Why I Won’t Bid on Correa (and most draftees)
In the original ottoneu league, the weeks following the amateur draft tend to be among the most active. As contracts are signed, draftees become roster-eligible and teams – particularly those that are out of the running for this year – begin the process of stocking their farm system with newly minted millionaires.
This year, Carlos Correa was already auctioned in that league, going for an impressive $6. Not only that, but half the league bid on him and four of the bids were for $5 or $6. All for a 17-year-old. The kid has a ton of potential, and may very well be the second coming of Alex Rodriguez. But I didn’t enter a bid.
And it isn’t because I couldn’t use a top prospect, particularly at MI. My minor league system has graduated a lot of talent recently, and is close to barren at the moment. I could easily drop a Mike Carp to make room for a future stud, but I find it’s best to be picky with the new class.
First of all, prospects are always risky, and guys who have never seen a pro arm (or in the case of arms, a pro bat) are even riskier. There are plenty of stories of top picks who have turned into valuable fantasy assets (I believe the Washington Nationals have a couple of those), but there are plenty of busts, as well.
But even more importantly, the path to the big leagues is often a long and arduous one. Let’s all acknowledge that the Bryce Harper‘s and Matt Bush‘s of the world are what they are, and focus instead of the average top pick – a guy who moves at a typical pace through the minors, develops as anticipated, and becomes a useful Major Leaguer. Maybe even a very good one.
Let’s take Adrian Gonzalez.
Gonzalez went first overall in the 2000 draft, nabbed by the then Florida Marlins, who could probably use a stud 1B right about now. At age 18, in the Florida system, he played in both Rookie ball and Low-A (although with limited power) and in 2001 played a full year in Single-A before advancing to the high minors for 2002 (his age 22 season). After a decent year in Double-A, Gonzalez suffered a wrist injury, found himself in a trade to Texas, and struggled in his first look at Triple-A in 2003. 2004 and 2005 were a different story, as the big 1B pounded minor league pitching and earned a shot to go to the show, where he did basically nothing of note.
Then, in 2006, his age 24 season, Gonzalez moved from the hitters-haven that is Texas to run-sapping San Diego, and really blossomed, putting up a .304/.362/.500 line with 24 home runs for the Padres. The rest, as they say, is history.
So here is a guy who moved along, station-to-station, through the minors, and by 24 was establishing himself as an MLB star and a must-own fantasy player. But that was a SIX YEAR PROCESS! Let’s put the same timeline on a $6 Carlos Correa. Correa plays some Rookie ball this year, advances at a decent pace, and his owner pats $7 to hold him in Single-A in 2013. In 2014-2015, Correa keeps moving up but doesn’t see Houston, and now costs $9 as we enter 2016. In 2016 he gets a cup of coffee but provides limited value, if any, and costs $11 entering 2017, when (if we accelerate Gonzalez’s timeline a bit) he breaks out and becomes a star. Of course if the breakout is too big, instead of being a $13 SS in 2018, he is, instead, voted off your team and a guy you have to buy back for the next season.
Now, this is obviously only one scenario. Maybe he is A-Rod, or Justin Upton, or Bryce Harper, and we will see him tearing up the AL West in 2014, or sooner. And maybe he is Matt Bush and never has a real impact. The point is, the Gonzalez scenario is a good outcome. The Astros would be thrilled for a 23- or 24-year-old Correa to be a breakout star at SS. But if that happens? Not too helpful in ottoneu.
Because of this, I try to limit my draftee bidding to a couple scenarios: First, if I can nab a guy like Correa for $1, then why not? Sure, I might have to wait 4 or 5 years to use him, but at that point he will only cost $5 or $6 (and he will have taken up less than that each preceding year), instead of $11 or $12. Second, if I have good reason to believe a guy will be up much sooner than that. Trevor Bauer last year was a good example. Harper and Stephen Strasburg fall in that camp. This year, a guy like Mark Appel could be a case of a guy who is already closing in on his ceiling and could make a quick leap.
Some will disagree with me, and believe that grabbing a guy like Correa now, before the hype-machine really takes off, is the way to go. But roster spots and salary dollars are your two biggest assets in ottoneu. Tying up one of the former and a handful of the latter for the next few years doesn’t make sense to me.
This is exactly right. Similar situation in our league where Tyler Austin (NYY), Low A, was picked up for $5. At least $4 too much…
Correa is going to be a top 10 or 20 prospect in all of baseball very quickly (just based on tools and his draft position) that’s a guy I can very easily trade if it’s a situation where I’m not willing to wait out his development cycle. Look at Profar now- the guy is either untouchable or only traded for some of the best players in ottoneu.
I’m certainly not going to let a guy like Mile Carp or a $5 price tag keep me from landing such an asset.
paying top dollar for untested prospects as potential trade chips in any dynasty league only works if you feel like you can get appropriate value in return. In a league where 4 teams are bidding $5 or $6 on him, he’s probably a very valuable trading chip. In a league where no one else bid, or only bid $1 and you bid $5, you’re suddenly stuck with a player you substantially overvalue (or, as owners will always see it, “everyone else doesn’t value enough”).
You have to know your own team and strategy, as well as the strategies of your main competitors, to be able to accurately gauge how to approach players like Correa or even Soler. They are hot right now because they are names in the news. Next year, they could be top 10 prospects and be hot again. Those are probably the only times you’ll be able to get equal value to what you paid in the first place, when you could have used those $6 to get 2 or 3 or 6 players. And with minor leaguers, if you just assume half or more won’t pan out, you’re probably still being liberal.
Banking on trading someone like Correa seems reasonable. But otherwise I agree that holding them doesn’t seem worth it on average.
What you’re not taking into account is that hyped-up prospects make great trade chips even when they’re 19 years old in High-A ball. I play in a 16-team deep keeper league with large minor league rosters, and top long-term prospects like Jurickson Profar, Manny Machado, and Miguel Sano routinely get back one-year rentals on stud players as owners pack it in for the year and try to get something (anything!) back for unkeepable players.
For instance, Manny Machado was just traded for Chris Perez straight up. Chances are the person getting Machado isn’t planning on waiting to call him up, but rather hoping he gains some value over the next year or two, and the next time his team’s competitive he can flip him for something useful.
Ottoneu might be a special case in this respect, but the trade value of top prospects is not something to be dismissed in keeper leagues.
I personally don’t really buy the “recent draftee” stigma. Young talent is young talent, and in ottoneu you need to go out and get it. As long as it’s cheap. If you’re holding Correa and his salary has escalated to like $9, then he’s no longer young and cheap, he’s just young. In otto it really depends on a) your total salary at time of auction, and b) how close the rest of your roster is to title contention.
I’m not seeing how you can even bid on cornea now. It looks like he’s not even in the player pool from what I was just looking at. Am I missing something?
Correa ….auto correct
He’s there bjs2025 – check out the Search tab, include minor leaguers. Like Chad said in the article, we already auctioned him in our league.
Well, it worked. Posted this article in our Ottoneu league during the closing minutes of Correa’s auction. He was just won for $9. Driving up prices!
Rather than saying he won the auction, I’d say who ever got him for $9 lost it.
I’m in no position to win, and I understand the trade chip argument, but I don’t see any reason for me to go higher than $1 for a young high school athlete. I may go a little higher for someone like a Marcus Stroman who projects to get to the big leagues quicker. I know Dylan Bundy is $7 on a roster right now (which is too much for me, even as dominant as he is in the minors) and I wouldn’t be surprised if he ends up being one of those one-and-done type guys due to arbitration for that league.
By the time Correa is a useful MLB player his ottoneu salary will be in the ballpark of what people paid this year for Asdrubal Cabrera, Michael Young, Elvis Andrus, and Jimmy Rollins. Sure, there’s a possibility that paying $6 for him will end up being a bargain, but you’re really banking on him being a top 5 or 10 MLB middle infielder to get any kind of value from the signing. And in the mean time, you’re sinking valuable resources into rostering him. I’m not saying it *won’t* pan out, but it seems like a long shot.
I had no problem grabbing Cole, Rendon, Starling, Bundy, and Bauer last year, because they were particularly good prospects who were expected to move between medium (Cole, Bundy) and fast (Bauer), excepting Starling who was much further away, and whom I’m regretting taking. But Correa wouldn’t have gone ahead of any of those guys last year, and might get to the majors slower than all of them but Starling. It seems pretty apparent to me that guys who are 6 years away would have limited value, but maybe you are all right that he’ll have trade value.
There’s no absolute rule with recent draftees, it depends on talent level. With “generational” talents like Strasburg, Harper, Trout, you could have bid $20 on them the day after they were drafted and it would have (apparently) been a smart decision.
Agree. Trout, Harper, Strasburg are tough to use as examples because they are generational talents that don’t come along very often. Doubt a guy like Correa is like that, and at $6 and 4+ years away, it’s just too long and expensive to wait for the payoff if you have any hope of competing before he arrives.
PROPOSED OTTONEU RULE CHANGE:
Speaking of keepers and young players, I want to take a moment to recommend a wide-sweeping Ottoneu rule change that would positively impact the best new fantasy baseball format available. This probably isn’t the place, but our league has been discussing this potential change for some time. I think it’s time for the off season “vote off” to change.
The “vote off” is unique to Ottoneu (at least to my knowledge), and the concept make sense: Allow star players to re-enter the draft pool so other team have a shot. Just one player per year per team.
But here’s the problem: it doesn’t take into account MLB service time, and for that, it’s flawed.
Let’s use Trout as an example in my league. An owner has him for $20, which, considering his play already this season, is a great price. But if he continues to play this well, he’s pretty much assured to be voted off this off season. In fact, Trout is making a strong case to be the #1 “vote off” candidate in all of Ottoneu leagues after the 2012 season.
Instead of being rewarded for having the foresight to either draft or trade for a $20 Mike Trout, this non-contending (rebuilding) team can be seriously penalized for making Mike Trout their centerpiece building block. Trout will get voted off by the rest of the league and will probably be drafted for at least double the price in 2013. Yes, the team certainly has a shot at redrafting Trout with a $5 discount, but that’s no guarantee, especially if this owner is still not yet ready to compete for a title. If the point of Ottoneu is to best mimic the reality of MLB, in what rule or process is an MLB team forced to lose one of their star players at the whim of all the other clubs?
It’s my understanding the “vote off” rule was put in place to simulate what happens when a player goes through several years of MLB arbitration: they often get too expensive for their original team to afford and are thus deemed a “free agent”, available to all. The flaw in the Ottoneu vote off rule is that it does not allow for the cost savings associated with those early non-arbitration eligible years where a team can enjoy the star players services at an affordable price (without risk of losing him to another owner). The Angels get 5+ more years of affordable, primo-Trout services; our Ottoneu owner loses him immediately following his rookie year.
Again, the concept of vote off is correct; the execution is not. Here’s a better way: No player should be entirely voted off another owner’s team. Instead, at season’s end, each team should be given $1 to spend on one player on every other team in the league. That means I essentially get to add $1 in salary to the player of my choice on each of my fellow owner’s roster. It’s still market driven and it still serves the purpose of eventually driving star players back into the pool, but at least it gives the Trout owner a guarantee that Trout will still be his player as long as he wants him. That $20 Mike Trout now becomes a $31 Mike Trout in 2013 if every other owner chooses to add $1 to his salary. While more expensive, this slight change at least gives the Trout owner the assurance that his best trades, drafts, or auctions cannot be swept out from under him, and may actually (slightly) help raise the value of a young guy like Correa (even at $5). In today’s system, the $1 Correa owner can wait four years hoping Correa becomes an impact SS in 2016 but secretly wishes he’s not too good to be voted off the very next off season…
Yes, a thousand times yes. I got Harper last year expecting to compete next year. Now he’s started fast, and I’m actively rooting against my best prospect. This is super fun for a team that’s looking toward the future.