Who goes #1???

[steve9781]

Is it still Hanley? I just read an article recently making a case for Reyes.
What do others think, my draft is tommorow and I'm picking #1 ( 10 team mix )

[Todd Zola]

Two points...

1. Derek Carty compares Reyes best case scenario versus Hanley's worst. If you believe the drop in power is probable and that he won't run and that his BA was a fluke, then Ramirez is out of the top-5.

2. There is no cut and dried answer. The answer is whoever you feel you can best build your entire team around, as the players bring a different skill set to the table and it is far more important what you do after the first pick than the actual first pick.

Hanley - balance of power and speed from SS
Reyes - potential to steal 60 bags and still have some pop from SS
Wright -- consistent production with some steals
Pujols - can completely anchor you batting average and provide pop

Each puts you on a different course, you need to figure out which overall course is best for you and how you perceive the 2009 player pool.

[Mickey4081]

I believe it still is Hanely. While he won't steal 60 bases, he has the ability to crush 30+hrs with 30-40 steals and post a terrific batting average. There is no reason to think Hanley can't hit 40 homers either.

Where is Hanley's ceiling? He could go .320 35 100 120 35

Where is Reye's ceiling? He could go .300 20 70 120 60

[steve9781]

So I ended up drafting Hanley, which was the right move. I then made the following trade 1 day after the draft.

I traded H.Ramirez G.Floyd P.Sandavol J.D. Drew for J.Lowrie C.Sabathia A.Gonzalez J.Dye

I then dropped Lowrie and picked up C.Guzeman. Because I don't belive in drafting P in the first 8 rounds, that trade was huge, as CC really boosted my pitching. Gonzalez became my UT and Dye is my 5th OF, so I'm in great position now to win, now my players just need meet my projections

[Todd Zola]

I'm not sure I understand the difference between not wanting to draft a pitcher early, but be willing to deal the consensus top hitter for a top pitcher (my feelings about his risk aside).

[Hambowen]

I'm not sure I understand the difference between not wanting to draft a pitcher early, but be willing to deal the consensus top hitter for a top pitcher (my feelings about his risk aside).

Ya I was confused by that as well.

[steve9781]

The answer is real easy.....

I don't like the hitting studs I have to pass over to get a player like CC. The fact that I gave up Hanley and got back CC A.Gonzalez ( now my UT ) & J.Dye ( my 5th OF )was just too great to pass up. Had I known this owner was that crazy about Hanley, I would have made it a point to roster another SS ( which I almost did in the 9th round, until my computer locked up and picked Marmol for me ) I belive that pitching value really occurs in the 9-15 range of a mixed draft which is when I like to select my pitchers, after rostering 8-10 hitters. Here is my staff see if you agree....

Rounds 1-8 I grabbed in order Hanley Morneau Soriano Rios Markakis Votto C.Davis Dunn.

rd 9 C.Marmol ( was deciding between J.Lakey & D.Jeter, but computer locked up )
rd 10 C.Billingsly
rd 11 Dice K
rd 12 E.Santana
rd 13 B.Myers
rd 14 J.Johnson
rd 16 C.Qualls
rd 19 H.Bell
rd 23 G.Floyd
rd 24 J.Smoltz
rd 26 C.Ray
rd 29 K.Gregg

Overall not a bad staff ( i was the most balanced team in the league by far), but subtracting Floyd and adding CC gave me 12pts in the pitching standings ( from 27pts to 39pts ) increasing my Wins/K's and lowering my WHIP/ERA according to S.T.A.R.T. I was comfortable with my pitching before the trade, but getting the two hitters who I liked + CC was too good to pass up. The trade also took my projected 2nd place finish up to 1st. I know a lot can happen between now and the end of the year, but I really feel I should walk out of a draft projected to finish 1st especially considering the standings are based on the projections I used!

Overall I would say that picking 1st SUCKED! I was able to turn a negative into a positive with this trade, but I can't begin to imagine how my team would look had I been picking more in the middle, while getting the back to back picks was nice, too many times I'd put 5-6 players in the queue at the start of a round coming back to me only to see them all gone by the time I picked. But overall I'm very happy with my team.

[viper]

For me personally, I dislike drafting a player with the intent to trade. Trading requires a trading partner and that does not always happen the way you wish. Of course, three of my nine leagues are the no-trade NFBC and another three are leagues where tradings in limited to about 6-8 total per year. My own experience is that I just about never have been a big winner in a trade.

Would you have done the same in a league of Todd Zola types?

[steve9781]

For me personally, I dislike drafting a player with the intent to trade. Trading requires a trading partner and that does not always happen the way you wish. Of course, three of my nine leagues are the no-trade NFBC and another three are leagues where tradings in limited to about 6-8 total per year. My own experience is that I just about never have been a big winner in a trade.

Would you have done the same in a league of Todd Zola types?

Viper,

I agree about not drafting to trade, my thinking when contemplating taking Jeter was my own team needs of BA & Runs and the positional scarcity it would have created for at least one other team. My drafting philosophy is to build the most balanced team I can within the confines the other owners create. Ie - If everyone overvalues SB or SV, I'll redirect towards HR and SP. I only draft players with an eye towards trading at the end of a draft, an example is I took JD Drew & J.Francoure and P.Konerko even though I was stocked at OF/1B so that if a need arises I can trade and have a solid alternative on my bench ( which I belive is just smart roster management).

What are you refering to when you ask if I'd have done the same in a league of T.Zola types?

I only adjust my drafting stratgey based on the players available, not who the other owners are in the room. Knowlege of other owners helps to know drafting trends, to make it easier in evaluating the player pool. If I know a bunch of owners don't like drafting saves then I'll feel more comfortable waiting a little longer drafting closers. My therory for this season has been to grab 4 OF in the first 6 rounds because in leagues where you start 5 OF + a UT, having a stud OF is a HUGE advantage. There are only a couple of stud 3B/2B/SS in a draft and after they are gone, it levels the playing field for all the other teams. I belive most people make the mistake of beliving that OF is deeper than it is, when in fact by round 8 or 9 the drop off becomes severe, and people begin to make mistakes passing on better players ( ie P ) to make sure they don't get shut out in the OF. My 5th OF is J.Dye. Other teams 4th OF are A.Jones / L.Millage / J.Upton. Now those people COULD breakout and become studs, but my way reduces risk. I belive that more "breakouts & undrafted "gems" occur in pitching, not hitting, and I think history backs me up on this.

[msugray]

Would you have done the same in a league of Todd Zola types?

viper,

Have you seen some of the trades in LABR over the years?

I think these types of trades and strategies happen often enough.

[viper]

Would you have done the same in a league of Todd Zola types?

viper,

Have you seen some of the trades in LABR over the years?

I think these types of trades and strategies happen often enough.

My intent was some league consist of difficult people to trade with and other don't. I accept the fact you know your league and that is a very important factor. Now LABR is a rare bird of a league in that many people are likely playing to try things out rather than necessarily win. I'm sure they would all want to win but the try something new and see it succeed would be just as satisfying and likely as marketable for the next season. If Todd gets an NFBC league 2nd using the Papelbon Plan, I have to think he will somehow figure out a way to use it to promote this site - not that it really needs it.

Maybe I have too much of an ESPN history. So many folks play in those weak draft room leagues where you can almost always find some other owners who are clueless in trading. I know I over-think the category impact of my trades. If I had one goal it would be to stop that but it is hard. I go into every league thinking I will not make a trade.

[steve9781]

Viper,

I agree with your point. I also go into every league assuming I'll never make a deal. I think people who assume they will be able to trade are making a mistake ( unless it's a long standing league and you know the owners ) When you leave a draft needing to trade, you put yourself at the mercy of other owners ( who probably realize what you are doing).

After I traded Hanley, I asked around about a few SS I was intrested in before the draft, they all have incorrectly assumed that I needed to make a trade, so the offers I've gotten back are poor and one sided. If I made one of those deals, I'd be giving away all the value I got by making the 1st trade. I ended up dropping Lowrie and picking up C.Guzeman, who can help offset Dunns poor BA. He might not be my ideal SS, but the production I'm getting at all my other hitting spots more than makes up for it.

[Hambowen]

Every league i am in is a money league so it is tough to test out strategies. Not to mention they are mostly keeper leagues besides NFBC.

If we could get enough of the regular posters here to start a redraft league for testing purposes(or just bragging rights ) it might be interesting. Philosophy, Risk tolerance, and overall strategy is pretty diverse with lots of the posters here. Could be interesting.

[Todd Zola]

We will indeed be putting together a subscriber league (or two) next week. I am on week 6 of weekend traveling, I am finally home after Tout Wars on Sunday to pay a bit more attention to site matters.