scutaro and it worked quite well. You know how much he costs and you have flexibility within the auction, not just in-season. Even if I pay a couple of extra bucks, it is worth it as I will make that back with better roster management.

The other early toss would be Tommy Hanson, Clayton Kershaw or Cole Hamels. I want one of the three of them. So I put Kershaw out with my first nom, maybe before Lincecum, Doc and Cliffly have been tables. Others are sitting on them, maybe I get Kershaw cheap. I don't bid at all until the end and then only if the price is right. If it is too high, everyone thinks I was just getting money off the table. Next time, I nom Hamels, lather rinse and hopefully won't have to repeat.