|
Post by rxmeister on Mar 17, 2016 7:11:47 GMT -5
Posey and Vogt are far apart in my opinion, Boagie. Vogt has to do it more than one year. Trout for Pollack of course is in his favor but if Pollack continues his improvement he'll still be a superstar. The pitching exchange of course is what makes that deal untenable for my son. Still it's not as bad as the way Rog tried to rip my son off for Kershaw!
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Mar 17, 2016 19:27:30 GMT -5
Why did you drop Sano? I should have been paying attention. Rog scooped him right up
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 17, 2016 21:50:08 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 17, 2016 21:50:08 GMT -5
He's only a DH, which limits where I can play him. I dropped Prince Fielder for the same reason. Minnesota sucks too, so it will limit his RBIs and runs, and his projected numbers are very optimistic to begin with.
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 18, 2016 2:41:13 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 18, 2016 2:41:13 GMT -5
I really feel bad for you that you missed the draft, Boagie. I'm not sure I feel bad enough to make the trade you offered me, but I truly would like to help you out. If I were in your shoes, I would be very disappointed, so I'll try to find it in my heart to work with you to find something that will improve your team without hurting mine TOO much.
As for the trades I have proposed to your son, Mark, I wouldn't have accepted them either. But while I made one marvelous blockbuster trade last year that helped me tremendously while also helping my trading partner, for the most part I offered way too much and overall would have been better just to stand pat.
What I'd really like from your son would be a counter offer, so we could see if we could find some common ground. I'm not going to go crazy to get Clayton, but I do think you son is right that he was the guy to take #1 overall. I also was impressed with the manager who made the unorthodox move of taking Max Scherzer at #4 overall.
If you don't mind, tell your son to make me a counter. Even if it's crazy, it will give us some room to find a common ground in the middle. I'm open to trade offers from anyone here and appreciate the one from Matt, whether we find a way to help him in a reasonable manner or not. Aside from trying to work with your son, I'm not overly eager, since I found that being too eager to make trades really hurt me last season.
Nick won the league you're joining with me in part because I kept helping him with trades that I offered him because he has a beautiful young daughter, and I remember how both exciting and challenging it is to raise kids. I can't remember all the players I traded him, but IIRC it included Kershaw, Liriano, Zimmerman and other players who were in between Kershaw and Zimmerman. I probably shouldn't try to hard to remember all the guys I trade him, since it might make me sick.
Check this out, Mark. Entering the last week of the regular season, he was so far out of the sixth and final playoff spot, that he was virtually dead. In a comeback that was at least as good as the one the Giants made to catch the Dodgers in the last week of the 1962 season, he routed his way to the final playoff spot.
I found myself playing him in the playoffs, and as soon as he made them, I knew I was in trouble. As we entered the final two days of the week, I found myself in a hole in that series that was about as big as the one he entered the final week with. I almost pulled it out, but it would have been a minor miracle if I had.
Anyway, I imagine he had a lot of work as the league commissioner, so it's nice that he won. You and I are going to take down him and all those Dodgers fans this year though!
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Mar 18, 2016 7:36:48 GMT -5
No offense, Rog, and I know you love your family as much as I love mine, but if I was your son I wouldn't want my dad to make intentional bad trades to help me win. That sort of diminishes the integrity of the league, don't you think? I wouldn't have accepted "charity" from dad, and if I were one of the other teams I would be steamed! In my other leagues we look at every trade carefully and make sure nobody is trying to help anybody else by blocking the trade.
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 18, 2016 9:03:15 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 18, 2016 9:03:15 GMT -5
Don't do me any favors, Rog. It was my own fault for missing it, and I'll be fine. As for the trade, if you don't like it, that's fine. But let's not act like its lopsided. I'm offering you the best overall player and the best closer, granted he's suspended the first 50 games..but he should still put up good overall numbers throughout the season. Plus you're also getting an extra player. But hey, if you don't like it, reject it. I'm beating you either way
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 18, 2016 13:56:35 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 18, 2016 13:56:35 GMT -5
No offense, Rog, and I know you love your family as much as I love mine, but if I was your son I wouldn't want my dad to make intentional bad trades to help me win. That sort of diminishes the integrity of the league, don't you think? I wouldn't have accepted "charity" from dad, and if I were one of the other teams I would be steamed! In my other leagues we look at every trade carefully and make sure nobody is trying to help anybody else by blocking the trade. Rog -- You should indeed feel the way you do, Matt, and I didn't do a very good job of explaining myself. The team in inadvertently helped was that of the league commissioner. I was the one managing my son's team, as a favor to his busy schedule. That's how I got into fantasy, which I had thought would never happen, just as I was surprised when you set up our league this season. And I didn't help the guy on purpose. Even though my son had warned me against helping a team more than I helped my own team, I was OK in making trades that I felt helped both teams, even if I thought the trade helped the other team more than it helped me. I like win/win's, and while my favorite is naturally when the trade helps me at least as much as my trading partner, I made several deals last year where I knew the trade helped my partner more than it helped me. If I make a misjudgment on top of that, I can REALLY help the other guy more. Overall, my trades hurt me last year, which is why I'm trying to be more careful this year, setting up negotiations instead of giving away the store. By the way, if I had given my son charity as it first came across, he would have been at least as upset as you were. Your moral opinion here was right on the money. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3211/fantasy?page=3#ixzz43HY2zjpB
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 18, 2016 14:10:19 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 18, 2016 14:10:19 GMT -5
That was Mark who you were replying to.
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 18, 2016 15:08:36 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 18, 2016 15:08:36 GMT -5
As for the trade, if you don't like it, that's fine. But let's not act like its lopsided. I'm offering you the best overall player and the best closer, granted he's suspended the first 50 games..but he should still put up good overall numbers throughout the season. Plus you're also getting an extra player. Rog -- I didn't mean to imply that you were trying to rip me off or anything, Boagie. The offer was a legitimate one. Your logic was good. But let's look at the trade from the perspective of points projected by ESPN. You would receive Correa (438 points), Robertson (371) and Sale (575), for a total of 1384 points . I would get Trout (495 points), Chapman(336) and Richards (438), for a total of 1269. Based on the valuations of ESPN, the trade would cost me 115 points (the 1384 I would lose less the 1269 I would receive). Unless I'm egotistical enough to think my ability to value the players involved is better than ESPN's, that's a losing deal for me -- even though on the surface it looks decent. You did throw in Eduardo Escobar (268 points), but I have nowhere on my roster to put him. By the way, like ESPN, I had Robertson rated higher than Chapman. That seems counter-intuitive, doesn't it? But I wanted my closers to be guys who would get plenty of save chances, barring injury. Robertson might get injured, but he isn't suspended, and while Chapman might be limited slightly for saves by the highly-capable Andrew Miller and Dallin Betances, Robertson is the clear #1 guy. Once Chapman comes off suspension, I would think he would receive the bulk of the save opportunities, but the Yankees might also choose to use him in longer save situations (He has a very durable arm.), setting up (nice, coincidental term, eh?) more save opportunities for the highly capable Miller and Betances. Chapman should strike out more batters, but over the course of 100 seasons, I'll bet Robertson would average more saves -- perhaps even WITHOUT Chapman's suspension. If I'm a GM looking to make a trade, I should look not only at how good a player is, but how much he will help my TEAM, based on his availability and how the manager may choose to use him. Here's another way to get to the heart of the trade. It would be basically Trout and Richards for Correa and Sales. You chose Trout with the #1 pick and Richards with the #140 (IIRC). I chose Correa at #9 and Sales at #12. Trout was the first player selected, and both Correa and Sales were selected very high. Trout was arguably the best player, and both Correa and Sales were near the top. Richards was actually picked just past halfway in the 250-player draft. One could certainly say that Trout is the top outfielder, although it's close with Harper. ESPN rates Correa as the #1 shortstop by a lot, and it has Sales as the #3 pitcher. The thing I was considering doing to "help" you was to simplify the trade to Trout and Hendricks for Correa and Sale. ESPN's projections say that would give you 1013 points, while I would receive 933. That was how I was considering "helping" you. Here is what is ironic. I mentioned how I like win/win trades. If we went back to right after the draft, I could have found a way to perhaps justify the trade. But that was before I picked up Sano. As you mentioned, Sano was tough to play, since he could play only utility. But he's penciled in as the Twins' right fielder, which means after he plays 10 games there, he'll be eligible for the outfield. Trout's 495 points looked REALLY good when he would be replacing Kevin Keirmaier's projected 311 points. Now that I have Sano's 389 projected points instead of Keirmaier's 311, I can't really even STRETCH the deal to make it good for me. But I still might make the deal. Yes, it was your fault that you missed out on the beginning of the draft, but it could just as easily have happened to any of us -- me included. You and Mark did me a favor by rearranging the draft so Mordy and I could participate live. If not for that, it would have been Mordy and I -- not you -- who missed out. As is the case in real baseball, when we evaluate whether to make a trade or not, we should do so on how it affects our TEAM, not simply on the players involved. That is one lesson fantasy baseball has reinforced for me. As I mentioned last season, it has helped me learn more about non-Giants players. One final point. If a team can come up with an evaluation system that works better than its competitors, it can make some hay. That worked for a while for the A's, and it helped make the Dallas Cowboys the team on the nineties. One could argue that it has helped make the Warriors into one of the best two-season teams in NBA history. One could argue either way on Trout and Richards for Correa and Sales in MLB. Let's just say that most teams would like to be in position to make EITHER side of that trade. But in fantasy baseball, it's a little bit one-sided. Certainly the concept of adding arguably the game's top reliever for one of the best and of adding an additional player helps even it out. But as much as I love the idea of acquiring arguably the game's best player, that trade is likely to hurt my team while helping yours. I don't mind helping you more if it also helps me some. And as I say, I might make the trade anyway because you are in a position I -- or any of the rest of us -- could be in just as easily as you. And maybe the deal would be good for both of us. But ESPN thinks it's a little one-sided. as well-intentioned as it was. Even though I never thought I would play it, I really like this fantasy baseball. I've learned about both game theory and the game of baseball from playing it. And it has been a very enjoyable way to learn. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3211/fantasy?page=3#ixzz43HZxAjEX
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 18, 2016 15:11:50 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 18, 2016 15:11:50 GMT -5
That was Mark who you were replying to. Rog -- You're right, Matt,and I apologize. Usually he's right on the, er, Mark, but clearly I didn't communicate with him. I'm hoping that he and I crush the mostly Dodger fans in the other league in which we're playing. In fact, I should as you, Matt, if you're also interested in crushing these Dodgers guys. The last I looked, they still had one opening in the league. With you, Mark and me against seven Dodgers fans, I think we would have a clear advantage. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3211/fantasy?page=3#ixzz43Hs7k1lK
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 18, 2016 16:57:06 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 18, 2016 16:57:06 GMT -5
But let's look at the trade from the perspective of points projected by ESPN.
You would receive Correa (438 points), Robertson (371) and Sale (575), for a total of 1384 points . I would get Trout (495 points), Chapman(336) and Richards (438), for a total of 1269. Based on the valuations of ESPN, the trade would cost me 115 points (the 1384 I would lose less the 1269 I would receive). Unless I'm egotistical enough to think my ability to value the players involved is better than ESPN's, that's a losing deal for me -- even though on the surface it looks decent.
You did throw in Eduardo Escobar (268 points), but I have nowhere on my roster to put him.
Boagie- I don't go by the numbers, that clouds my better judgment.
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 18, 2016 18:32:28 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 18, 2016 18:32:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Mar 19, 2016 7:38:32 GMT -5
I go by both numbers and feel when I'm selecting a team. I also go by the site's ranking, not because I think their projections are right, but because I'm expecting the players I'm playing against to put a lot of stock into them. For example, I wind up with Carlos Gonzalez, Troy Tulowitzki, Buster Posey, in a lot of my leagues, because I think they should be much higher rated than they are. Further down, I like players like Samardzija, Duffy, Panik, Kazmir, Jordan Zimmerman, who I think are down way too far. However I might pick a player I like less than them earlier, because I know my opponents are looking at the rankings and I know those players will still be available later. I'm in a Yahoo league and I did a draft last night and even though I like CarGo more than Cespedes, they had Cespedes ranked much higher, so I picked him first and gambled that CarGo would still be there when I picked again. Now I have both! Sometimes I get burned when I do this, but usually it works out. Boagie, you're sure making a lot of moves considering the season hasn't started yet! I like your style! I think you did me a favor though, dropping Brantley. That kid is a terrific player and there's a DL spot which I'll be keeping him on till he's ready. As for picking up Big Mac, Denard Span sure looked 100 % last night! That's good for the real team though, and I know that's way more important.
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 19, 2016 10:04:13 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 19, 2016 10:04:13 GMT -5
Last year I didn't use any numbers at all and simply went by my own impression of players. It went pretty well. In that case though, it comes down a little more to luck.
I lucked out, for instance, when I felt Harper would break out. Didn't do so well when I thought Belt would. Did well in picking Mookie Betts, but not so well with Jorge Soler. I picked Carlos Correa, but waived him when I wasn't sure when he'd be called up. Fortunately I was able to get him back in two or three of the five leagues.
I fared well with call ups overall (including Schwarber), but I don't expect quite as good a crop this year. Last year was unusual.
I tried different strategies as the season went on. Overall that didn't work too well. In the other league Mark and I are going to play in this year, I traded for Kershaw, then traded him away. Picking him up or Kluber and Hamels was good, but trading him away for too little wasn't.
Part of the fun of playing is learning -- about fantasy and about players. It helps to know how players are measured. Overall, picking the "best" players works well, but one must adjust for the way the players are scored. In our league, for instance, high strikeout totals for hitters are killers, whereas in real baseball they don't matter a whole lot more than most outs.
Mark makes a great point about using the ESPN rankings to guess where a player will be chosen. Those rankings have a very big effect on that. If a player is ranked too low, one can often afford to wait, as Mark did with Carlos Gonzalez.
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 19, 2016 12:15:26 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 19, 2016 12:15:26 GMT -5
Mark- Boagie, you're sure making a lot of moves considering the season hasn't started yet! I like your style!
Boagie- I wouldn't be making all these moves if I had been at the draft. Unfortunately, the team the computer assembled for me was unacceptable in my opinion. I'm sure I'll make more moves leading up to the season. For instance, I have both Pagan and Williamson...it will all depend on Span's health as to which one I decide to keep and which one I don't. Honestly, playing fantasy this way is more fun than getting top tier picks and just sitting on them.
Mark- I think you did me a favor though, dropping Brantley. That kid is a terrific player and there's a DL spot which I'll be keeping him on till he's ready.
Boagie- Of all the moves I've made, that is the one I'm starting to think I could potentially regret.
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 20, 2016 2:30:01 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Mar 20, 2016 2:30:01 GMT -5
Just a heads up for you guys, they shifted some players to different positions today. A few of my players have different positions now. For instance, Hanley Ramirez was just an outfielder, now he's an of/1b, and Eduardo Escobar was a ss/2b, now he's a ss/of. You might want to check your roster and see if you need to make any adjustments.
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Mar 20, 2016 9:57:33 GMT -5
I know how you feel, Boagie, because I was checking out some ESPN leagues a couple of weeks ago and I must have clicked on something accidentally because I checked my phone later and it said I was in the middle of a draft! I tried to cancel the team but was told it was too late. I then logged in and finished the draft, but half the team was auto picked already and I definitely didn't like who they picked.
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 22, 2016 0:25:21 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 22, 2016 0:25:21 GMT -5
Mark- I think you did me a favor though, dropping Brantley. That kid is a terrific player and there's a DL spot which I'll be keeping him on till he's ready. Rog -- The only question I have about Brantley is whether he will be fully productive next season after he returns. He's the top contact hitter in the game, and is capable of both 20 homers and 20 steals. I tried to trade for him last year and was rebuffed at every turn. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3211/fantasy?page=3#ixzz43bfBpq8k
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 22, 2016 0:40:46 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 22, 2016 0:40:46 GMT -5
Thanks for the heads up, Boagie.
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Mar 22, 2016 7:35:34 GMT -5
He's actually back already and homered in his first game. Looks like he'll be ready sooner than expected, maybe even on Opening Day
|
|
|
Fantasy
Mar 25, 2016 15:18:49 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Mar 25, 2016 15:18:49 GMT -5
I had that same thing happen last year, Mark. I didn't know I was drafting a team until after the entire team was drafted. Turned out though that it was really fun trying to move the team up in the standings. In a way, it turned out to be my favorite league.
I'm really excited about our league here, and that Mark and one of his sons have joined the league in which I took over my son's team last year and got involved in something I never thought I would be involved with.
Fantasy is a game that merely simulates real baseball, of course, since there is no in-game managing. But it does give us a chance to play GM in that we can trade, make waiver claims and pick up free agents. And we play manager to the extent that we can pick our lineups every day.
It's not real baseball, but it does have several of the elements of the game.
|
|
|
Fantasy
Apr 2, 2016 7:37:32 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by rxmeister on Apr 2, 2016 7:37:32 GMT -5
AJ Pollock broke his elbow last night and is probably out for the season. My son Bryan has him in both leagues he's in and I have him in my money league so it really hurts! I grudgingly picked him over Buster Posey so going with head over heart definitely didn't pay off there! By the way, Rog, you said the guys in the Yahoo league are all Dodger fans, but I'm guessing the guy who named his team "Dark Knight" (Matt Harvey's nickname) and has more than half of the Mets rotation on his team likes someone else. Can't figure out who though!
|
|
|
Fantasy
Apr 4, 2016 12:31:24 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Apr 4, 2016 12:31:24 GMT -5
Tell your son thanks for not pulling the trigger on the deal I offered him. I'd be stuck with Pollack and he'd have Trout. Whew! That would have been devastating for my already weak roster.
|
|
|
Post by rxmeister on Apr 5, 2016 8:39:42 GMT -5
My son is feeling no pain right now in both leagues he's in. After a 12 run Giants outburst and a Kershaw start, he's sitting pretty! Only problem for me is that in our league, the victim if his good fortune is my other son!
|
|
|
Fantasy
Apr 12, 2016 1:06:06 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Apr 12, 2016 1:06:06 GMT -5
I feel awkward and apologetic because Boagie has made me a couple of trade offers that would be reasonable in the real world but don't work well in our league because the scoring favors pitchers. Pitchers get three points for simply pitching an inning, and that's just too much -- especially when they can get an additional five points for a win or a save.
For instance, Mark's son Bryan got 179 of his league-best 379 points from his nine pitchers. His 15 hitters contributed 200 points. That'd 20 points per pitcher compared to 13 points per hitter.
Yes, Bryan had Clayton Kershaw for two starts, but he also had fellow Dodger Alex Wood, who weighed in at a miserable minus-7 points. And on the hitting side, his Giants had phenomenal weeks, and Jean Segura earned an obscene 34 points -- yet the hitters still averaged about two-thirds as many points per player as the pitchers did.
My theory is that the scoring system was devised back in the steroid era, when there was more hitting and less pitching, which required the pitchers be rewarded more heavily to balance them out with the hitters. Now the balance has become more even, consequently rewarding the pitchers too heavily.
So I feel like a heel even though Boagie makes legitimate trade offers for my pitchers. In this unbalanced league, it takes more than a legitimate real-world offer to equal a pitcher. So I'm sorry to disappoint you, Boagie, although to your credit you've had good success in scoring points.
On a week-to-week basis, there are a lot of vagaries. For instance, last week in the other league Mark and I play in, he led most of the week, but when his top two players (Trout and Machado) were rained out on Saturday, I was able to just sneak by him. Pretty much the same thing in this league, where Goeller led me virtually all week long, but I finally caught him on Sunday.
And to bring this back to the pitcher bias, how did I catch Goeller? I got a 22-point game out of Joe Ross on Sunday. Otherwise Goeller wins. Man, I sure hope the week I face Bryan Wolf he gets only one game out of Clayton Kershaw! Because I'd like to see his Giants players continue to well, week after week!
|
|
|
Fantasy
Apr 12, 2016 13:43:09 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Apr 12, 2016 13:43:09 GMT -5
I like the point system. It allows the pitching to be competitive with the hitters. A fantasy team with good pitching can beat a team with good hitting, which seems more like real baseball.
|
|
|
Fantasy
Apr 15, 2016 9:35:32 GMT -5
Post by Rog on Apr 15, 2016 9:35:32 GMT -5
If a real baseball team with good pitching can beat one with good hitting, that might not bode well for the Giants, whose early success has been built more with lumber than with arms.
|
|
|
Fantasy
Apr 15, 2016 11:19:02 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Islandboagie on Apr 15, 2016 11:19:02 GMT -5
I agree. The Giants have won 3 World Championships on pitching, not hitting. They've had timely hitting that has been a factor of course, but without our pitching staff we don't win any of them. The team that I would be most worried about facing in the post-season would be the Mets, because they remind me a lot of the 2010 Giants with their pitching staff of young studs.
|
|
|
Fantasy
Apr 17, 2016 9:58:52 GMT -5
Post by rxmeister on Apr 17, 2016 9:58:52 GMT -5
I like the point system too, it's similar to the CBS sports line system which I'm familiar with. I think subtracting a full point for a strikeout though is excessive. If a player hits a single and then strikes out, he's batting .500 yet has zero points! In the CBS league, you only lose half a point for a K. The Yahoo league scoring system I dislike immensely though. If I hit ten homeruns and my opponent hits zero, and his team has stolen one base and I have none, we're tied in points 1-1. That's ridiculous!
|
|