ottoneu Auction Analysis Contest

Two weeks ago, Eno Sarris ran a series of posts asking you, dear readers, to analyze some fantasy questions and offered you a subscription to the FanGraphs+ 2012.

Today, at the behest of Niv Shah – the Abner Doubleday of ottoneu (except, you know, without the doubts that he is actually the man behind the game) – I present to you an opportunity to win a free $9.99 ottoneu team for 2012. All you have to do is tell us who you think was the worst value in the original ottoneu auction that happened this past weekend.

This Google Doc spreadsheet has a tab for each of the teams in that league, with their full rosters and a column called “Auction Order.” Basically, if this column has a number (say, 37) it tells you when this player was nominated in our auction (say, 37th); if it has an N/A, the player was kept from 2011.

To get you started, here are a couple of what I consider to be the best values from our 7th annual auction:

Jason Heyward ($36) and Joe Mauer ($19)

An odd couple, I know, but I think these were great pick-ups by Gerbils on Speed. We talked about this team earlier in the off-season and looked at their focus on 2013. Heyward and Mauer are coming off down years (or injuries) and their values are low. I haven’t seen either of them go this high in auctions so far. But when 2013 is your goal, grabbing guys like this can pay off in a big way. If these guys reach the level they could reach, they could be top-tier talents at their positions, and command salaries much higher than these, making them values for 2013. Even failing that, small bounce backs should make them stellar trade candidates later this Summer. And if they flop? The Gerbils can cut’em loose without having lost much.

Mat Latos ($23)

I’ve mentioned a couple times this off-season that you should all expect inflation in year two. Well, by year seven, that grows. With only a few solid SP out there (among my top 25, Clayton Kershaw, Jered Weaver and Ian Kennedy were free agents via the arbitration process, so teams held $5 coupons on them, while Tim Lincecum, Josh Johnson, Chris Carpenter, and Latos were the only four true free agents), prices for SP were sky-high. Kershaw broke $60, Linecum was over $50, Weaver cracked $40, Johnson and Carpenter went for $30 and $29, respectively, and the winning bid on Kennedy was $25 (salary is $20 after the coupon). Yet the Tigerblood Warlocks managed to nab Latos for less than any of them (significantly less than most). His transition to Cincinnati may be tough, but the potential to have a $23 stud is high.

So what were the worst values? Get your answers in by 7:00 p.m. PT (that’s right, I am refusing to adhere to your East Coast bias by using ET) and we’ll pick a winner!




Print This Post



36 Responses to “ottoneu Auction Analysis Contest”

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
  1. baruchk says:

    Matt Holliday at 57? That seems way too high for me.

    btw, is the free league only for this season, or will also be free next year?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  2. rotofan says:

    Worst value player was Tim Lincecum at $55. His velocity is no longer elite, his k-rate has dropped three straight years his walk rate has risen two straight years, his WHIP will rise as his BABIP regresses to carer norms and his ERA regresses in line with every indicator suggesting he benefited somewhat from luck last year. On top of that, he has a motion and a huge workload at a young age that has long made him a candidate for an injury.

    There are other players who were over-bids: Holliday, Fielder and even Kershaw come to mind, but none that carry as much downside risk.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  3. SwitchRodeo says:

    A-Rod for $36 and its not even close. There was a lot more value to be had at third base later in the draft. Kevin Youkilis went for $29 and I just don’t see A-Rod being 125% the player he his. Plus with his age how long before he really declines or worse, loses 3B eligibility. Even worse, David Wright went for $30, offering greater upside with a much better number in the age category.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  4. LuckyStrikes says:

    I don’t see much value in a $17 A. Chapman. No one yet knows his role and his walk rates just don’t make him an effective SP and a scary RP. Yes, he could turn the corner, but I’d rather use that money elsewhere.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  5. Damon says:

    Josh Johnson at 30 is steep. He’ll be injured and won’t come close to producing 30 value value

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  6. Eminor3rd says:

    Carlos Quentin at $20. I’m a big fanof the guy, but there’s zero chance of him staying healthy without the ability to DH and diving around like he does in the huge outfield in San Diego. Add that to the fact that Petco will drain his power AND the fact the 4×4 won’t take advantage of the doubles increase he’ll have by as much as a linear weights league will, and you have a $20 OF who will play 100 games at nothing more than league average. By contrast, the same team has Jayson Werth for $12, which is probably where CQ belongs.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  7. bsally says:

    Cespedes at $15 seems awfully high. I can’t see him contributing this year and he’s such an unknown quantity, yet he’s $1 more than Bryce Harper.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  8. Niv Shah says:

    The free league is for this season. I can either refund an existing team for you or set you up with a new free team!

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  9. Negative EV’s Matt Holliday at $57 will be by far the worst

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  10. Damn, I wait to post and Baruchk beats me to the winner… Do I have to vote again or can you give us both a free league?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  11. Daniel says:

    I’ll have Eric Hosmer at $37 please.

    It’s not that I don’t like Hosmer. I do; everyone does. He was a top prospect among top prospects in the bumper 2011 KCR crop, he put up a 114 wRC+ at the age of 21, he’s basically what fantasy dreams are made of. But we’re here to talk about value, right? And I don’t see a whole lot of value in $37.

    We don’t care about wRC+ for Ottoneu purposes but we do care about wOBA. Young Hosmer? .342 in 2011. Sure, he’s 21. Of course he has the pedigree. But that stadium is not friendly to the left-handed among us and his power is always likely to be suppressed by it (only 3 out of 19 homers last year came at home, as per J. Zimmerman in Hosmer’s profile – that’s the narrative; a 76 home run park factor for lefties is the science). ZiPS has him at .359 wOBA next year. At first base? For $37?

    I don’t like to see my young stars starting behind their salaries and while I accept that necessity might demand bending that rule in the seventh year of a keeper league, I think that price tag gives Hosmer far too much catching up to do to be anything but ugly.

    First baseman available in the auction who went for less: Carlos Lee ($8), Joe Mauer ($19), Kevin Youkillis ($29). I don’t want to keep Hosmer for $39 so give me any of those guys for 2012.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  12. bgrosnick says:

    I’d like to offer a dissenting opinion. At first, my mind jumped to the “big-money” signings: Matt Holliday, A-Rod, Lincecum. Especially Holliday, at a big-ticket number of $57…should someone be investing that much in any non-Cabrera/Pujols caliber hitter? But I thought about it further, and you have to take league context issues in mind. Ottoneu 4×4 leagues don’t value things like SB and AVG, they basically double-count power and the ability to get on base in the first-half of a batting order. With that in mind, an elite hitter like Matt Holliday, someone who’s shown very little regression with the bat over the last six years, could be a decent (if not cheap) value at that price. Given the way salaries inflate, and the limited pool of top-end talent available in this draft, a player who boasts a .900 OPS has quite a bit of value, and having Holliday’s consistent bat in the lineup could make that investment worthwhile. To me, those rates that he puts up are far superior to spending an equal amount of money on, say, two players like Andre Ethier. With half the league being based on rate stats, quality can definitely trump quantity.

    So who’re the candidates for worst value, if I feel that elite OBP and power skills are valuable at high prices? Gordon Beckham is an awful hitter, but he plays up the middle and only cost $4. That’s not an awful value, even if I have him at negative $$ in my rankings. The same could be said of Aaron Hill…if SB aren’t counted, he’ll have to really get some balls out of the park to be worth $10.

    No, I think the worst value, dollar-for-dollar coming out of the draft is Adam Dunn at $11. Hear me out…Dunn plays the most overstocked position in ottoneu: first base. He may have considerable upside, but he’s coming off a terrible season in which there were few sustained signs of improvement over the course of the year. And, most importantly, his prime assets of power and on-base ability diminished. (No one would bet he’d be a strong R asset this year.) Yet a team manager saw fit to spend $11 dollars on Dunn. Why?

    I can only assume that the implication is that Dunn will return to something close to his previous standard of performance. While most projection systems posit between 20-25 HR and a return to respectability via OBP, the risk here can certainly outweigh the reward. If Adam Dunn puts up numbers even close to his 2011, he will flat-out destroy your OBP and SLG rates, and he’ll be doing so from a position (either 1B or UTIL) which typically provides the biggest boost to your stats. Not only that, but the market is flush with players who project near Dunn’s rebound projection (20 HR, reasonable SLG and OBP numbers). Heck, several of them are already on this owner’s team.

    Look at the owner’s roster composition. On staff, they already have three 1B-only players: Ryan Howard, Chris Carter, and Miguel Cabrera (for now). The team also boasts LaHair, Berkman, Guzman, Gamel, and Blanks. There’s obviously no strong market for 1B types who project middling HR and rate stats, even $11 seems a bit like overkill for that type of player. My only guess is that the owner sees Dunn as someone with a non-zero chance to bounce back to his 2010 level of performance, not something in between 2010 and 2011. These other players also have a more steady and reasonable valuation than Dunn’s, in my opinion.

    Under a best-case scenario, Dunn could be a $40 player at a position where there already several $40 players. Under a worst-case scenario, Dunn could be a -$30 player at a position where nobody else is that bad. The reality is that Dunn most likely projects as a near-average player at a super-stacked position. That’s the kind of lottery ticket that you spend $1 or $2 dollars on, a Chris Carter valuation, not 11 bucks. I’ve found in my ottoneu league that $11 is a big difference when it comes to mid-season acquisitions and post Rule 4 draft additions. It seems to me that this owner is going to be chucking $11 down a hole to hold a roster spot in case the Dunn lottery ticket hits, and more than likely will have to cut the big slugger and eat half his salary part-way through the season. This team is built low on prospects and looks designed to try and contend this season…so while I get the sentiment, the owner spent $10 too much on this lottery ticket.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • rotofan says:

      Problem I see with your analysis is that there will be replacement-level 1B available with a positive value, so if Dunn tanks again, you dump and replace him. The downside risk is less than $11. By comparison, the downside risk on a $50 or$60 player is considerably higher.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • bgrosnick says:

        The problem is that dumping Dunn will cost $6 minimum. The downside risk is at least that much in terms of cash, and in terms of performance, the downside risk is really, really terrible rate stats that could sabotage your season.

        The downside risk on someone like Holliday is more than likely that he doesn’t play. I don’t think anyone projects him to post an OPS of .600 or something of the like. If he plays, he’ll probably bring your team positive (highly positive, even) value. The same isn’t true of Dunn.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Chad Young says:

        I am with rotofan on this. I assume Dunn’s owner has no intention of putting him in the lineup until we see what he has. If Dunn starts hitting, he has a cheap power source. If he doesn’t, he can use his slew of 1B options to fill that slot and cut Dunn loose when he needs the cap or roster space. The worst case scenario isn’t a TERRIBLE Dunn, it’s actually a mediocre Dunn or a Dunn who fades. Someone good enough to get you to play him but not good enough to help. As long as he bounces back or sucks, all is well.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • bgrosnick says:

        Ok, I see what you’re saying, about Dunn sitting until he gives indication he’s playing well. But how well does Dunn have to perform to earn a lineup slot given the players on that roster? The way I see it is that 1B is locked with Cabrera (before the eligibility at 3B) and Howard (after his return). That leaves the UTIL slot as Dunn’s home if he eventually plays mediocre-to-good.

        If he sucks, all is not well, because the player is out either $11 or $6 and a roster slot. Because he’s reinforcing or buying a lottery ticket on an already-stacked position. And for that reason the trade market is depressed as well.

        Plus, that doesn’t take into account putting Dunn in on the beginnings of a hot streak, then getting punished for at least a few games if he goes back to 2011. Just food for thought.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  13. ettin says:

    Ubaldo Jimenez at $33. I’ll make this short and simple: For a pitcher who is projecting to pitch at a 3.60 ERA and 1.30 WHIP, there were so many more better options to choose from in the draft including Chris Carpenter ($29), Josh Johnson ($30), Josh Beckett ($13!!!!), Tim Hudson ($16), et. al. The list goes on and on.

    A $33 Ubaldo is a complete head scratcher to me, no matter how much you believe he will rebound. End of story.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  14. shankster91 says:

    Andre Ether at $25. Ethier had a down year in 2011, and that may have been due to the knee injury that ended his season, but $25 seems to be a high price to pay for a rebound to 2009-2010 levels. Two guys I’d rather have in Gordon and Ellsbury went for not much more- $31 and $32 respectively.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Eminor3rd says:

      This is true. I hit the +$1 button at the wrong time on Ethier and got stuck with him at $15 (instead of $8 that I meant to bid), and nearly cried myself to sleep.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  15. gb2319 says:

    Gotta say Asdrubal Cabrera at $21.

    The power is bound to regress (2nd in the league in “just enough homers” with 15 of his 25 HRs last year being “just enoughs”), and as it does, so does his fantasy relevance. Outside of one insane month last season (May), his career numbers suggest he’s more of the Scutaro, Drew, Rollins, Jeter, Furcal, Andrus ilk as far as fantasy value goes this year.

    Of those names, the ones who were available for auction went for the following prices:

    Jeter: $11
    Furcal: $6
    Rollins: $11
    Drew: $9
    Andrus: $3

    In fact, Yunel Escobar, who is probably better than Cabrera, went for less than Cabrera did at $18.

    And there was a sneaky Mike Aviles play to be had at $3 as well.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  16. Kyle says:

    43$ for Jared Weaver seems incredibly steep. Not only are you paying for a career year, you are paying out of the a$$. A holder of ~ 7.5 K/9 and a 32% GB rate, the chances of his ERA staying around 3, and of him pitching 230 innings again is very low.

    Let’s look at some other SP that were drafted this year, Mad Bum, and Ian Kennedy. The TOTAL of the cost for the two of them was 47, or 4 more dollars than Jered Weaver, and West Coast Wellness could improve a rotation which is stuck with the high risk, no control Jonathan Sanchez. Ian Kennedy does not have the pedigree, nor does Mad Bum, but at the very least they get to pitch in the NL West, far away from Arlington, and never having to visit Fenway or the Bronx. Both players have higher K rates, higher GB rates, and higher BABIP, all of which could indicate brighter (than Weaver) days to come. The most important facet of this, however, is you are mitigating risk for future seasons. If Kennedy or MadBum are as good as they were last year, they will be keepers at 22 and 29 come next year. The odds of at least one performing at a keepable level is much higher than one player earning his cost. And if neither player earns his cost, throw them back in the pot. But either way, no one is going to pay 48 for Jered Weaver next year, making him a rental.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Chad Young says:

      I had coupon on Weaver and wanted him back for like $30. I was shocked he went for so much. I outbid the Weaver winner for Kershaw…maybe he was just getting back at me.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  17. Andrew says:

    Definitely Mark Teixeira at $48. How do you pay more for him than Robinson Cano? Teixeira has been steadily declining for the past few years. This guy batted .248 last year, and no, the 39 homers does not make up for it. Add a whopping 110 strikeouts to him and he’s a slightly above average player with a lot of power. How is that better than Mark Reynolds for that matter. I’m sure he was paid a lot for homers, but I’d say you overpaid by a good 15 bucks which could have been better invested elsewhere. Teixeiras average has gone down 44 points since he signed with the Yankees in ’09. The decrease looks consistent.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  18. Nick says:

    The worst buy has to be Holliday for $57–not necessarily because Holliday without Pujols will suck–but because Negative EV needs pitching to make a run this year, and Lester, Carpenter and Pineda just isn’t enough. I realize Holiday came up early (10th), and the owner had money to burn, but if he turns 57 bucks of Matt Holliday into a $23 Latos and a $36 Heyward–or any number of combinations, I’d like one that involved Lindor or Starling–Negative EV (Braun, Lawrie, etc.) looks tough in 2012. I’m not sure what Matt Holliday provides in a keeper league for 2013 and beyond.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  19. Nick says:

    Also, spending that 57 on Holliday in that moment hamstrung the team for the remainder of the auction. Granted, I wasn’t there, but I suspect he or she wasn’t in on all the players of interesting, bidding to either get the player or make sure the price was acceptable. Decreased flexibility early on in an auction can be a terrible thing.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Chad Young says:

      Nick, you are the winner of the free ottoneu team. I think you are dead on in a couple regards. 1) I agree that Holliday is overpriced, although the reality is, in this league, if you need a bat (or an arm) at his level, you will pay $50+ easy. 2) I think you hit the nail on the head with Negative EV’s needs (Negative EV is ottoneu guru Niv Shah, by the way). He should he spent on an arm at this point, having already grabbed Braun. and 3) The comment about being hamtrung is pretty accurate as well. Niv spend nearly $120 on two OF among the first 10 guys and had to calm himself after that. I think your Latos+Heyward suggestion is spot on as well. Didn’t have those two, and I could see an argument for a Weaver or Lincecum instead of Braun or Holliday. But all in all, excellent work.

      Not sure what Niv needs from you to get you set up with the free team, but I’ll get back to you on that. (probably by posting something here)

      Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Chad Young says:

      Nick, can you post the league number and team name of the team you want refunded? I’ll make sure the refund happens. If it is for a new team, just start the team and then send me the info.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  20. Sabermetric Solutions says:

    I don’t want to be hating on the Freeport Pretzels because, except for the player I’ll be mentioning, he had a good draft, but it’s kind of neccesary.

    The worst value of the draft has to be Clayton Kershaw, the 2011 Cy Young Award winner, for $63.

    Before I explain why Kershaw is the worst value of the draft, I’ll say a little about the good. Last year Kershaw’s ERA was 2.28, best in the majors. His FIP also mostly supported this at 2.47, second only to Roy Halladay. Kershaw’s K/9 was 9.57, third in the majors. He also had control of his power, evidenced by a 2.08 BB/9. However, this is a 4×4 Ottoneu league, so the only stats we care about are wins, K’s, ERA, and WHIP. Here are those stats: 21 wins, 248 K’s, 2.28 ERA, and a .98 WHIP. Wow, pretty darn good.

    Okay, let’s go through those one by one. I’ll start with WHIP or walks plus hits per innings pitched. How did Kershaw’s K/9 go up while his BB/9 went down? Batters started swinging more. Kershaw’s Swing% went up by 4% from 2010 as his Zone% (percent of pitches in the strike zone) fell by 3%. What allowed him to do this is his ability to get ahead in the count, emphasized by his F-Strike% rising by 4%. I think it is likely that Kershaw will continue to strike out around 9 per 9 innings (I expect a little natural regression) however, as soon as hitters realize he’s throwing more pitches outside the strike zone, they will adjust and let them go by. I think a 2.4 BB/9 is reasonable for next year. The biggest outlier in my opinion is innings pitched. In 2011, Kershaw pitched 233.1 innings. He also had 106 pitches per game. In his career, Kershaw has 716.1 innings. This amount of work on his 24 year old arm has to stress it and he has to be slowed down by injuries at some point. 210 innings is a good mark for next year. Even if he regresses next year, his WHIP will still likely be elite.

    ERA also looks fairly stable. The only stat that is concerning is HR/FB which has risen steadily since 2009 from 4.1 to 5.8 to 6.7. While this is still below league average which is about 10, it shows that luck isn’t entirely in Kershaw’s favor and a correction is likely to be made next season in HR/FB and also BABIP which is .269 for Kershaw. Unfortunately, this correction probably won’t be very large, possibly leading to a 2.80 ERA. Strikeouts will also be like ERA, dropping slightly in production.

    The last is wins. Wins are very difficult to predict due to the fact that defense and team offense are just as important as good pitching. We know that Kershaw is a good pitcher and the Fangraphs leader board shows the Dodgers as a +3.2 Fielding team, so they have defense covered. That’s two checks. The offense is a different story. In 2011, the Dodgers scored 644 runs, 21st in the league. However, 126 of those runs were driven in by Matt Kemp. If I had the time, I would write another response on why Matt Kemp will experience major regression, but since I don’t I’ll just point to his .380 BABIP and his high 23.1 K%. Assuming Kemp regresses from his 8.7 WAR to a more normal 5, the Dodgers will experience a 15% decrease in WAR and overall runs produced, translating to 548 runs. That seems very low indeed and should at least be slightly higher with Dee Gordon and other rookies moving up so I’ll add 30 runs to make it 578. Using Bill James Pythagorean Wins formula, I can then find out how many games Kershaw should win next year expecting an offense that scores 578 runs while he allows 2.80 runs per game (Again, expecting regression). It comes out to about a 60% win percentage, which in 30 starts is 18 wins. Not a huge decline, but a noticeable one.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  21. mschulm2 says:

    Tim Lincecum for $55 is the obvious choice here. Not only for the fact that his stuff and numbers are diminishing, but because of when he was picked and who he was picked by. The team that picked him, Freeport Pretzels, had a good group of starting pitchers heading into the draft and added to it earlier with Kershaw. If he really wanted to improve his starting pitching he could of looked to add Latos or Kennedy to get similar value for a much cheaper price and also be able to improve the team elsewhere. There were still a lot of great players on the board and to spend $55 on Lincecum after already spending $63 on Kershaw was the pick with the worst value of the auction.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Chad Young says:

      I liked this analysis. The Pretzels are my team, and I regret taking Lincecum – I should have grabbed a bat. I am not sure I agree that taking Latos instead was the way to go, though. As I said, I needed a bat. The real direction for me was probably a guy like Holliday, Heyward or Braun (although he went earlier).

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  22. Sabermetric Solutions says:

    Sorry accidentally hit submit…. and realized that HR/9 takes the place of Saves…. this is part one and two:

    I don’t want to be hating on the Freeport Pretzels because, except for the player I’ll be mentioning, he had a good draft, but it’s kind of neccesary.

    The worst value of the draft has to be Clayton Kershaw, the 2011 Cy Young Award winner, for $63.

    Before I explain why Kershaw is the worst value of the draft, I’ll say a little about the good. Last year Kershaw’s ERA was 2.28, best in the majors. His FIP also mostly supported this at 2.47, second only to Roy Halladay. Kershaw’s K/9 was 9.57, third in the majors. He also had control of his power, evidenced by a 2.08 BB/9. However, this is a 4×4 Ottoneu league, so the only stats we care about are K’s, ERA, HR/9, and WHIP. Here are those stats: .58 HR/9, 248 K’s, 2.28 ERA, and a .98 WHIP. Wow, pretty darn good.

    Okay, let’s go through those one by one. I’ll start with WHIP or walks plus hits per innings pitched. How did Kershaw’s K/9 go up while his BB/9 went down? Batters started swinging more. Kershaw’s Swing% went up by 4% from 2010 as his Zone% (percent of pitches in the strike zone) fell by 3%. What allowed him to do this is his ability to get ahead in the count, emphasized by his F-Strike% rising by 4%. I think it is likely that Kershaw will continue to strike out around 9 per 9 innings (I expect a little natural regression) however, as soon as hitters realize he’s throwing more pitches outside the strike zone, they will adjust and let them go by. I think a 2.4 BB/9 is reasonable for next year. The biggest outlier in my opinion is innings pitched. In 2011, Kershaw pitched 233.1 innings. He also had 106 pitches per game. In his career, Kershaw has 716.1 innings. This amount of work on his 24 year old arm has to stress it and he has to be slowed down by injuries at some point. 210 innings is a good mark for next year. Even if he regresses next year, his WHIP will still likely be elite.

    ERA also looks fairly stable. The only stat that is concerning is HR/FB which has risen steadily since 2009 from 4.1 to 5.8 to 6.7. While this is still below league average which is about 10, it shows that luck isn’t entirely in Kershaw’s favor and a correction is likely to be made next season in HR/FB and also BABIP which is .269 for Kershaw. Unfortunately, this correction probably won’t be very large, possibly leading to a 2.80 ERA. This trend in HR/FB% will also cause Kershaw’s K/9 to rise from the great .58 it was at last year. .8 seems like a reasonable projection. K’s will also likely face a slight natural regression to about 225 or so as hitters see more of him.

    (I’ll leave this paragraph in just in case you want to read it. I realize now that it is irrelevant because wins isn’t a category)

    The last is wins. Wins are very difficult to predict due to the fact that defense and team offense are just as important as good pitching. We know that Kershaw is a good pitcher and the Fangraphs leader board shows the Dodgers as a +3.2 Fielding team, so they have defense covered. That’s two checks. The offense is a different story. In 2011, the Dodgers scored 644 runs, 21st in the league. However, 126 of those runs were driven in by Matt Kemp. If I had the time, I would write another response on why Matt Kemp will experience major regression, but since I don’t I’ll just point to his .380 BABIP and his high 23.1 K%. Assuming Kemp regresses from his 8.7 WAR to a more normal 5, the Dodgers will experience a 15% decrease in WAR and overall runs produced, translating to 548 runs. That seems very low indeed and should at least be slightly higher with Dee Gordon and other rookies moving up so I’ll add 30 runs to make it 578. Using Bill James Pythagorean Wins formula, I can then find out how many games Kershaw should win next year expecting an offense that scores 578 runs while he allows 2.80 runs per game (Again, expecting regression). It comes out to about a 60% win percentage, which in 30 starts is 18 wins. Not a huge decline, but a noticeable one.

    In all, we have an .58 HR/9 pitcher with a 2.80 ERA, 225 K’s, and a 1.10 WHIP. That is still very good. However, this is Ottoneu, a unique format with keepers whose price increases by $2 each year. $63 seems exorbitant for Kershaw whose price will be $65 next year and $67 the year after that. This steady rise makes age almost irrelevant because surely either next year or the year after that Kershaw will be dropped. Another reason why $63 is too high is because you can get a pitcher like Ryan Dempster who is also on the Freeport Pretzels for $1. Dempster will give you 200+ K’s, a 3.80 ERA (Look at last year’s FIP, not ERA), a 1.25 WHIP, and 1 HR/9 for a price that is $62 cheaper. For that $62, this team could have fit about another Yovani Gallardo, Hunter Pence, and Ryan Zimmerman. Who would you rather have: Kershaw or the three above?

    I’m sorry if I missed references to wins in the course of this. I was nearly done when I realized what the 4 stat categories were.

    I think I’ll stop now before I top 1000 words :)

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Chad Young says:

      First, I should point out that this team is my team. And I like this analysis, but it didn’t win because I don’t think you looked close enough at my team’s situation when I picked up Kershaw. I came into the auction with a very solid roster but not enough pitching to win. With the money I had, I could grab two star-level players, at any cost, and I wanted to make sure at least one was a pitcher. Kershaw came up early ad I jumped at him. The stats you laid out are probably not worth $63, but they are as good as any pitcher in baseball is likely to provide, and could easily be the difference between my pitching staff being #1 overall or #5.

      At some level, another solid value pitcher wouldn’t have been a huge help – I needed an ace. If my team wins this year, sure I will cut Kershaw the day the season ends, but he will have been well worth it.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Sabermetric Solutions says:

        This brings up the annual MVP debate: How do you define most valuable or in this case, least valuable? Based on the overall league, I think that Kershaw is the least valuable. If you are talking about each individual team, then I would argue that Prince Fielder is the worst value. Fielder’s team was already stacked on offense (Hanley Ramirez, Justin Upton, Carl Crawford, Freddie Freeman, Dustin Ackley, Mike Trout) and had almost no pitching (Josh Johnson, Josh Beckett, Fransisco Liriano). Instead of spending $63 on Prince Fielder who will almost certainly take a step back this year, (http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/index.php/figuring-fielders-fantasy-fallout/) those $63 could have been spent on someone like Clayton Kershaw.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  23. herve houchoua says:

    Granderson / of / NYY

    33 dollars , it s too expensive

    I prefer Gardner and Swisher

    Vote -1 Vote +1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>