Targeting Jonathan Papelbon
There is a lot of disagreement among fantasy players about when to start taking relief pitchers. The one thing that most agree upon is that the first one to take is Jonathan Papelbon. The Red Sox closer has a three-year track record of success, pitches for a team that should clear 90 wins and is a young 28, with only 230 major league innings on his arm. Papelbon has an ADP of 54, which means that fantasy players start targeting relievers in the middle of the fifth round.
Papelbon’s K/9 fell from an otherworldly 12.96 in 2007 to 10.00 last year. But he compensated by cutting his walks in half. His BB/9 checked in last year at a minuscule 1.04, which was the third-lowest mark for relievers. After back-to-back seasons with a BABIP in the .230s, Papelbon had a .313 mark last year. Combined with a LOB% of 69.5 percent, he saw increases last year in both his WHIP and his ERA.
With a more typical distribution with his LOB% (the only player with 15 or more saves to have a lower rate was Brandon Lyon) Papelbon could easily exceed last year’s overall numbers. And if no pitcher challenges for the all-time saves record, Papelbon could meet pre-season expectations by being the top fantasy closer at the end of the year.
But fantasy players have to ask themselves how much they are willing to pay for Papelbon’s track record. Is it worth taking him in the fifth round, while passing on players like Joe Mauer and Dan Haren? Especially when 30-save pitchers like Kerry Wood and B.J. Ryan are available eight rounds later? Both of those players have had injury problems in the recent past, which makes the Papelbon decision not so cut-and-dried.
16
Papelbon’s ADP was 44 last year. You could’ve had Beckett (45), Sabathia (49), or Hamels (55) in that same round.
Alternatively, Brian Wilson’s ADP was 206 last year. You could’ve had Pettitte (210), Gorzelanny (213), Randy Johnson (216), or Guthrie (222) in that same round.
What combination is more valuable? Papelbon and Pettitte or Wilson and Sabathia?
Assume your team’s other generic five starters and two closers posts this line:
1000 IP, 3.80 ERA, 1.25 WHIP, 833 K (7.5 K/9), 75 W, 50 SV
Here’s Papelbon and Pettitte added to that:
1272 IP, 3.85 ERA, 1.26 WHIP, 1068 K (7.6 K/9), 92 W, 91 SV
Here’s Wilson and Sabathia added to that:
1319 IP, 3.49 ERA, 1.21 WHIP, 1150 K (7.8 K/9), 92 W, 92 SV
Here’s Papelbon alone:
1068 IP, 3.81 ERA, 1.23 WHIP, 910 K (7.67 K/9), 91 SV
Here’s Wilson alone:
1061 IP, 3.86 ERA, 1.26 WHIP, 900 K (7.63 K/9), 91 SV
I guess my point is, closers are one-trick ponies. Papelbon’s ratios look nice compared to Wilson, but the bottom two lines show that Papelbon doesn’t have too much of a positive effect over Wilson in those categories. The innings just aren’t significant enough. Starters, on the other hand, contribute significantly in four categories. It’s much easier to find a quality, reliable starter in the 5th round than it is in the 12th round. It isn’t difficult to find a 20+ save closer who can strike a few guys out in the 12th or later. I think the first two lines illustrate that nicely.
There’s an additional argument that three great relievers can essentially equal another starter, minus the wins. Last year, one owner in a league of mine took Papelbon and Nathan in the 4th and 5th, and then added Rivera in the 8th. Here’s their combined production last season:
207.1 IP, 1.69 ERA, 0.83 WHIP, 12 W, 119 SV, 228 K (9.9 K/9)
Looks gaudy. You’re going to be highly competitive in saves, and your getting ratios that are equivalent to a career year from an elite starter. Their logic is valid, but you can still utilize that strategy without paying for closers. Even if you scraped the very bottom of the barrel last year with Wilson, Sherrill, and Gregg, here’s your output:
184.1 IP, 4.44 ERA, 1.40 WHIP, 13 W, 101 SV, 199 K (9.72 K/9)
That’s equivalent to having Andy Pettitte (204 IP, 4.54 ERA, 1.41 WHIP, 14 W, 158 K) in your rotation for a full season, except you’re adding 101 saves and some strikeouts.
The big difference is, the second scenario freed up your 4th, 5th, and 8th round picks for offense and starting pitching. Selecting Sabathia in the 4th, Hamels in the 5th, and Halladay in the 8th last year quickly made an Andy Pettitte in your rotation easier to swallow. They are going to neutralize the ratios from the closers without much of a problem, plus you’re still at the top in saves. Selecting Paps, Nathan, and Rivera means you’re sacrificing a lot of offense, starting pitching, or both. That owner’s draft went Utley, Teixeira, Manny, the two closers, Verlander and Furcal in the 6th and 7th, his third closer, Beltre in the 9th, Swisher in the 10th, Fukudome in the 11th, and then a run of Billingsley, Hughes, and Pettitte in the 12th-14th rounds. Billingsley was a good pick, but this guy was relying on the waiver wire (Dempster and Lee helped him significantly) early and often for pitching help. He had some bad luck injury wise, but the closer selections didn’t work in his favor, despite their excellent combined performance.
Another example of making the “teens closers” work for you: had you plugged Wood, Marmol, and Lidge into your lineup last year, this would be their combined output:
223 IP, 2.26 ERA, 1.07 WHIP, 9 W, 82 SV, 290 K (11.7 K/9)
That’s Pedro Martinez circa 1997 with Matt Cain’s luck. Plus, you’ve got 82 saves, alone enough to put you in the middle of the pack in most roto leagues.
Even if Papelbon returns to his 12.96 K/9 in 70 IP, adding 100 K to your total, it would only propel the 7.5 K/9 in the initial example line above to 7.8 K/9. To put this into perspective, if you wanted to “buffer” your 7.5 K/9 in the line above (trying to put my Biology degree to work), Papelbon would allow you to take on a 200 IP starter with a K/9 of 5.6 (Hideki Kuroda, Jeremy Guthrie, Jamie Moyer). Wilson’s 9.67 K/9 in 70 IP would add 75 K to your total, sufficiently buffer a 200 IP starter with a K/9 of 6.8 K/9 (Cliff Lee, James Shields, Jon Lester). I concede that a ridiculous K/9 close to 13 could allow you to take on low K/9 starters with good ratios and become more competitive in ERA, WHIP, and K. That being said, I still don’t think a K/9 close to 13 makes a closer worthy of an early-round selection. The post-12th round closers still have high K/9, specifically referring to Francisco (11.8), Fuentes (11.7), Wood (11.4), Hanrahan (9.9), and Wilson (9.6). You can always stack some high-K middle relievers like Balfour (12.7), Cruz (12.4), or Kuo (11.2) if you’re extremely worried about a low K/9. These guys usually carry the added benefit of being next-in-line for closer gigs and are good to stash if you’ve got room on your roster.
So, in conclusion, don’t draft closers before the teens.
Great stuff Clayton. You broke down the “don’t pay for closers” to a tee. It’s amazing looking at these expert mock drafts and closer still go way above their value; but maybe owners love that security blanket of a solid closer.
Sorry for the length of that, by the way, but the early-round closer selections irk me. Don’t get me wrong, I love it when people in my leagues start a run on closers in the 6th or 7th round because it usually drops a starter or hitter I want but didn’t think I could get into my lap. What I don’t like are their arguments justifying it as a good idea.
It’s analogous to plugging a fast player into the leadoff spot despite his low OBP. Yeah, people have been doing it for years, but that doesn’t justify it. It’s a horribly ineffective way to build a team/lineup in both cases.
I agree completely. I usually like to get as many bats as possible before I start drafting pitchers at all. For every Jake Peavy and Johan Santana, there is a Matt Cain or a Ricky Nolasco who will give you just as much, just maybe a few fewer wins. Kind of the same argument you made for not drafting Closers high. That is more than made up for by the bats you can get when Santana & Co. are going off the board though.
that was very compelling and well-written, clayton.
sorry to post again, but i have a strategy question. in some of my deeper (mixed though) leagues, closers went much earlier than their ADP’s last year. common sense says let them overvalue these players, but if i do that, i either have to take someone like sherrill in the 11th, or punt saves.
in the 8th in one league last year, there was a run of valverde, cordero, jenks, street, soria , then soriano and capps first 2 picks of the 9th. i picked before and after that run and wound up with corpas in the 9th, which was several rounds above his adp. hoffman and brian wilson went in the 10th, izzy/ryan/perci/borowski in the 11th. obviously at that point i couldn’t have known, but if i can anticipate something similar this year, what should my counter-strategy be? looking back, rivera in the 7th and nathan in the 6th look like the best values, as they were taken only 3/4 rounds earlier than percival and borowski. there’s no trading in this league btw.
In my opinion, it’s better to let other owners reach for closers and resist the urge to jump on a run. If they’re taking guys like Borowski and Percival in the 9th, that works to your advantage. Grab one of the starters or bats that is sliding down into your lap. Even if you end up with Sherrill in the 11th, it’s still better than Borowski or Percival in the 9th.
If 22 closers are gone by the end of the 8th, then you need to adjust your strategy and consider taking a closer in the 9th and 10th. If only 5 are gone by the end of the 8th, you can probably afford to wait a few rounds. Be aware of what’s left on the board at all times and make adjustments to your plan accordingly. If you only end up with two closers, then draft one or two next-in-line guys in the later rounds.
Just remember that saves are saves. Closers with bad ratios don’t hurt you until they lose their job. Assuming you used those saved early-round picks on some decent starting pitchers, horrible closers aren’t going to put much of a dent in your ratios.
First of all, that seems unlikely to happen again, but remember this: Plenty of closers lose their jobs every year….so there is always the waiver wire, or….
Does your league have holds? If so, go strong in the holds category (this is all if the closers are all gone early) but target setup men who pitch behind closers who have shaky job security. You can pick up vulture saves this way, and you even have the chance of one or two becoming the closer. Here are some setup men I would target if your league has holds:
Dan Wheeler
Jon Rauch
Fernando Rodney
Jose Ceda
Tyler Walker
there are plenty more…. these are guys who could pick up a good number of saves, but don’t possess the “closer” label, so their value is not inflated and they can be had much later. If your league doesn’t have holds, just keep a close eye on closer situations and be ready to make a waiver move….
I agree with Clayton though….don’t take a “closer” too high who probably won’t end up with any more saves than the guy who will take over when they lose their job or get injured (Lyon, Qualls, Percival, etc).
I completely agree with you Clayton about drafting closers. The only way it would be justified is if you are in a head to head league, then I could see it being more beneficial. Anyway this year I’m targeting Marmol and Fuentes along with Matt Lindstrom for my closers.
Fuentes has been going a bit too early, in my opinion. I think K-Rod’s gaudy saves in Anaheim last year are causing some inflation, but that’s just an opinion. I’m not even sure if Marmol is going to close. It wouldn’t be surprising to see Gregg starting the season as closer.
I really like Wood, Broxton, Bell, Devine, Qualls, Lindstrom, and Francisco. In the very final rounds of the draft, I’ve been stashing Gregg, Corpas, Ray, Balfour, Motte, and Soriano if I have room for any of them. All either have an outside shot to close at the beginning of the season (Gregg, Motte, Ray), will be in a time-share (Soriano), or take the job a month or so in (Motte, Balfour, Ray, Soriano).
Excellent points! I drafted Papelbon early last year along with B.Wilson and Sherrill in the later rounds. Around the 4th week I realized that wilson and sherrill were doing enough to help me in saves that I turned around and traded papelbon for Berkman and Joe Saunders, and picked up Kuo from LA to offset sherrill and wilson’s poor whip and k totals. Turned out that drafting Papelbon high turned him into a bluechip trade prospect. I don’t suggest doing this, but if you plan on snagging an upper tier closer, try and fill out the rest of your bullpen with later round gambles.
I think this is a good point, Nate. I wouldn’t be opposed to drafting Papelbon or Nathan if I’m not happy with the players available to me in the 6th or 7th round and they slide to me there. I’m still going to load up on the lower tier closers in the teens, maybe use Papelbon for a month or two and wait for someone to panic about their saves situation, and then deal him for an elite player that fills one of my needs.
If you could draft Papelbon in the 5th or 6th and turn him into a bat that was drafted in the 2nd or 3rd, that’s not a bad strategy.
In my league last year, Rivera was the #1 closer and he was ranked #34 in overall value. Papelbon was #2 and he was #58 overall. An average ADP of 55 is about right for the top closer. The #5 closer in my league in 2008 was Jose Valverde and he ranked #65 overall.
Valverde was 5th among closers and 65th overall in your league. Where was he drafted? Looking back on my leagues from last year, it was usually around the 8th or 9th round. That’s between the 84th and 108th players selected (ADP was 84th on MDC). So, you could get the 2nd closer and 58th overall player with the 55th pick, or you could get the 5th closer and 65th overall player with the 85th pick. Yep, Papelbon is already looking like great value…
The big question is, where did Soria, Lidge, and Wood rank in your league, both at their position and overall? What was their ADP? That’s called value.
Let’s use outfielders for an analogy since they are somewhat comparable to closers. There’s a ton of depth and plenty of late-round bargains. While I’m not advocating that you pass on one of the earaly-round studs if they’re the best player available, I am suggesting you realize the importance of value. Bob Abreu’s ADP was 41st last year. He was perceived as a surefire lock for 20/20 with 100+ R and RBI. Bob Abreu finished as the 31st ranked player according to Yahoo last season and the 10th best outfielder, so you got what you paid for. Matt Kemp’s ADP was 113th last year, although he was perceived by most as a 20/20 lock. He finished the year 42nd overall and 14th among outfielders. Now, pretending you could see the future and knew how each player would perform in 2008, would you prefer to take Abreu in the 4th or Kemp in the 9th?
While it’s a bit difficult to project success with hitters like Kemp and Abreu due to their affect on five categories and heavy dependence on lineup and teammates for some of their stats, closers need to be viewed as one category players (as I illustrated already). Their effect on ratios and strikeouts are not worth paying a premium price for. You are drafting them for saves and saves alone. That is why elite middle relievers are always drafted in the later rounds, not in the 8th. If you know Papelbon is closing for Boston, Wood is closing for Cleveland, Devine is closing for Oakland, and Francisco is closing for Texas, you know without a doubt that they are going to save around 30 games. Maybe a few more, maybe a few less depending on team success and luck (Wilson saved 41 games for a horrible team). The vast majority of closers who lose their jobs don’t lose them for poor performance. They lose them due to injury. Is Papelbon immune to injury? I don’t know… Was J.J. Putz last season? If you take closers in the teens and they get hurt, you’re going to struggle in saves. One category. That’s it. If you spent a 5th round pick on Putz last year and he gets hurt, you’re going to struggle in saves plus you passed up an elite pitcher or top-tier hitter to draft him. That’s a double blow to your team. Getting lucky with a sleeper aside, what player is going to provide you with more value than a closer in the teens? None. What player is going to provide you with more value than a closer in the 5th round? Just about anyone.
Winning in fantasy baseball is mostly luck, but you can minimize the effect of bad luck by getting as much value as possible with every pick. I draft Dan Haren in the 5th, I’m boosting my wins, ratios, and strikeouts significantly. I draft Papelbon, I’m getting saves. There are guys who get saves in the teens. How many Dan Haren’s are you going to find in the teens?
I don’t really get it. A top tier closer is worth $x or whatever pick. That’s relative to the other positions. If you draft anybody at their true value, you are not getting good value. That starts with pick #1 and rolls all the way through the last pick of the draft. It’s not some special rule relegated to closers. Last year, there were four closers who produced more value than Abreu and six that produced more than Kemp. If you had your choice of drafting one or the other, you should take the one with higher value. Period.
George Sherrill was a replacement level player last year. Kerry Wood had only three more saves and was worth $16. That’s a difference of #79 and #240 in DP. Brandon Lyon and his 26 saves was below replacment level! Billy Wagner with his 27 was worth $8 more. You’re trying to tell me that’s similar value? It’s not.
Good pitchers who are closers are a lot more valuable than bad pitchers who are closers. It’s that simple. The diffrence in WHIP, ERA, and Ks is about +/- $8 above or below average from elite to replacement. That’s a difference in draft position between #59 ($20), #111 ($12), and #197 ($4).
Picking who the elite closers are going to be is no different than picking who the elite starters are going to be. You look for guys who rack up Ks in droves and are stingy with the BB. Then you factor in park and defense. Then you give a slight bump for a guy who pitches for a winning team and/or in a lower than normal run environment. (note: this is not different than starting pitchers, where going from the worst situation to the best is worth no more than $4 in wins).
You want guys who are firmly in the grasp of the closers job. Most guys who lose the job are due to injury, but the 3-4 that lose it to innefectiveness come from a pool of about 8-10 unsettled positions.
The ability to find sleepers at closer is no different than any other position. By knowing who the dominant MR are (Morrow, Marmol…etc) rather than taking a crappy “backup” closer (like Rauch?) gives you a big edge on the competition. This is no different at starter, where you know Johnny Cueto is worth a roster spot even though he had an ERA of 1,000,000 last year. It’s no different in the OF. It’s no different than at the most overvalued position in my league by far, 1B. It’s no different than MI. You get your edge from knowing how to value the stats relative to one another and how to value upside, not from avoiding closer.
To take the sillyness of a few posters above, what combination would you rather have? Bob Abreu and Brian Wilson or Matt Kemp and Jonathan Papelbon?
rw34peru, you can argue all you want with dollar values, but that’s not going to change the fact that there are many more decent closers available late than there are Matt Kemp or Bobby Abreu caliber bats. You say would you rather have Jon Papelbon and Matt Kemp than Abreu and a low level closer, but I would take Abreu AND Kemp, and take a few low level closers. Closer is the most unstable position in the game, so it is downright silly to invest such a high pick in a far-from durable Papelbon or a 39 year old Rivera when you can get a rock-solid bat around the same place. MLB.com has Papelbon around the same place as Prince Fielder and Adrian Gonzalez in their top 100 for 2009. What would you rather have….Prince Fielder and Heath Bell or Jon Papelbon and Lyle Overbay? If you want to use Dollar Values, the spread in dollar value between top closers and bottom closers is a lot less than the spread between a top bat and a bottom bat. Using MLB.com dollar values, the difference between top and bottom first base is $30. The difference between top and bottom closers is $20.
Yet another argument: It is MUCH easier to make up for the low closer’s lack of production in other categories than it is to make up for having Lyle Overbay at first base.
I just thought I would throw this out there, I play in a AL-only keeper league, and I strongly believe in the value of a tier one closer. Last years draft was a classic example of why to go big if you want a closer.
(keeper league so these were only closers avalible and their cost)
Rivera 30
K-Rod 31
Borowski 17
Todd Jones 18
CJ Wilson 13
Percival 18
Plus in deep League only leagues the guys that replaced these guys are already rostered so there is never a closer on waiver wire. I would never want to play on closers in the teens. Also in league only league you tend to roster some less quality starting pitching then in mixed so the impact a top closer can make might jump you 1-2 points in ERA and WHIP. Just looking at things from a different view.
AA
In an AL-only league, you’re cutting the player pool in half. If everyone had three keepers, there’s another 36 players gone from the pool. The teens of a 12-team, mixed, non-keeper league quickly become the 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th rounds of your draft.
Obviously the rules change for different leagues. What I wrote wouldn’t pertain to your league. You have a smaller player pool and apparently an auction format. You’re not looking at things from a different viewpoint. You’re looking at a completely different thing. Apparently that wasn’t obvious to you.
After reading Claytons great post on the value of closers from a mixed league point of view, I thought it would be interesting to hear coments from others looking at it from the league only point of view. I thought I made it obvious that I was talking about something completely different by using AL-only or Leage-only a number of times in my short post. Apparently that wasn’t obvious to you.
Point taken, Aaron. Sorry for the hostility.
I agree for the most part to wait on closers. There are certain situations, not AL-only leagues, when it may behoove you to take a closer. From a hindsight, statistical perspective of course it looks like people who had Brian Wilson and George Sherill last year were smart. But what about the people who waited and drafted C.J. Wilson, Borowski, Todd Jones, Gagne, Street? Even Saito and Fuentes were tenuous. Where the statistics are misleading is the value of knowing you have an established, elite closer. I would never recommend reaching, but if Paps falls to you, you have to consider it in certain circumstances.
I just started a 13-team Roto Mixed Dynasty Salary Cap League and found myself with the 13th pick. At the end of the 5th round I decided to take Papelbon. I knew he wouldn’t come back, along with a few others. At that point I knew I would either have to reach for a Jenks or literally wait for Bell and Francisco late. Sure I like Bell, and even Francisco for his low price, but am I confident they will close all year? If I had waited last year and drafted Wilson, Jones and Gagne or Street, I would have been crushed.
The good news is you are only losing out on one category – I totally get that. If I have a pick anywhere from 4-9, maybe even 3-10, I’m not taking a closer early, because I can scrap up a guy when a run starts. Of course, as a swing pick you will be on the end of a run probably 80% of the time. By choosing Papelbon I not only started a run on some closers, causing other players to drop anyway, I ensured I had the best player at his position and still getting him 10 spots below his ADP at 64/65.
This would be one of the few times I would recommend taking an elite closer. There is tremendous value in having one of these guys because, in a Roto league, you know you will at least be in the middle of the pack with saves, even if you don’t draft another guy for 10 rounds. I admit it’s not ideal, but neither is having the last pick, so sometimes you gotta make a move and this one is reasonable. Otherwise, great stuff Clayton.
What? More good closers than good bats? That’s just false.
Above replacement closers available on the waiver wire in my 12 team league in 2008;
Salomon Torres, $6
Dan Wheeler, $5
John Rauch, $1
That’s the least of any position! You can set the bar wherever you want, but no matter what, closer is the most scarce position of all (maybe catcher in “normal times”).
It doesn’t matter that the drop from top closer to bottom closer is bigger than than the other positions. I’m not suggesting you take a $22 closer ahead of a $40 outfielder. I’m suggesting that you take a $22 closer ahead of a $21 OF. Therefore the drop is bigger. Papelbon outproduced Abreu last year. That was not hard to predict. If you took Abreu ahead of Papelbon, you made a mistake. Plain and simple.
Even if you assume you can “hit” with a late closer with a guy like Brian Wilson ($6), let’s look at the hitters that produced +/- $2 of him.
Ryan Theriot
Corey Hart
Randy Winn
Bengie Molina
Mike Aviles
Orlando Cabrera
Placido Polanco
Chris Snyder
Conor Jackson
Hunter Pence
Chris Young
Chone Figgins
Mike Jacobs
Miguel Tejada
Cristian Guzman
Adam LaRoche
Willie Harris
Kazuo Matsui
Jerry Hairston
Shin-Soo Choo
Adrian Beltre
Ray Durham
Garrett Atkins
Yunel Escobar
How many of those guys were available late or on the waiver wire? Every position is covered multiple times. And that’s not even counting guys like Ludwick or Quentin or Huff that were $30 better than Wilson and $20 better than Lidge, who was the best of the possible late round closers. No matter where you set the bar, you can do better with position players on the waiver wire than you can with closers. Why? Because there’s more of them.
You don’t win a league by having the highest dollar values! It all depends on how you combine the players.
Clayton has spelled it out as clear as day, and you still don’t see that Papelbon isn’t as valuable of a player as Matt Kemp (MLB.com has Pap at $24 and Kemp at $26).
Kemp will give you great numbers in all 5 categories, and Papelbon will give you one category, with good but minimally significant contributions in other categories.
Think about it: If your team pitches 1400 innings collectively, which it would in a competetive league, Papelbon will pitch about 5% of your team’s innings. How much of an impact can he have in the categories other than saves?
A top starter would pitch about 15% of your team’s innings, being a much bigger factor (and contributor) in ERA, K, W, and WHIP than Paps. That’s 3 more categories than Papelbon. One top starting pitcher alone will eat up a lower rated closer’s mediocre peripherals. Make that 5 starting pitchers and 3 setup men, and one closer’s stats (other than his saves contributed) are nearly undetectable when added.
Compare Papelbon to Kemp….Kemp is one of 9 bats in a lineup….meaning he accounts for about 11% of your offense’s playing time, whereas Papelbon accounts for about 5% of your IP. So anything Kemp does automatically has more of an effect on your team’s offense than something Papelbon does has an effect on your pitching (except for those saves, which any closer could provide). That goes for any bat. So wouldn’t you rather have a good bat and a bad closer who at least gets you saves? Plus, it’s not even a guarantee that a late closer will even have a bad ERA.
In fact, the people who overvalue saves the most are the guys who pass on the elite closers in the 5th-7th and start taking middle of the road closers in the teens. The guy who picked George Sherrill last year was no smarter than the guy who took Aaron Cook, Ramon Hernandez, Jason Kubel, or Marcus Scutaro.
Do you want to cite a source for these dollar values you’re throwing at us?
I’m also not sure why you’re pulling out auction values while discussing a draft. It’s a completely different entity. You can have Papelbon for $27 and Jenks for $21 in an auction this year. I’ll take Lindstrom for $6 and Bell for $2. With my extra $30, I can outright buy Tim Lincecum. I’m not sure, but I think Lincecum, Lindstrom, and Bell are going to combine for more value than Papelbon and Jenks. I think I just beat you in four out of five pitching categories with my $38. Heck, saves are fickle enough that I may have beaten you in all five.
Papelbon for $27? Or would you rather have Kinsler, Pedroia, Manny, Webb, or Halladay? Lidge for $24? Or would you rather have Markakis, Roberts, Haren, or Oswalt? Fuentes for $14? Or would you rather have Billingsley, Shields, Felix, or Pena? In an auction, it doesn’t really matter beyond that because you should be able to afford all the guys like Bell, Devine, Hanrahan, Francisco, Ray, Sherrill, Balfour, Percival, Wheeler, Swisher, Escobar, Sandoval, Dukes, etc. who are a couple dollars.
Is my team going to be better with Kinsler, Haren, Billingsley, Bell, Devine, and Francisco or with Papelbon, Lidge, Fuentes, Polanco, Snell, and Cook? My three lesser regarded players only contribute significantly to one category and have a decent shot at bettering your three expensive players in that very category. On the flip side, there’s little doubt that Kinsler outperforms Polanco across the board and that Haren and Billingsley will absolutely dominate Snell and Cook. We spent the same amount of money and I’m beating you by a significant margin in at least 9 categories. What happens if Bell, Devine, and Francisco all lose their jobs? Nothing has changed. I’m still significantly beating you in 9 categories.
I’ve been using the values from my league, but Last Player Picked would be a good place to start. Once you realize that Mariano Rivera outproduced every pitcher not named Roy Halladay in a standard (Yahoo?) league last year, hammered K-Rod, and was the 15th most valuable player in fantasy baseball, then you’ll start to realize that closers are not one trick ponies and the best is usually worth a top 50 pick.
BTW, why do you assume that just because I take Papelbon, I can’t grab a Heath Bell or Frank Fransisco later? If I take Papelbon and you take Webb, I am going to hammer you in WHIP, ERA, and saves, assuning all the rest of our pitchers are the same. Even last year when Webb had a fluky 22 wins, Papelbon put up $2 more in value!
The problem with your comparisons is, you are not comparing similar valued players. If Pedroia and Kinsler are falling to the 50th pick, then it’s not the closer that is overvalued. It’s the 15 non-closers that went ahead of Kinsler and Pedroia that shouldn’t have that are overvalued.
It’s not a difficult transition from $ values to draft picks.
Taking Papelbon or Nathan assures you of saves. In a roto league, it pretty much guarantees you will be middle-of-the-pack in a category. If you pick up the George Sherrill of this year, then you are probably near the top. Assuring your floor in a category is middle-of-the-pack with a 5th round pick, AND gives you a strong possibility of being in the top with only 2 players, has value within itself. The drop-off in going from an Abreu to a Vernon Wells is worth the drop-off of going from Papelbon to a Jenks, because of the assurance you will have substantial production in a category. Like I said before, this is even more relevant to a keeper league.