Trade: Beach Bum | Rocky Mtn Oysters

Beach Bum send: 1B Mark Teixeira ($17)
Rocky Mtn Oysters send: UT David Ortiz ($30)

Andrew’s thoughts:¬†This is a perfectly fair swap for both sides that I like a tad more¬†for the Beach Bums, a team that already looked to be over budget next year who now gets a superior hitter for 2016 and an easy cut in the off-season. With Albert Pujols, Adam Lind, and Joe Mauer already rostered, Beach Bums didn’t really need a fourth 1B. Granted, Big Papi is going to block off one of his two starting UT spots, but so what? Papi’s a better hitter. He looked cooked early in 2015 and still finished as the 18th highest scoring hitter.

For the Oysters, I understand not wanting to have to start Yonder Alonso at 1B. But ironically, if his roster remains unchanged, Alonso may just end up occupying one of the two UT spots Papi had cinched up¬†more often than not, in which case Alonso/Ortiz was flipped for Alonso/Teixeira, a likely marginal (probably negligible) downgrade. If Teixeira’s healthy, he’s good. Very good even. And he’s not planning on retiring any time soon, so he may give you something beyond this year where Papi will not.¬†Again, even trade, I just tilt in favor of Ortiz a little.

Jordan’s thoughts:¬†Its really easy to come out and say, hey just draft Teix and leave Papi alone. But, I know as well as anyone, sometimes drafts don’t go as planned. I think Dusty makes his team more flexible at a reasonable cost. Everyone probably would rather have Papi on their team then Teixeira, but moving Alonso to the utility/bench slot is worthy of making this deal.

2016 Auction Review – Beach Bum

Beach bum

BB

Future President Beachler’s team here is well rounded out as you can see. He found value as he always does in those, who by most in fantasy baseball, are considered old. He mixes together hitting and pitching really well and has a very flexible roster. I particularly love the value found in Yu Darvish at $29 and Albert Pujols at $21.

Hitting – Good

Matt Carpenter and Ryan Braun stand out as guys who you can figure to be leaders at their respective position. Nobody would be surprised by Brian Dozier or Pujols having an up-year and sneaking into that same tier. Dan’s team does not have that superstar on offense, but his offense is solid. He did¬†not punt at any of the nine positions and has several guys he can stick at the two utility spots with ease. The missing piece here taking his rating from Very Good down to Good¬†is the lack of a star hitter that should carry week to week. Balance is great, but the entire line up could finish ranking in the 6-10 slots at their positions and that might not be enough.

Pitching – Very Good

Gerrit Cole is¬†the highest paid player on the roster is a worthy choice as he should be a great number one starter. Francisco Liriano is one of my favorites. Yu Darvish was a bargain if he comes back healthy in 2016, and Tanaka is good when he is pitching. His top four is enviable by most teams in this league I¬†would¬†bet. Andrew Cashner seems like a quality bounce back candidate. Dan’s staff is held from a rating of greatness over the bullpen. If Dan punted anywhere it is here. He spent five dollars on three guys. While they could all be serviceable, he is likely banking on streaming relievers in hopes of finding something good.

Depth – Great

All of Dan’s¬†hitters have a backup that is above replacement value. Perhaps if Vogt gets injured his catching situation gets a tad hairy.¬†Overall having Evan Longoria, Matt Holliday, Mark Teixeira, and Dexter Fowler on the bench is a lot of fire power. Adam Lind and Joe Mauer are good in utility spots if they are called upon. Dan’s flexibility with guys like Carpenter qualifying at two spots¬†and¬†his outfielders overlapping well, makes the Beach Bum squad¬†potentially scary as a competitor.

Why 2016 would be bad…

It is not unthinkable that both of Darvish and Tanaka do not pitch well in 2016. While Tommy John surgery has not been as scary as it was in the past. It is still a concern. Toss in ideas like perhaps Cashner has pitched his best already, or punting bullpen is a poor idea, and things could get middling or even sour quickly. Maybe baseball is a young mans game and Dan’s older roster just doesn’t hold up.

Why 2016 would be good…¬†

In short, Dan’s team is a candidate for being¬†a contender in 2016. His roster allows him to suffer some unforeseen blows, plus has upside in previously injured player returning to stardom. He just has so many choices to make that make a lot of sense. Depth might be the best feature, and it just fits into this team so beautifully that even if nobody gets hurt, the potential route to maximize the entire roster is clear here.

 

A couple of “greed” allocation strategies…

Before I start spewing ideas, I should probably reiterate what “greed” is in our league.

Greed is kind of¬†a surrogate for arbitration. It’s a way of letting the market — our stable of owners — adjust the value of players league wide. Every offseason, each owner is given $1 to blindly add to a player from every other¬†roster. (This is in addition to a natural raise of $2 every major leaguer will receive.) The only players protected from this allocation process are minor league players who have cost control status and major leaguers whose salaries place them in the top-30 of the league ledger. (Read the official rules here.)

Now that that’s out of the way, how might¬†greed be applied?

The first, most obvious way to apply greed, is to slap it onto each opposing roster’s most underpaid player. Take AJ Pollock, for example. Coming into 2015, Pollock’s statistics suggested a break out may have been imminent, but he dealt with injuries and had no previous track record of sustained success. The Diamondbacks’ outfield appeared crowded. Hypothetically speaking, he may have been rostered for $5 as a reserve outfielder.

Obviously, he outplayed that number in a big way in 2015.

Based on our league settings and taking into account his monster 2015 campaign, the FanGraphs auction calculator projects him for $28 of value next season. Frankly, that’s conservative. The calculator doesn’t account for marketplace or the dynasty aspect of our league. But we’re dealing in examples here, so it’s fine.

Now, if Pollock cost $5 heading into 2015, he would by default cost $7 heading into 2016. He gets that $2 raise, y’know. At this point, he’s still projected to provide $21 of surplus value.

You fundamentally do not want your competing owners to have surplus value. So it makes sense that when applying your greed, you slap $1 on Pollock. Maybe other teams follow. For the sake of argument, let’s say nine¬†other owners see what a bargain Pollock is and hit him with their dollar as well. Suddenly, Pollock’s contract is $17.

He’s still a bargain at this price and you’re definitely keeping him, but let’s say he replicates his 2015 in 2016 and is again projected to produce $28 of value heading into 2017. A two dollar raise puts him at $19, and let’s say this year 12 total owners slap greed on him. Now he’s contracted at $31. Suddenly, the tide has shifted. If the projections hit exactly (and they pretty much never do, of course), in two offseasons your AJ Pollock has gone from a surplus boon to a -$3 valuation. He’s still a great player, so maybe that $3 isn’t a big deal and you hang onto him*, but you have a decision on your hands at this point.

* I’ve never played in an Ottoneu league but I’ve read up on it¬†and one strategy I see a lot is this: if a player is not providing surplus, he’s a cut. It seems simple enough, but I’m not sure how hard and fast a rule it should be. If you’re paying Clayton Kershaw $100 and he’s only providing you $95 of value, is he not still Clayton Kershaw? I understand cutting him and hoping to win him back at auction for less, but I can’t imagine every time the surplus scale tips even the teeniest bit dumping players is always the right answer.

I think in terms of options for placing greed, the Pollock scenario is the easiest to arrive at. But how about another example?

Let’s say first base was a black hole for you in 2015. Heading into 2016, you’d probably like to avoid¬†navigating¬†the same problem, but you’ve exhausted the trade market. You either need to hit on a free agent pick-up in-season, or you need your opponents to cut players that you can bid on at auction. That last part, you can sort of help.

Let’s say¬†you scour the league and find three guys on different teams — let’s just go with Ryan Zimmerman, Adam Lind, and Mark Teixeira — who after their $2 raises are teetering between providing surplus value and being a cut. Well, you can tip that scale. You can add your dollar to each of these guys and while, sure, a dollar isn’t a lot, it could be enough to¬†make another owner’s decision for them. Maybe they were torn between a $12 Zimmerman and a — I don’t know — $7 Yonder Alonso or something as their reserve 1B, and Zimmerman suddenly jumping to $13 seals the deal. If you force even one of these guys into the free agent pool, you’ve given yourself an additional option at a position of need.

If you really hated your 1B situation from a year prior, you could put your $1 towards a 1B on every team and hope it pushes more than one guy out.

There are all kinds of ways you could go with your greed allocations. We touched on them in one of our podcasts and I’m sure we’ll go down that road again, particularly 10-11 months from now when greed allocation is upon us. But you may want to start churning those gears in your head now.