In the process of developing a grand strategy for the Fantasy Baseball Search Expert League draft, there are a few interesting factors that must be considered. I am not sure what tack I will take yet, but readers can advise if they disagree with my propositions.
Naturally I have been giving a lot of thought on how to handle the expert draft on Monday. It will be an interesting experience, and there are some factors that I wanted to throw out there to readers for comment while I am developing my strategy.
1. There are 12 teams, all experts. Surprisingly, most experts tend to do the same things. I am not sure if it is psychological in that they do not want to look foolish, or that if they do something wacky they will no longer be considered experts.
Note especially for someone like me this is no trivial factor, given that my “reputation” in the industry is still being defined. It is one thing for Ron Shandler to come up with a new plan it is quite another for me to do so in my first expert league.
It is also possible that the general strategy the others pursue is warranted as a matter of theory. Not knowing the guys I cannot determine if theory or psychology is the prime factor.
2. What is this general “expert” plan? To focus on offense and speculate on the more unreliable pitchers. Most will focus on value and amassing offense early some perhaps to the exclusion of pitching but it is certainly true that the prime focus is on offense. This is a tried and true expert recommended strategy, and listening to various podcasts and radio shows analyzing expert drafts it should be clear that this is the basic strategy of most experts.
3. Given 2 above, it seems that it makes little sense to pursue the same strategy. Why? Because once we do that, the winner will be the one who is lucky and who has the “better judgment” for lack of a better term, than the rest. When all pursue roughly the same strategy, then planning and strategy are non-decisive. What will decide the winner is largely a matter of chance.
4. Luck is largely determinative if 3 is true. Given the high variability of player projections and the uncertainty of any given player’s performance once you get beyond the first three or four rounds, whether a pick is good or bad is largely a matter of luck.
5. The one factor that can win given 2 and 3 above is having the best judgment. Generally in garden variety leagues this is, in fact, what wins. No matter how solid the plan or how good the analysis, no tool is more important or more valuable than good judgment, and the player with the best judgment will usually win.
6. Given 5 above, there is no reason to think that any one person in the league has the best judgment. When dealing with experts why would one think he is better than the rest? I certainly recognize that though I suspect, but do not know, others do not. Experts generally think they are the smartest, and often with good reason.
I do not, however. I am relatively certain that most experts tacitly understand this, since most discussion focuses not on plans or strategy but on the “value” and merit of particular selections. Once we talk about a certain selection we are now discussing judgment, and when the expert takes Chone Figgins in the fifth round it is because he or she thinks their judgment is better than the rest.
7. Given these propositions, it seems clear that pursuing the garden variety strategy is a losing strategy. Or at least there is no reason to think it is a winning one a priori. The issue is whether one wants to win or just do “ok” so they are not embarrassed. I honestly think that this psychology is a large factor; no one wants to finish last or get killed. But if they do it can likely be chalked up to luck in many cases?
So, is it better to take a huge risk and fail knowing that the plan was flawed, or to go the basic route, struggle for slight edges and be able to blame fortune in the case of failure? And yet, taking on as much risk as possible may be the best way to win, as opposed to just merely doing well.
8. The role of chance is magnified geometrically once you are in a head-to-head league. This is simply because of matchups combined with the inherent small sample size of one week. Traditional roto balances this out but in head-to-head it is a large factor if not a paramount one. Since we are talking about other experts it should be clear that even in the case of having the best judgment the edge in judgment and knowledge is slight indeed and can be completely engulfed by randomness and chance.
It is said that the faint heart will never win the fair maiden, so perhaps a maximum boldness strategy is warranted as opposed to doing the same old thing.
4 responses so far ↓
1 Rich // Feb 29, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Dude, man-up! It sounds like you’re considering the “just don’t embarass myself” tact. YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME! You should be constructing a strategy to win. Assuming all other owners are targeting offense, I would take a chance on drafting pitching right away. Start with elite starters, and if they start to panic, and follow you, go to elite closers. And, if you really consider yourself an expert, allow your expertise to shine on the risky hitters with upside. In other words, try the complete opposite strategy of your opponents. Think Hannibal!
2 Patrick DiCaprio // Mar 1, 2008 at 1:52 am
I guess you didnt read the last sentence–also consider that my opponents are likely reading this….
3 digglahhh // Mar 2, 2008 at 4:25 pm
I’ve never played in a league with all experts. I’ve played in some that had a few experts among the players. Based on those experiences, I would guess that the LIMA Plan’s efficacy decreases proportionate to the amount of experts in the league. Things that really help glean potential value in starting pitching (predicted regression to mean in BABIP, strand rate, etc.) are not secret nuggets of wisdom to experts; they are par for the course. Using the LIMA plan would, indeed, be ultimately luck-reliant. The list of guys you are going to target will be extremely similar to that of the guy/gal on either side of you.
The reluctance to spend for starting pitching is ingrained in “the industry” to the point that it is something different than it was originated to be. I don’t think it was ever intended to be sacrosanct, but a reaction to market behavior. Now it is like some immutable law, and therefore the value exists in exploiting the other side of it. You can still execute the LIMA Plan very well in leagues with the unwashed masses. Just my opinion.
That said, H2H throws a curveball (horrible, but unintentional, pun) in that strategy. Your strong staff can be neutralized by a solid staff with a couple of two-start pitchers that week. Additionally, if others aren’t concentrating on pitching, you’re liable to “waste” numerous two-start weeks for your studs, meaning you’ll get Cole Hamels (or whoever) twice, but the second start won’t change your point take.
I’d give consideration to a strategy that targets premium closers. Saves are an easy category to dominate on draft day. (SBs probably being the easiest, HR, BA are pretty difficult, etc.) The elite closers hold down rate stats, helping to offset your second (and third) tier pitchers. The top dogs can contribute as many Ks over the course of the week as solid starters who start once that week.
You can argue that, say, three J.J. Putz appearances is worth more than 90% of all starter outings that don’t result in a win (and some that do).
I’ve also always found it pretty easy to move closers. The advantage to trading pitching is that you don’t have to find a partner who matches up with a positional need and and categorical need. You just need to find somebody who needs what you’re offering, category-wise. One variable instead of two.
4 digglahhh // Mar 2, 2008 at 5:14 pm
One more thing, am I the only one who considers the idea of pairing complimentary players? This is easiest to see in basketball. If you want to to take Dwight Howard your other round 1 or 2 pick has to be somebody like Kobe, Iverson, or Pierce (or, you can try for Magette later). Basically, to counteract Howard’s faults you need another player who lives at the line and shoots 85%+.
People don’t understand “volume.” Kobe’s 86% from the line is more valuable than Nash’s 91% because of how much it weights the category. Ichiro’s reluctance to walk makes a .330+ BA that much better because he will also lead the league (and your team) in ABs.
Take Adam Dunn and Ichiro last year. Their respective .351 and .264 BAs averaged out to a .307 BA without accounting for weight. But once you factor in the ABs, that pair would have hit almost .320! Ichiro hits lead off, never walks and Dunn walks all the time, Dusty Baker be damned! Combine their production and halve it and (going by last year), you would have had two players who put up a combined average line of .320/106R/23HR/78RBI/23SB. That’s like what, Alex Rios, maybe a bitter better? How high would you draft a player with a line like that? Add Ichiro and Dunn’s ADP and halve it, you wouldn’t you take this player at that spot? I know you’re a bit down on Ichiro, but the point is largely rhetorical.
Say you take Kamzir, try to pair him with an elite middle reliever. Kazmir has WHIP concerns (durability concerns too) and pitches against BOS and NY a lot, curbing Wins potential (though he has looked pretty dominant against Boston). Grab Jonathan Broxton - viola, problems solved.
Sum your bullpen innings and block them into 150, 180 or 200 innings groups. Look at that production, aside from saves, as another starter, for perspective. Forgetting about closers for a second, take Broxton, and Okajima, say, That’s like 150 innings with a mid 2 ERA, over a K per inning and 8 or 9 wins. Every year a handful of middle relievers win up with 7-9 wins. If one of your two middle relievers is lucky enough to have that happen, you have a borderline ace as a sum of two.
Middle relievers are the unsung heroes of many league championships in my fantasy history. Especially if you have an innings cap, they are just incredibly productive on a per-inning basis.
A warning though, consider whether you have weekly or daily line-up setting. Sometimes you might get stuck with a weird rotation that may make it necessary to bench a MR b/c you have a bunch of pitchers going on the same day. Not a problem really in daily, but it is in weekly.
Also, it helps if all your pitching spots are generic Ps as opposed to SP and RP.
Lobby for all Ps, by the way! SP/RP is an artificial distinction that has no likeness in the real game of baseball. A roster simply has pitching, there is nothing to stop a GM from building a staff of 12 “starters” or “relievers.” In the game of baseball, Billy Wagner and Johan Santana play the same position, it should be the same in a fantasy league.
Leave a Comment