Someone suggested getting this post into the FAQ at askrotoman.com, but right now there is no FAQ. There are people who ask about position scarcity, and now maybe if they Google it this page will come up next to the column at mlb.com of March 2, 2005.
Ask Rotoman’s Message Board: Position Scarcity is Insignificant by Rotoman
The whole position scarcity argument is based on a misunderstanding of the problem. I wrote about it in this week’s column at mlb.com, so I don’t want to rehash the whole thing. But assuming you read that and I wasn’t clear enough, here’s more to chew on.
On auction day all the players have an ideal price. Those prices add up to the total that can be spent in the auction. Those prices are based on the expectations the market has for all the players.
We know a few things about the prices and the pool.
All the money should be spent.
All stats are worth the same amount (a homer by an outfielder helps a team just as much as a homer by a catcher) to a team.
All the players with a positive value will be bought.
So, there will be a team that has the worst catcher on its squad, for which is paid (or should have paid $1). Will it lose the league because of this?
How about the four or five other teams that also bought bad $1 catchers? Are they out of it?
And if not, why not?
Because that $1 Mike Matheny allows them to budget $9 more money for an their other players than it does the team that bought a $10 AJ Pierzynski.
So, they can afford Manny Ramirez at $33 rather than a $24 Andruw Jones.
And Ramierz and Matheny are of equal value to Piersynski and Jones.
Now things don’t work out so neatly, which is why our game doesn’t end up in a 12-way tie. But I hope this illstrates the principal: prices are in general linear, so in every situation you’ll end up with a similar balance.
The exception, and the reason you do want to give a little advantage to catchers particularly, but also 2B and 3B and SS over 1B and OF with an equal price, is because at the bottom of the pricing scale the worst five or six catchers will be listed at $1 and will cost $1. But in relation to them the worst OF and 1B will probably be worth $3, but will also cost $1.
As I said in the column at mlb.com, this might insert $40 of expected value in the draft in the outfield for which teams only pay $10. This is enough to give players at scarce positions the nod over players of equal cost/value in OF and 1B, but not to change their prices.
And it’s the reason to organize your draft league so that players at the skill position get the advantage over players at the power positions when they’re the same price, but not to bump them up over players with higher prices/values.
Hope this helps.”
