Ask Rotoman

Questions and answers

ASK ROTOMAN: What is FAAB Worth?

by

Dear Rotoman:

I was thinking about redeeming the DLed Nate Jones in Tout Wars AL, which got me thinking about FAAB, Vickrey bidding and being in last place a few weeks after the season starts. I wrote about it here at USA Today.

Does it make sense to add Jones’ $14 now? Or should I wait to see if he can get healthy and reclaim the closer job in Chicago?

“Ron Shandler”

Dear Ron,

I had some thoughts about your recent column and thought they made a better topic here than at your various discussion boards. Though perhaps I’ll show up at those, too.

You raise a few interesting issues that I wanted to touch on.

I will admit that I thought the Tout Wars redemption process was going to be a disaster. It has instead been a great success. (I thought the same about FAAB trading as well, and was wrong about that, too.) In Tout Wars teams are allowed to cut any player on the DL and reclaim their draft day price as FAAB up until the All Star break—after which they can reclaim half their draft day price as FAAB.

The  usual dynamic for redemption is determining how long a player will be out, versus his utility when/if he returns, filtered by the value of the added FAAB. This means that guys who are out for a while, but who may not be out all season, can reside on a team’s unlimited DL reserve until it becomes clear that the extra FAAB is going to matter (as we approach the break, and the interleague trading deadline).

What makes Nate Jones interesting is that he could return to the bullpen eventually and not gain the closing job, which would pretty much waste his $14. That’s a good reason to cut him and reclaim his bid price, though at this point he’s not close to returning, and it is pretty unlikely that the $14 you add to your FAAB total will have any utility at all until much later in the season.

For those reasons, I suggest waiting until he’s either done for the year, close to returning as a non-closer, or you need the $14 to buy something better.

As for Vickrey, the bidding auction system that we use in Tout Wars, it awards the FAAB player to the highest bidder, but reduces their cost to $1 more than the second highest bidder. Cory Schwartz was quoted earlier this week about how he thinks Vickrey just randomizes the process, and he doesn’t like it, but his bidding last week in Tout Mixed Auction is a prime example of Vickrey’s importance and why you and I like it.

As we all know, there were some closers available in last week’s bidding. Cory decided he needed one of them. Zach Steinhorn agreed with Cory that the best available closer was Francisco Rodriguez. Zach bid an aggressive $33, but Cory trumped him by bidding $60, which was then reduced a la Vickrey to $34. One can look at this as Cory “saving” $26, but it is a fairer evaluation of Vickrey to say that Cory bid aggressively because he wanted K-Rod most. Such overbids are made knowing that someone else who did the same thing would raise the price of K-Rod a lot, but that was a price Cory was willing to pay. The stated intention of Vickrey auctions are to limit system rigging, since bidders are encouraged to bid the absolute most they’re willing to pay (knowing that if they value more than the market they won’t have to pay their full price). Cory bid what he was willing to pay, and since no one else would pay as much, he ended up with a discount, as it were. That’s a feature, not a bug.

Where Vickrey excels is when there are a number of bidders. Where Vickrey falters is on the players for whom there is a limited market. With only 12 or 15 teams in a league, many without holes at particular positions, there may only be one or two teams looking for a player at a particular position. There may only be one or two of those players at that position available. One of those teams may value one of those players a lot, but chances are, even if he bids aggressively, his bid will be reduced to $1 or a few dollars because there was no market for that player. That seems to me to distort the bidding process.

For a couple years we played in Tout Wars with a $10 floor on bidding. If you bid $10 or less, that was the price you would pay if you won, with no reductions. If you bid $10 or more and no one else bid more than $10, your winning bid would be reduced to $10. If two bids exceeded $10 the standard Vickrey rules applied. The idea was to increase the cost of roster churning at the low end, where the market is less than robust. Many objected to this, saying they thought that if we were going to play with Vickrey we should play pure Vickrey. After a rule change, that’s the way we play now, and while I still think it makes the low-level bidding somewhat arbitrary, it isn’t really a problem.

I recommend Vickrey bidding for the most contested players, but the use of a floor for the cheap bidding. That’s the best balance in my opinion.

Okay, back to FAAB and inseason values. One rule that might help us find the balance between Draft Day dollars and FAAB dollars would be to combine the two. Let’s say teams are given $360 on auction day, and are told that they can spend as much of that as they like, with the balance ending up as their available FAAB balance. How much would they actually spend on Draft Day?

Or, less radically, you’re restricted to the $260 for your regular team, but then can bid FAAB $ for the reserve rounds.

By increasing the porousness between Draft Dollars and FAAB budgets, we open up ways for teams to play different strategies at the draft table, in the reserve rounds and all season long during waivers and claims.

Earlier this year I looked at how many stats were available via FAAB and claims in the NL and Mixed Leagues. This is what our money goes to buy on draft day versus what we’re able to add as the season progresses. Would that number change if we spent more cash on draft day and had less available for inseason buys? It sure looks to me that paying more on draft day is the way to go.

Sincerely,
Rotoman

 

 

ASK ROTOMAN: Time To Give Up On Salazar?

by

Rotoman:

Is it worth giving up Danny Salazar in a 5×5 keeper league where I need some power in order to get Matt Adams?  I already have Madison Bumgarner, Adam Wainwright, Robbie Erlin, Yordano Ventura, Tyson Ross, and Jeff Samardzjia for SP’s plus a couple others. What do you think?  The other offer was Bumgarner for Mark Trumbo, but I think thats too spendy.

“A Bridge Too Salazar?”

Dear Bridge,

Let’s get the obvious out of the way. You are pretty rich in pitching and need a power hitter. On draft day Salazar and Adams probably cost a similar amount, and it sounds like in hindsight if you could have taken Adams instead of Salazar you would have. So this deal is obviously to the good for you.

And I agree about Bumgarner and Trumbo. The former was a $24-25 player in NL leagues, while Trumbo was a $22-23 player. If that was your only way to add power you might do it, but it isn’t as square a deal as Salazar for Adams.

It might have a bigger impact, since Trumbo is a more significant hitter than Adams, and Bumgarner is a more significant pitcher than Salazar, but sometimes it’s better to play it safer and smaller, which is what Salazar for Adams does.

That’s because we know quite a bit about Adams. He’s a very solid power hitter against right-handed pitchers (and not so good against lefties). He may lose some at bats versus lefties at some point, especially given the Cardinals’ plethora of hitters in the bigs and the minors, but he’s been weak enough against lefties (.588 OPS in limited time the last three seasons) that you probably want to see him sit against them. He’s still a solid power hitter even when missing those at bats.

We don’t know quite a bit about Salazar. He took the AL by storm late last year, in 52 IP, and was quickly elevated to stud status  by many despite the lack of experience. I warned about that during the preseason, because regardless of a young pitcher’s obvious gifts (he throws very hard, missed lots of bats with good control, etc.), we simply don’t know how well and quickly he’s going to be able to adjust as hitters adjust to him and his workload increases. Salazar has not been good thus far this year. His velocity is down, he’s walking guys, and throwing homers. It’s early, just three starts, but things are not right right now.

So make the trade. Getting out from under the struggling Salazar is really just a slim advantage. Odds are Salazar is going to work things out, and once he’s in a groove he’ll throw plenty of strikeouts, but he’s not in that place now, and if you can fix your team by dealing a struggling cipher, you have to do it.

Enthusiastically,
Rotoman

 

Link: Rotoman on BaseballHQ Radio

by

Patrick Davitt is a fantastic interviewer, which makes me feel just a little smart or witty or whatever I’m going for when he has me on. I’m on this week, talking about Tout, Doubt and JD Bolick’s Guide to Fantasy Prospects, which my ebook company, Booknoise, published recently.

In my picks and pans at the end of the program I demonstrated my perverse fixation on the Twins this season.

ASK ROTOMAN: Do We Value Relief Too Much?

by

Hey Rotoman,

A few weeks into a league in its inaugural year and looking for some advice for next year. We seem to have skewed our format and put too much weight on relief pitching. Here are the specifics:

-H2H points league using pretty much all scoring categories offered in ESPN standard format. (including Total Bases which gives hitters a significant boost)

-Roster spots for all positions + 2 DH + 1 extra infielder & outfield. 5 starting pitcher spots + 3 relief pitcher spots.

-8 start limit.

I think our issue arises from the 3 RP spots. With 12 teams, there are not enough ‘starting closers’ to cover this position and our draft showed this with many people loading up on closers in round 5-8. I also think our 8 start-limit is too low and limits the value of quality starting pitching. My thought is if we increased the start limit to 10 or 12, it would even out the people hoarding closers vs the people with depth at starting pitcher. Or would dropping relievers from 3 spots to 2 be better?

Any thoughts are much appreciated, thank you!!

“Cat In The Bag”

Dear CITB:

It is my personal opinion that you can make any game you want, so I have little to say about league-specific rules. But since you are unhappy and asked, here’re a few thoughts:

Limiting the number of starts per week to a low number means that you’re effectively taking IP off the table. Starters on good teams gain value, as do those with high strikeout rates, since you’re turning the K category into a ratio, like K/9. If you have daily ups and downs, maybe there is a reason to limit starts, but it should be fairly high, so that teams can choose to run up the innings OR protect their ERA and Ratio as a way to gain points.

Another good reason to have a Starts limit is because of the S/R designation, which often makes a mockery of fantasy pitching staff balance. But since you’re complaining about the relievers having too much value, something else is going on in your league, and I’m not sure what it is. Limiting teams to three relievers, when there are only 32 closers, seems like a red herring. Too many teams right now have no closer, or multiple arms to feed save ops. Sure, the best relievers might go early, but isn’t figuring out when to jump there  a key part of the game?

And I’m not sure the guy who went early for Craig Kimbrel is feeling that good right now.

For me, any set of rules can take a few years to gel. Maybe teams thought something would happen this year, drafted accordingly, and they’re now learning that it didn’t, and so the team that marched to a different drum will win in the end. You have to decide if that’s a good or bad thing.

I’m personally in favor of as few rules as possible that describe how the game has to be played. Multiple strategic approaches makes for a more fun and challenging game. So maybe don’t cap starts or innings, but cap the number of decisions a team can have (162 wins + losses, for instance). When a team reaches that number it no longer accrues pitching stats.

Or broaden categories, so that relievers count for saves and holds, instead of just saves. I recommend half-holds + saves as a category, giving value to middle relievers while recognizing that the role of closer has a value unto itself.

The thing to recognize is that the shallower the mixed league, the less the fantasy league is likely to look like real baseball and the more it’s going to become something else. Whatever that is is just fine, if it pleases you and your leaguemates, but my advice if you’re looking for fix things is to make the rules expansive and encourage creative play rather than trying to stick everyone in some restrictive box.

Hope the end of this bit comes as a relief.
Rotoman

 

ASK ROTOMAN: Should I trade Mike Trout?

by

Dear Rotoman:

ESPN 10 Team 5×5 roto league. Should I trade Mike Trout and Pedro Alvarez for Jacoby Ellsbury and Giancarlo Stanton?

“Fishing”

Dear Fishing:

Los Angeles Angels center fielder Mike Trout (27)No.

In a shallow league the greatest value goes to the most irreplaceable players. Mike Trout is the best outfielder out there, by a lot. He is the only irreplaceable outfielder, and as such is paid a premium (which is what you get when you’re the first draft pick). You don’t want to trade him. Ever. Unless the bounty you reap means you don’t have to ask anyone else whether it makes sense.

Plus, Pedro Alvarez is a third baseman. He’s not an irreplaceable third baseman, per se, but with Ryan Zimmerman and Adrian Beltre on the DL, Alvarez ranks as one of the top six or eight third basemen. He will hit a lot of homers. Since you don’t say how you would replace him it’s hard to judge totally, but in general Alvarez earns a little premium, too, for his position.

Which is not to run down Ellsbury and Stanton, both of whom have plenty of skills. They could conceivably earn more than Trout and Alvarez in any given year, though again, without a discussion of who plays 3B for you it’s hard to figure this. But neither Ellsbury nor Stanton is irreplaceable.

Don’t do it.
Rotoman

ASK ROTOMAN: Excited to Add Tim Hudson

by

Dear Rotoman:

I have a chance to add Tim Hudson.  I need to drop a pitcher in order to do this.  Pitchers to drop: Francisco Liriano, Jeff Samardzjia or Zach Wheeler.

Do you think Hudson in better than any of the three listed.  Scoring roto categories are  W, L, ERA, WHIP, Ks and saves.  What do you think.  

“Tim Is On My Side”

Dear TimIOMS:

I like to start with benchmarks. Some expert leagues (CBS, LABR, TW) recently had auctions. How did these guys rate?

Liriano: $15, $10, $14 (my bid price is $8)
Samarzdjia: $11, $9, $13 ($7)
Wheeler: $10, $10, $10 ($6)

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAHow about Hudson?

Hudson: $4, $8, $5 ($8)

The experts leagues don’t like this idea at all, and while I have Hudson a little higher, I’m sure I would prefer Liriano, at least, to Hudson, but your question is whether I’d prefer Hudson to any of them. And clearly in my preseason rankings, I valued Hudson by a little over Wheeler, who may have a bright future ahead of him but entered this season a bit underdeveloped as a ML starting pitcher.

Tim Hudson is an experienced veteran with a long track record of success, but he’s coming back from ankle surgery and he’s 38 years old. Guys recovering in their late 30s are far from sure things, and have to be considered somewhat delicate.

So, you have youth and vigor facing off against age and savvy, and you’re looking for the edge. By my reckoning it’s close. I would give a very slight advantage to Hudson in real baseball, and given the probability that the Giants are going to be the better team all season long, that bumps up to a healthy advantage in a league that puts a value on losses as well as wins.

Not only might the Mets not score so much for Wheeler to win, but that bullpen could lay some hurtful losses on him as well. Still, you’ll be giving up quite a few strikeouts, so make sure you can afford those.

And remember, too, that you’re giving up the sexy young rapids to add a lazy ol’ river. If things go wrong you and me both are going to look a little dum.

Edgily,
Rotoman

 

ASK ROTOMAN: Wacha Flocka Cashner?

by

Hi Rotoman –

Can you explain how prices sometimes do not coordinate with projections? For example below are your projections for Cashner and Wacha:

Cashner: 10 W, 3.53 ERA, 149 K, 1.24 WHIP
Wacha: 9 W, 3.45 ERA, 173 K, 1.16 WHIP

Yet you have Cashner at $16 and Wacha at $8.

Could the difference be perceived risk?

“Wacha Flaka Cashner”

Dear WFC:
In the Fantasy Guide, the projections are a starting point. They’re based on past performance rates regressed toward the mean, with some manual adjustments, scaled to a rough estimate of playing time (which is also regressed). The Projections are my attempt to describe a player using numbers. I hope that they give a sense how hittable a guy is, what sort of control he has, does he hit for average, can he run, that sort of thing.

The Big Prices in the Guide are my attempt to fix a guy’s value against the market. The prices are meant to be advice on who to buy and who to not buy. Essentially, I try to set the price on guys I expect to do well a buck or two higher than their “market” price. And guys I have concerns about, I set a buck or two lower.

It is important to note that the Prices add up to the budget for a 12-team AL or NL league with $260 budget per team. The reason to budget this way is because it helps you track the spending during the auction. If guys are going for more than the bid prices, you know that there are going to be bargains later. If guys are going for less? A bubble is born.

Now, let’s fast forward to March 15. That’s the day I posted the updated projections and prices here, for purchasers of the Guide. The adjusted projections were:

Cashner: 184 IP, 3.54 ERA, 10 W, 149 K, 1.14 WHIP
Wacha: 172 IP, 3.77 ERA, 11 W, 163 K, 1.24 WHIP

Now here’s the interesting part. The price for Cashner in 5×5 is $16. The price for Wacha is $15. But if you translate the above to dollar values, Cashner’s line is worth about $17, while Wacha’s is worth $8.

What happened?

Two things. As we hurtled toward the baseball season I learned that the market for Wacha is red hot. People consistently have him valued higher than Shelby Miller, which I think is a little wacky. It turns out that he tends to be going in the $16-$18 range in startup auctions. If I kept him at my pessimistic $8 price, it would look like a massive overpay when he went for twice that on draft day. But it isn’t really. The low end of the market for Wacha is $16, and I don’t want him at that.

Cashner, on the other hand, is a guy I want at $16. I mean, I’d rather have him at $14, and that’s been his average price this preseason, ranging from $13 to $15, but if I have to go $16 I’m okay with that.

The other thing I did was tinker with the projections to better reflect my perceptions about these two.

Wacha was a fastball/changeup guy last year. That’s it. An excellent fastball, a tough change, and early success, but it’s really hard to sustain a high level of success over multiple times through the lineup with just two pitches. No matter how good they are. My pessimism derives from the limited arsenal and the good chance that as major league scouts and hitters get repeated looks at him, there is going to be some payback.

The reason why most everyone thinks I’m wrong is because Wacha has added a curveball, which he threw a fair amount in his first start this year, and a cutter, which he didn’t throw much. It’s early, the pitches are new, and so there’s a lot we know. If he adds them effectively, he will become every bit the ace he looked like late last year. My bet is there is going to be some adjusting and he’s going to have some rough starts. So I think he’ll allow more hits and runs. We’ll see.

Cashner, on the other hand, is older, more experienced, has a more traditional fastball/slider/change repertoire already in place. I like him being at least as good as he was last year, when he earned $17.

The final word is that this process is one that consists of information, generated by the players that play, the press that follows them and tells the world what happened, and the numbers that describe what they did. This information is distilled by analysts as it comes in and added to both the projection, something of a description of average talent levels, and the market, which filters it all through the lens of risk and reward, which leads to bid values.

The whole process stops, for a few seconds at least, the moment the auctioneer says Sold! And then it starts all over again.

 

ASK ROTOMAN: Quentin or Morse?

by

Hi Rotoman:

I’m looking through ADP and I can anticipate a problem deciding between Carlos Quentin and Mike Morse. How should I go?

“Buyers Remorse”

Dear BR:

Go elsewhere!

These two guys are not hitters you want to be making an investment in. Morse is the classic late bloomer. He didn’t really make the majors until 2010, as a 28 year old, albeit because of injuries and a couple of drug infractions. He had a big season in 2011 and hasn’t come close to duplicating that. He was hurt most of last year, had surgery and is expected to be better, but given his history the only way he should land on your team is if he’s the last sort-of regular outfielder left.

Carlos Quentin reached the majors in a more traditional manner, and had a fairly successful run in Chicago as a power hitter while in his mid-20s. He’s struggled in San Diego to stay healthy, and limited playing time and a tough park for homers has limited his value.

I would take Quentin, who is the better hitter, over Morse every time, but unfortunately that doesn’t mean he’s going to outearn him. Really, in a perfect world I’d avoid them both and find cheerier players to put on my team.

Happily,
Rotoman

ASK ROTOMAN: Lake At The Top?

by

Dear Rotoman,

in the current TXT files, you have Junior Lake hitting .318.  Typo or irrational exuberance?  If typo, what do you really predict (I’m curious, he’s pretty high variance).

“Junior Birdman”

Screenshot 2014-03-17 22.56.11Dear Jr.

Not really a typo, but one of those instances where a player with limited major league playing time has a high BABIP and a high strikeout rate, and manages to go through the projection tweaking without me noticing his outsized batting average.

If I had noticed I would have dropped Junior Lake’s BA projection this year to .275, which is more in line with his past production and contact rate. Maybe it’s a bit high, actually, but he’s always had a good BABIP coming up through minors. It’s hard to take that completely away from him without good reason.

The other numbers I have for him in the Patton $ Software and Data, are right on, but the .318 is the absolute high end of the possibilities for him this year. That’s if he strikes out less, gets on base a lot on batted balls, hits a homer every 40 at bats or so. That’s possible.

Equally possible is that major league pitchers are going to see that he’s not patient, and they’re going to extend the zone on him. He’s going to strike out more, and pop out more, and his average is going to drop to .235. That’s possible, too.

Which is the variance you’re talking about, Junior B. and I’m glad you brought it up. My projection for Lake has him earning $13 in 420 AB, hitting 10 homers and stealing eight bases (but getting caught nearly as much). That’s batting .275. But I’m willing to pay $7, a bit more than half, because even though there is a fair chance he’ll do better, there is an equally fair chance he’ll do worse. And I want to get caught holding a smaller bag if that happens.

I’ve seen Lake play and it looks like he has the physical skills to excel, the question is in his head and desire. You don’t want to bet on the come hoping those things develop now, but a modest bet will have decent upside if the others in your league let him go.

Cautiously,
Rotoman

 

ASK ROTOMAN: White Sox Position Battles

by

Hey Rotoman:

When the White Sox resigned Paul Konerko and traded for Adam Eaton, they seem to have ended up with way too many players for OF, 1B and DH. What’s going to happen there?

“Chicago River Jam”

CT ct-met-Patricks-79992.jpgDear River Jam,

As we approach St. Patrick’s Day, when the Chicago River runs green with blarney, this is not a bad time to try to figure out what the south side squad has in mind.

Here are the players in the mix (I’m going to cross them off as we determine their role): Jose Abreu, Alejandro De Aza, Adam Dunn, Adam Eaton, Avisail Garcia, Paul Konerko, Dayan Viciedo.

Here are the positions: DH, 1B, LF, CF, RF. Looks like seven players for five positions

Let’s start with DH. Adam Dunn will hit (or walk) against righties. He was not great against righties last year, but not good against lefties. Paul Konerko was not good at all, overall, last year, but was very good against lefties. That seems like a nice match.

1B. Jose Abreu has been solid during spring training, which seems to be increasing confidence that his move into the majors is going to be a smooth one. Maybe. But what happens if he struggles? Success during the first couple of weeks of games in spring training is pretty meaningless. Keep an eye on Abreu’s health and effectiveness through the rest of camp (he’s having physical issues with his feet and ankles). When he can’t play, it looks like either Dunn or Konerko will be backing him up.

LF. This would seem to be a battle between Alejandro De Aza and Dayan Viciedo. De Aza doesn’t have a big platoon split in his career but has generally been protected against left-handed arms. Viciedo has been much better against lefties in his career, but was a little better against righties last year. De Aza is coming off two fine fantasy years, but he’s more of a liability in real life baseball, making plenty of outs while he’s stealing bases and hitting homers. Viciedo is the youngster, the potential power source who has yet to erupt. It’s tempting to see this as a head to head matchup, or a straightaway platoon, but Viciedo’s potential development and De Aza’s usefulness playing center field mean that there could be room for both men, at least some of the time.

CF. Adam Eaton was supposed to take the league by storm last year. He was a fantasy darling before camps even opened, the sure source of scores of stolen bases, except that he wasn’t. After hurting his elbow in spring training and deciding not to have surgery, he did not run wild in the second half of the season. He then found himself traded to Chicago in the offseason. No one knows whether he can be an everyday centerfielder or whether he can hit and run enough to help a team batting leadoff. He is far from proven. He’s ripping it up in spring training so far, but that’s just 26 at bats. De Aza was the team’s center fielder last year and is insurance this year should Eaton stumble at the plate or have his elbow unravel under stress.

RF. The White Sox traded Jake Peavy last summer to the Red Sox in a three-way deal that returned the excellent outfield prospect Avisail Garcia from Detroit. Garcia hit .304 after landing in Chitown last summer, raising hopes that Little Miggy (his Motor City nickname, based on body type, not hitting profile) will step into the right field job without issue. Could happen, but the youngster (he turns 23 in June) is pretty unseasoned, walked just 9 times in 249 at bats last year, while striking out nearly 25 percent of at bats. Garcia’s success this year is far from guaranteed. Some contingency has to be available should he struggle. That would be De Aza, too.

370px-Dayán_Viciedo_on_June_26,_2012CONCLUSION: What looks like a mountain of alewives piling up at the south end of Lake Michigan doesn’t look that bad under closer examination. At least in terms of planning. There are some potential success stories brewing, including Viciedo, Eaton and Garcia, and valedictory turns positioned for success, in Dunn and Konerko. De Aza’s versatility will be utilized, one way or the other, and the door is open for Jose Abreu, who has the talent to explode onto the scene. To my taste, the sweetest anchovy in the box is Viciedo, whose price has been dropping because of the uncertainty (and his own slow development). He is just two years older than Garcia, approaching that age where smarts and experience best complement a player’s natural physical gifts.