Draft Chatter

Timmah! wrote:

TitaniumMan wrote:

Zara wrote:

Winner of the award for least appropriate nickname.

I don't know. Didn't he once say it had something to do with his performance in the bedroom?

I thought that was you.

Lad- At this point coming at ALL would be a godsend.

Zara wrote:

MustacheToes wrote:

I've been texting Boz all day, so if we can get quick I'll have his pick.

Winner of the award for least appropriate nickname.

Hey i cant help if i work at a supermarket and deal with dumbass customers who cant understand the sales all day! Sorry, a little P.O.ed at the moment. Anyway, yea, my username has been a tad on the ironic side at the moment, but now i should be around quite a bit.

Until Monday comes along at least, then you'll pretty much have to take the day off from the draft cuz i'll be MIA for 13 hours.

Oh sure, I get off from my helllish rounds (Usually done by 1130-12, done at 215 ACK), and now it comes to a dead halt.

Gotta say this league is definitely keeping me on my toes - Larry called the SS run when I told him my pick last night before heading off to bed. And of course my first choice was Chipper, then changed my mind (if that makes you feel any better, Dale). Just had a feeling that the SS run was gonna happen.

Would have loved to get Drew & Mauer in 7/8, but at least I didn't get sniped with my backup plan - I might *still* be deciding, since I wanted a high .avg guy and 4-cat goodness; glad we're at 5 OF's, it can justify going 3 OF's so far.

So, I readily give 1 snipe to Larry & Jon on either end, will be interesting to see if how the next rounds shape up, LOL.

quickster12 wrote:

Hey i cant help if i work at a supermarket and deal with dumbass customers who cant understand the sales all day!

Sure- It's always the customers' fault, isn't it? Blame it on the poor, pathetic haggard brainwashed consumer who looks to you, Chris, to be a beacon of light in their dark, drab existence, a voice of sanity calling to them as the vainly seek a guide through the bewildering desolation of barren, soulless, blighted retail terrain with costly pitfalls sheer as cliffs at every turn.
And what say you to these sad lost souls?
"Piss off you!"

Sounds like you're management material.

Rotoraysfan wrote:

glad we're at 5 OF's, it can justify going 3 OF's so far.

Oh indeed. 4 in 7 would be forgivable as far as I'm concerned seeing as how most of us are going to share the same middle round targets and it will come down to who reaches across the most rounds and for whom and what tidbits are left to sift through.

TitaniumMan wrote:

Rotoraysfan wrote:

glad we're at 5 OF's, it can justify going 3 OF's so far.

Oh indeed. 4 in 7 would be forgivable as far as I'm concerned seeing as how most of us are going to share the same middle round targets and it will come down to who reaches across the most rounds and for whom and what tidbits are left to sift through.

Well, I'm just waiting to see if what run happens next - with Kyle on deck, I'm sure we'll see something dramatic.

And in case you're all wondering, I'm serious - Kyle gets the mover/shaker award for setting runs this draft.

Rotoraysfan wrote:

TitaniumMan wrote:

Rotoraysfan wrote:

glad we're at 5 OF's, it can justify going 3 OF's so far.

Oh indeed. 4 in 7 would be forgivable as far as I'm concerned seeing as how most of us are going to share the same middle round targets and it will come down to who reaches across the most rounds and for whom and what tidbits are left to sift through.

Well, I'm just waiting to see if what run happens next - with Kyle on deck, I'm sure we'll see something dramatic.

And in case you're all wondering, I'm serious - Kyle gets the mover/shaker award for setting runs this draft.

I'm glad I've completely ignored what he's done and done my own thing. Runs are for suckers.

Zara wrote:

Rotoraysfan wrote:

TitaniumMan wrote:

Rotoraysfan wrote:

glad we're at 5 OF's, it can justify going 3 OF's so far.

Oh indeed. 4 in 7 would be forgivable as far as I'm concerned seeing as how most of us are going to share the same middle round targets and it will come down to who reaches across the most rounds and for whom and what tidbits are left to sift through.

Well, I'm just waiting to see if what run happens next - with Kyle on deck, I'm sure we'll see something dramatic.

And in case you're all wondering, I'm serious - Kyle gets the mover/shaker award for setting runs this draft.

I'm glad I've completely ignored what he's done and done my own thing. Runs are for suckers.

I wouldn't go *that* far - when runs take people way ahead of their value, then it's a sucker move. When you can catch the run at the very end before the big drop-off in production occurs, though, that's value IMO. It's when you're forced to reach for a guy you didn't really want, that's where the problems start to occur, because it forces you to reach again later on.

Navigating runs is a key to success IMO - I agree you shouldn't be a slave to 'em, but choosing to start one, or catching one at the tail end before the big gap in value, that's more than useful....especially in more hardcore leagues. In "lighter" leagues, the fact is you have so many easy targets left that runs aren't as important. Go into a league where no one's asleep at the wheel, however..... you get the idea.

Okay, I noticed that Kyle was here for about 20 minutes or so and left without making any picks. I was gonna wait to leave work to see who came off the board, but I'm just gonna leave now, and catch up then.

I'll be back in an hour-hour and a half.

Well, I don't believe there's such a thing as choosing to start a run. I guess if everyone was using the same draft list, then maybe, but I've seen players taken already that were much lower on my list so clearly we're not drafted from the same ones.

Sometimes zigging instead of zagging is the absolute way to go. Is it better to draft the last player in Tier 2 at say SS than the first player in Tier 2 of say 1b? I'm not necessarily sure that's true, especially if the top player in Tier 2 at 1B has potential for Tier 1 outcome whereas the last player in Tier 2 at SS you pretty much know what you're getting. That's why sometimes participating in a run means you're a sucker, even if you're getting that last player in a tier.

Timmah! wrote:

Okay, I noticed that Kyle was here for about 20 minutes or so and left without making any picks. I was gonna wait to leave work to see who came off the board, but I'm just gonna leave now, and catch up then.

I'll be back in an hour-hour and a half.

We're still waiting on spundin, who should be making picks in about 15 minutes or so.

I ken, but I still couldn't take Brandon Phillips or B-Rob before Holliday.
Of course I nearly got Roberts anyway, cept...

Zara wrote:

Well, I don't believe there's such a thing as choosing to start a run. I guess if everyone was using the same draft list, then maybe, but I've seen players taken already that were much lower on my list so clearly we're not drafted from the same ones.

Sometimes zigging instead of zagging is the absolute way to go. Is it better to draft the last player in Tier 2 at say SS than the first player in Tier 2 of say 1b? I'm not necessarily sure that's true, especially if the top player in Tier 2 at 1B has potential for Tier 1 outcome whereas the last player in Tier 2 at SS you pretty much know what you're getting. That's why sometimes participating in a run means you're a sucker, even if you're getting that last player in a tier.

Ah, but there's the rub - I did qualify that it only matters when the dropoff is *significant*. I agree completely that getting a Tier 2 SS might not be *that* much different than getting a Tier 2 1B.....but I believe some positions have tier differences that are so huge they do justify participating in a run. Others, it's as you said - the key is in appraising the differences as significant or not.

I suspect we have a similar perspective, since it's value-based in the end - I just tend to view not just tiers based on levels of performance, but also try to identify *key* tier differences. There are only about 4 of 'em this year, but being on the right side of them is important given that the differences from the other side warrants an upgrade in valuation.

As for starting runs, I agree that's not the primary objective - find a value pick, and make it. It's just gravy when you watch a bunch of guys pick behind you to leave you options in the next round, that's all. While it may not be your intent, it does factor into how your draft plays out, and that's worth noting... even if it shouldn't be your primary goal.

Hmm, probably should check in on work, LOL. Having too much fun talking FBB again.

Zara wrote:

Well, I don't believe there's such a thing as choosing to start a run. I guess if everyone was using the same draft list, then maybe, but I've seen players taken already that were much lower on my list so clearly we're not drafted from the same ones.

Sometimes zigging instead of zagging is the absolute way to go. Is it better to draft the last player in Tier 2 at say SS than the first player in Tier 2 of say 1b? I'm not necessarily sure that's true, especially if the top player in Tier 2 at 1B has potential for Tier 1 outcome whereas the last player in Tier 2 at SS you pretty much know what you're getting. That's why sometimes participating in a run means you're a sucker, even if you're getting that last player in a tier.

Well it was either be a sucker or roll with Clint Barmes at SS in yet another league.

F'n SS's. I hate them.

I like when a run passes and guys totally forget about the next level of quality and often you can get them much cheaper later.

Rotoraysfan wrote:

Zara wrote:

Well, I don't believe there's such a thing as choosing to start a run. I guess if everyone was using the same draft list, then maybe, but I've seen players taken already that were much lower on my list so clearly we're not drafted from the same ones.

Sometimes zigging instead of zagging is the absolute way to go. Is it better to draft the last player in Tier 2 at say SS than the first player in Tier 2 of say 1b? I'm not necessarily sure that's true, especially if the top player in Tier 2 at 1B has potential for Tier 1 outcome whereas the last player in Tier 2 at SS you pretty much know what you're getting. That's why sometimes participating in a run means you're a sucker, even if you're getting that last player in a tier.

Ah, but there's the rub - I did qualify that it only matters when the dropoff is *significant*. I agree completely that getting a Tier 2 SS might not be *that* much different than getting a Tier 2 1B.....but I believe some positions have tier differences that are so huge they do justify participating in a run. Others, it's as you said - the key is in appraising the differences as significant or not.

I suspect we have a similar perspective, since it's value-based in the end - I just tend to view not just tiers based on levels of performance, but also try to identify *key* tier differences. There are only about 4 of 'em this year, but being on the right side of them is important given that the differences from the other side warrants an upgrade in valuation.

As for starting runs, I agree that's not the primary objective - find a value pick, and make it. It's just gravy when you watch a bunch of guys pick behind you to leave you options in the next round, that's all. While it may not be your intent, it does factor into how your draft plays out, and that's worth noting... even if it shouldn't be your primary goal.

Hmm, probably should check in on work, LOL. Having too much fun talking FBB again.

Yeah. Sounds like we do have the same philosophy. It's a big reason why I took Miggy since I don't particularly care for the glut of 3b that will hit .265.

In any event, since we've stalled like a 77 Chevy Caprice Classic, someone just text me when it's my turn. Sometimes the service in my house sucks donkey nuts so email me at the Rotisguru@gmail.com account if I don't respond to the text within 5 minutes.

The Czar wrote:

Zara wrote:

Well, I don't believe there's such a thing as choosing to start a run. I guess if everyone was using the same draft list, then maybe, but I've seen players taken already that were much lower on my list so clearly we're not drafted from the same ones.

Sometimes zigging instead of zagging is the absolute way to go. Is it better to draft the last player in Tier 2 at say SS than the first player in Tier 2 of say 1b? I'm not necessarily sure that's true, especially if the top player in Tier 2 at 1B has potential for Tier 1 outcome whereas the last player in Tier 2 at SS you pretty much know what you're getting. That's why sometimes participating in a run means you're a sucker, even if you're getting that last player in a tier.

Well it was either be a sucker or roll with Clint Barmes at SS in yet another league.

F'n SS's. I hate them.

I like when a run passes and guys totally forget about the next level of quality and often you can get them much cheaper later.

Dont remind me, draft position alone garunteed that i would be selecting a SS late in the draft.

I erased your picks for a second, when Pat sent me a text he had already sent who he wanted for his 1st pick to Alex. Just a minute....

LOL Sandoval goes in Round 8. Which officially secures this league's rep as truly RW-hardcore.

(And I'm not bagging on the pick, it's just that you *knew* he was being targeted by many guys here, just didn't know when the hammer was going to fall).

Rotoraysfan wrote:

LOL Sandoval goes in Round 8. Which officially secures this league's rep as truly RW-hardcore.

(And I'm not bagging on the pick, it's just that you *knew* he was being targeted by many guys here, just didn't know when the hammer was going to fall).

Well, I'm a believer, but I didn't see him going that early. Nice pick.

Dogdamn I'm tired of getting sniped. I'm serious, I'm getting bitter about it. At least happen more than a few picks away from me so I know where I want to reroute my roster. Shit.

Damn you quick, I was really hoping Uggla would slide back to me. I'm not a huge fan, and never owned him, but at this point he's a great pick IMO.

"Mariana" Rivera? Show some respect to the greatest closer of all-time, damn you!

HighLanderZ wrote:

"Mariana" Rivera? Show some respect to the greatest closer of all-time, damn you!

Ooops. Now I'm leaving it and attached a girl name to all Yanks selected from here on out.

MustacheToes wrote:

Damn you quick, I was really hoping Uggla would slide back to me. I'm not a huge fan, and never owned him, but at this point he's a great pick IMO.

I never owned him either, and have never been a big fan of em. Before i picked em, i was basically looking for every reason not to draft him. lol. But he feel too far for me to pass em up.

quickster12 wrote:

MustacheToes wrote:

Damn you quick, I was really hoping Uggla would slide back to me. I'm not a huge fan, and never owned him, but at this point he's a great pick IMO.

I never owned him either, and have never been a big fan of em. Before i picked em, i was basically looking for every reason not to draft him. lol. But he feel too far for me to pass em up.

Yeah, I hear you on all that. I could have really used his power at 2B too with still not having an overpowering bat in the OF.