The Fantasy Baseball Sherpa

So, it’s Sunday night or Monday morning, and your league’s weekly lineup submissions are due.  You’re trying to decide among three starting pitchers (whether on your current roster or not) to fill your last pitching slot.  How should you go about it?

You could “go with your gut” and hope for the best (good luck with that).  You could look up each pitcher’s historical record (assuming he has one) against his upcoming opponent(s) and use that as a guide, ignoring the fact that a team’s roster is likely to experience significant turnover from season to season that will render historical results obsolete.  You could rely on the Remainder-of-Season Forecasts in the Fantasy Baseball Sherpa’s In-season Updates (shameless self-promotion).

While the third option is definitely better than the first two, it still leaves out one crucial component if you’re trying to make a short-term decision on which pitcher to start:  the quality of the pitcher’s opponent.  How can this be quantified?  The same way you would quantify the pitcher’s results - look at the historical data.

To assess a starting pitcher’s upcoming matchup(s) we want to use opponents’ success (or lack thereof) against a specific team.  For example, if I play in a league that uses the standard 5 pitching categories (Wins, Saves, Ks, ERA, WHIP), I’ll want to look at MLB Opponent Pitching Stats in each category that involves starting pitchers, so that eliminates Saves from my list.

I want to set my scoring system up so that the least desirable opponents have the highest scores, and the most desirable opponents have the lowest scores.  The least desirable opponent would have the highest number of Wins (equivalently, the lowest number of losses), the biggest difference between AB and Strikeouts (or, if you prefer, the lowest Strikeout per AB rate), the highest number of Runs Scored (using this as a proxy for ERA), and the highest number of Walks + Hits (using this as a proxy for WHIP).  Conversely, the most desirable opponent would have the lowest number of Wins (equivalently, the highest number of losses), the highest Strikeout per AB rate, the lowest number of Runs Scored, and the lowest number of Walks + Hits.

We can set up a scoring system for which the “best” team in each category receives a score of 1.00, and all other teams receive a score between 0 and 1 depending on the ratio of their result to the result of the best team in each category.  Thus, the maximum score is the number of pitching categories under consideration (4 in my example).  Add up a team’s results in each category to get its overall score; again, the lower the overall score, the more desirable the opponent.

Based on games through 8/8/09, here’s how the 30 MLB teams rank using the 4 categories in my example (with their accompanying score):

1. Cin 3.11 (max score is 4.00)
2. SD 3.12
3. KC 3.14
4. Pit 3.15
5. Was 3.32
6. Sea 3.33
7. Oak 3.34
8. SF 3.34
9. Hou 3.35
10. Bal 3.38
11. NYM 3.39
12. Ari 3.39
13. ChC 3.40
14. Det 3.43
15. Mil 3.45
16. Fla 3.46
17. Cle 3.47
18. Tex 3.47
19. CWS 3.49
20. Atl 3.52
21. Tor 3.53
22. StL 3.53
23. Col 3.54
24. Min 3.55
25. Phi 3.64
26. Bos 3.68
27. TB 3.69
28. LAD 3.85
29. LAA 3.86
30. NYY 3.98

Several notable changes since the last rankings update (on 7/5/09):  Washington, Oakland, Arizona, and the Cubs are among the teams whose offenses have improved in the last month; Cincinnati, Pittsburgh, and Toronto are among the teams whose offenses have regressed during that same time period.  Obviously, it’s important to take a quick glance at a team’s current overall health compared to its health season-to-date.  Tracking the standings over time (weekly or bi-weekly updates are best) will give you a good sense of whether a team’s offenses is improving, treading water, or getting worse.

The approach I’ve outlined above can take some of the guesswork out of selecting starting pitchers for your weekly lineups.  Of course, use your common sense - given the choice, I’d much rather start Tim Lincecum against the Dodgers than start Livan Hernandez against the Reds.  However, if you’re deciding among several pitchers of similar quality, this analysis can be extremely useful.

Until next time!

The Sherpa

Fantasy Baseball Sherpa

The Fantasy Baseball Sherpa’s Blog

@fantasy_sherpa on Twitter

So, it’s Sunday night or Monday morning, and your league’s weekly lineup submissions are due.  You’re trying to decide among three starting pitchers (whether on your current roster or not) to fill your last pitching slot.  How should you go about it?

You could “go with your gut” and hope for the best (good luck with that).  You could look up each pitcher’s historical record (assuming he has one) against his upcoming opponent(s) and use that as a guide, ignoring the fact that a team’s roster is likely to experience significant turnover from season to season that will render historical results obsolete.  You could rely on the Remainder-of-Season Forecasts in the Fantasy Baseball Sherpa’s In-season Updates (shameless self-promotion).

While the third option is definitely better than the first two, it still leaves out one crucial component if you’re trying to make a short-term decision on which pitcher to start:  the quality of the pitcher’s opponent.  How can this be quantified?  The same way you would quantify the pitcher’s results - look at the historical data.

To assess a starting pitcher’s upcoming matchup(s) we want to use opponents’ success (or lack thereof) against a specific team.  For example, if I play in a league that uses the standard 5 pitching categories (Wins, Saves, Ks, ERA, WHIP), I’ll want to look at MLB Opponent Pitching Stats in each category that involves starting pitchers, so that eliminates Saves from my list.

I want to set my scoring system up so that the least desirable opponents have the highest scores, and the most desirable opponents have the lowest scores.  The least desirable opponent would have the highest number of Wins (equivalently, the lowest number of losses), the biggest difference between AB and Strikeouts (or, if you prefer, the lowest Strikeout per AB rate), the highest number of Runs Scored (using this as a proxy for ERA), and the highest number of Walks + Hits (using this as a proxy for WHIP).  Conversely, the most desirable opponent would have the lowest number of Wins (equivalently, the highest number of losses), the highest Strikeout per AB rate, the lowest number of Runs Scored, and the lowest number of Walks + Hits.

We can set up a scoring system for which the “best” team in each category receives a score of 1.00, and all other teams receive a score between 0 and 1 depending on the ratio of their result to the result of the best team in each category.  Thus, the maximum score is the number of pitching categories under consideration (4 in my example).  Add up a team’s results in each category to get its overall score; again, the lower the overall score, the more desirable the opponent.

Based on games through 7/3/09, here’s how the 30 MLB teams rank using the 4 categories in my example (with their accompanying score):

1. Was 2.96 (max score is 4.00)
2. SD 3.00
3. KC 3.01
4. Oak 3.07
5. Ari 3.11
6. ChC 3.16
7. Cin 3.21
8. SF 3.23
9. Sea 3.23
10. Hou 3.24
11. Pit 3.29
12. Atl 3.30
13. Tex 3.36
14. CWS 3.37
15. Bal 3.38
16. Mil 3.39
17. Fla 3.40
18. NYM 3.40
19. Cle 3.41
20. StL 3.43
21. Col 3.44
22. Det 3.44
23. Min 3.53
24. LAA 3.53
25. Phi 3.58
26. Tor 3.65
27. Bos 3.71
28. TB 3.72
29. LAD 3.73
30. NYY 3.77

No significant changes since the last rankings update (on 6/21/09), but it’s important to take a quick glance at a team’s current overall health compared to its health season-to-date.  Tracking the standings over time (weekly or bi-weekly updates are best) will give you a good sense of whether a team’s offenses is improving, treading water, or getting worse.

The approach I’ve outlined above can take some of the guesswork out of selecting starting pitchers for your weekly lineups.  Of course, use your common sense - given the choice, I’d much rather start Tim Lincecum against the Dodgers than start Livan Hernandez or Russ Ortiz against the Nationals.  However, if you’re deciding among several pitchers of similar quality, this analysis can be extremely useful.

Until next time!

The Sherpa

Fantasy Baseball Sherpa

The Fantasy Baseball Sherpa’s Blog

@fantasy_sherpa on Twitter

This time of year many fantasy baseball team owners look to trades in an effort to improve their place in the standings.  Of course, everyone’s ideal is to trade away players who will perform worse over the remainder of the season than they have year-to-date, while simultaneously trading for players who will perform better over the remainder of the season than they have year-to-date.

How should you assess a player’s year-to-date value vs. his forecasted remainder-of season value?  Using Fantasy Baseball Sherpa’s In-season Updates tool, an owner can quantify both of these values in an effort to identify players who are currently undervalued and overvalued.  Fantasy Baseball Sherpa assigns a score of 1.00 Sherpa Points to the league leader in each category.  All other players are assigned a score for that category based on their result relative to the league leader’s result.

For example, if the league leader has hit 26 HRs year-to-date, then a player who has hit 13 HRs year-to-date would be assigned a scoreof 0.50 Sherpa Points.  For ratio categories (e.g.- AVG, ERA) a proxy statistic is used.  A player’s scores in each category can be added up to determine the player’s Total Sherpa Points.  A player’s maximum score is equal to the number of categories used (note:  this maximum score will be different for Hitters and Pitchers if your league uses a different number of categories for Hitters and Pitchers).

Here are 10 National League Pitchers who are good buy-low candidates for a league using the standard 5 Pitching categories (Wins, Saves, Strikeouts, ERA, & WHIP) based on stats through games of Sun 6/21/09:

1. Rich Harden, SP, ChC (2.13 Remainder-of-Season Total Sherpa Points - 0.66 Year-to-Date Total Sherpa Points = +1.47)
2. Cole Hamels, SP, Phi (2.27 - 1.03 = +1.24)
3. Roy Oswalt, SP, Hou (1.93 - 0.78 =+1.15)
4. Johan Santana, SP, NYM (3.40 - 2.32 = +1.08)
5. Hiroki Kuroda, SP, LAD (1.48 - 0.46 = +1.02)
6. Jose Valverde, RP, Hou (1.52 - 0.56 = +0.96)
7. Ricky Nolasco, SP, Fla (0.52 - -0.26 = +0.78)
8. Carlos Zambrano, SP, ChC (1.99 - 1.24 = +0.75)
9. Tim Lincecum, SP, SF (3.27 - 2.56 = +0.71)
10. Ryan Dempster, SP, ChC (1.92 - 1.28 = +0.64)

Here are 10 National League Pitchers who are good sell-high candidates for a league using the standard 5 Pitching categories based on stats through games of Sun 6/21/09:

1. Zach Duke, SP, Pit (0.84 - 1.88 = -1.04)
2. Jason Marquis, SP, Col (0.75 - 1.55 = -0.80)
3. Jonathan Broxton, RP, LAD (1.91 - 2.61 = -0.70)
4. Livan Hernandez, SP, NYM (0.20 - 0.88 = -0.68)
5. Jeff Weaver, SP, LAD (0.01 - 0.60 = -0.59)
6. Johnny Cueto, SP, Cin (1.66 - 2.24 = -0.58)
7. Randy Wells, SP, ChC (0.43 - 1.00 = -0.57)
8. Chris Volstad, SP, Fla (0.51 - 1.02 = -0.51)
9. Brian Wilson, RP, SF (1.34 - 1.83 = -0.49)
10. Russ Ortiz, SP, Hou (0.06 - 0.55 = -0.49)

Of course, there are a number of reasons why a player’s performance over the remainder of the season may vary significantly from his performance year-to-date, including normal variation in results, injuries, changes in roles, etc.  By attempting to quantify both a player’s year-to-date and remainder-of-season results, we can take at least some of the guesswork out of identifying buy-low and sell-high candidates.

I’ll take a look at AL Hitters in my next post.

Until then,

The Sherpa

Fantasy Baseball Sherpa

The Fantasy Baseball Sherpa’s Blog

@fantasy_sherpa on Twitter

So, it’s Sunday night or Monday morning, and your league’s weekly lineup submissions are due.  You’re trying to decide among three starting pitchers (whether on your current roster or not) to fill your last pitching slot.  How should you go about it?

You could “go with your gut” and hope for the best (good luck with that).  You could look up each pitcher’s historical record (assuming he has one) against his upcoming opponent(s) and use that as a guide, ignoring the fact that a team’s roster is likely to experience significant turnover from season to season that will render historical results obsolete.  You could rely on the Remainder-of-Season Forecasts in the Fantasy Baseball Sherpa’s In-season Updates (shameless self-promotion).

While the third option is definitely better than the first two, it still leaves out one crucial component if you’re trying to make a short-term decision on which pitcher to start:  the quality of the pitcher’s opponent.  How can this be quantified?  The same way you would quantify the pitcher’s results - look at the historical data.

To assess a starting pitcher’s upcoming matchup(s) we want to use opponents’ success (or lack thereof) against a specific team.  For example, if I play in a league that uses the standard 5 pitching categories (Wins, Saves, Ks, ERA, WHIP), I’ll want to look at MLB Opponent Pitching Stats in each category that involves starting pitchers, so that eliminates Saves from my list.

I want to set my scoring system up so that the least desirable opponents have the highest scores, and the most desirable opponents have the lowest scores.  The least desirable opponent would have the highest number of Wins (equivalently, the lowest number of losses), the biggest difference between AB and Strikeouts (or, if you prefer, the lowest Strikeout per AB rate), the highest number of Runs Scored (using this as a proxy for ERA), and the highest number of Walks + Hits (using this as a proxy for WHIP).  Conversely, the most desirable opponent would have the lowest number of Wins (equivalently, the highest number of losses), the highest Strikeout per AB rate, the lowest number of Runs Scored, and the lowest number of Walks + Hits.

We can set up a scoring system for which the “best” team in each category receives a score of 1.00, and all other teams receive a score between 0 and 1 depending on the ratio of their result to the result of the best team in each category.  Thus, the maximum score is the number of pitching categories under consideration (4 in my example).  Add up a team’s results in each category to get its overall score; again, the lower the overall score, the more desirable the opponent.

Based on games through 6/20/09, here’s how the 30 MLB teams rank using the 4 categories in my example (with their accompanying score):

1. SD 2.96 (max score is 4.00)
2. Was 2.98
3. KC 3.03
4. ChC 3.07
5. Oak 3.13
6. SF 3.13
7. CWS 3.15
8. Sea 3.15
9. Ari 3.18
10. Hou 3.18
11. Atl 3.20
12. Cin 3.21
13. Pit 3.22
14. Bal 3.34
15. Tex 3.35
16. Fla 3.36
17. NYM 3.39
18. Mil 3.40
19. StL 3.41
20. Det 3.42
21. LAA 3.43
22. Col 3.43
23. Cle 3.46
24. Phi 3.50
25. Min 3.53
26. Bos 3.69
27. NYY 3.70
28. TB 3.71
29. Tor 3.72
30. LAD 3.81

No surprise to see teams like the Nationals, Royals, Padres, A’s, Mariners, and Giants at the top of the list of most desirable opponents, but the presence of the Cubs among the “worst” offensive teams is a bit of a surprise to me.  If you’d asked me before the season started, I would have told you that the Cubs should have one of the best offenses in baseball.  Of course, Aramis Ramirez’ injury combined with slow starts by Geovany Soto, Derrek Lee, and Alfonso Soriano have all contributed to the Cubs’ abysmal ranking.  However, it points out the need to take a quick glance at a team’s current overall health compared to its health season-to-date.  The NY Mets are ranked in the middle of the pack according to this chart, but sans Carlos Delgado and Jose Reyes, they’re obviously a less formidable foe now than they would be if this pair were healthy.  Tracking the standings over time (I’d suggest weekly or bi-weekly updates) will give you a good sense of which team’s offenses are improving, treading water, or getting worse.

The approach I’ve outlined above can take some of the guesswork out of selecting starting pitchers for your weekly lineups.  Of course, use your common sense - given the choice, I’d much rather start Johan Santana against the Dodgers than start Livan Hernandez or Tim Redding against the Padres.  However, if you’re deciding among several pitchers of similar quality, this analysis can be extremely useful.

Until next time!

The Sherpa

Fantasy Baseball Sherpa

The Fantasy Baseball Sherpa’s Blog

@fantasy_sherpa on Twitter

So, it’s Sunday night or Monday morning, and your league’s weekly lineup submissions are due.  You’re trying to decide among three starting pitchers (whether on your current roster or not) to fill your last pitching slot.  How should you go about it?

You could “go with your gut” and hope for the best (good luck with that).  You could look up each pitcher’s historical record (assuming he has one) against his upcoming opponent(s) and use that as a guide, ignoring the fact that a team’s roster is likely to experience significant turnover from season to season that will render historical results obsolete.  You could rely on the Remainder-of-Season Forecasts in the Fantasy Baseball Sherpa’s In-season Updates (shameless self-promotion).

While the third option is definitely better than the first two, it still leaves out one crucial component if you’re trying to make a short-term decision on which pitcher to start:  the quality of the pitcher’s opponent.  How can this be quantified?  The same way you would quantify the pitcher’s results - look at the historical data.

To assess a starting pitcher’s upcoming matchup(s) we want to use opponents’ success (or lack thereof) against a specific team.  For example, if I play in a league that uses the standard 5 pitching categories (Wins, Saves, Ks, ERA, WHIP), I’ll want to look at MLB Opponent Pitching Stats in each category that involves starting pitchers, so that eliminates Saves from my list.

I want to set my scoring system up so that the least desirable opponents have the highest scores, and the most desirable opponents have the lowest scores.  The least desirable opponent would have the highest number of Wins (equivalently, the lowest number of losses), the biggest difference between AB and Strikeouts (or, if you prefer, the lowest Strikeout per AB rate), the highest number of Runs Scored (using this as a proxy for ERA), and the highest number of Walks + Hits (using this as a proxy for WHIP).  Conversely, the most desirable opponent would have the lowest number of Wins (equivalently, the highest number of losses), the highest Strikeout per AB rate, the lowest number of Runs Scored, and the lowest number of Walks + Hits.

We can set up a scoring system for which the “best” team in each category receives a score of 1.00, and all other teams receive a score between 0 and 1 depending on the ratio of their result to the result of the best team in each category.  Thus, the maximum score is the number of pitching categories under consideration (4 in my example).  Add up a team’s results in each category to get its overall score; again, the lower the overall score, the more desirable the opponent.

Based on games through 6/13/09, here’s how the 30 MLB teams rank using the 4 categories in my example (with their accompanying score):

1. Was 2.92 (max score is 4.00)
2. KC 3.02
3. SD 3.03
4. ChC 3.05
5. Oak 3.11
6. Sea 3.11
7. SF 3.12
8. Hou 3.16
9. CWS 3.16
10. Ari 3.18
11. Bal 3.20
12. Cin 3.20
13. Pit 3.21
14. Atl 3.22
15. Mil 3.31
16. LAA 3.34
17. Col 3.35
18. StL 3.36
19. Fla 3.39
20. Tex 3.40
21. Det 3.41
22. NYM 3.43
23. Cle 3.45
24. Min 3.52
25. Phi 3.55
26. Tor 3.69
27. NYY 3.71
28. TB 3.71
29. Bos 3.73
30. LAD 3.80

No surprise to see teams like the Nationals, Royals, Padres, A’s, Mariners, and Giants at the top of the list of most desirable opponents, but the presence of the Cubs among the “worst” offensive teams is a bit of a surprise to me.  If you’d asked me before the season started, I would have told you that the Cubs should have one of the best offenses in baseball.  Of course, Aramis Ramirez’ injury combined with slow starts by Geovany Soto, Derrek Lee, and (to a lesser extent) Alfonso Soriano have all contributed to the Cubs’ abysmal ranking.  However, it points out the need to take a quick glance at a team’s current overall health compared to its health season-to-date.  The NY Mets might be ranked as one of the least desirable opponents according to this chart, but sans Carlos Delgado and Jose Reyes, they’re obviously a less formidable foe now than they would be if this pair were healthy.

Nevertheless, the approach I’ve outlined above can take some of the guesswork out of selecting starting pitchers for your weekly lineups.  Of course, use your common sense - given the choice, I’d much rather start Johan Santana against the Dodgers (yes, in spite of his awful start today against the Yankees!) than Livan Hernandez or Tim Redding against the Nationals.  However, if you’re deciding among several pitchers of similar quality, this analysis can be extremely useful.

Until next time!

The Sherpa

Fantasy Baseball Sherpa

The Fantasy Baseball Sherpa’s Blog

@fantasy_sherpa on Twitter

Every fantasy baseball owner dreams of “discovering” the next Johan Santana or Jake Peavy before the rest of their leaguemates. However, many owners forget that for every Cole Hamels who bursts onto the fantasy scene and makes an immediate and lasting impact, there are many more pitchers like Homer Bailey and Phil Hughes, who disappoint their owners when their initial successes are tempered, if not outweighed altogether, by their struggles.

This season has been no exception. Johnny Cueto looked like the second coming of Bob Gibson in his first two starts; lately, he has looked more like the second coming of Kei Igawa, serving up in-game batting practice for his opponents’ hitting pleasure. Cueto will most likely be sent back to the minors shortly to gain some much-needed experience. Nick Adenhart has already been banished back to the minors after just three awful starts.

Meanwhile, this year’s early-season pitching surprises include below-the-radar types such as Edinson Volquez, Greg Smith, Dana Eveland, John Danks, Garrett Olson, and Vicente Padilla. What, if anything, do they all have in common? All except for Smith had MLB experience prior to this year. All except for Olson have switched organizations at least once in their career. All of them have made at least 10 starts in AAA. All of them are 23-24 years old, except for Padilla, who is 30.

Which of the pitchers in this group have the best chance at sustaining their success over the course of the season? I looked at Year-to-Date stats for all MLB starting pitchers, searching for those who have started at least 3 games, have a K/9 rate of at least 6, and a K/BB ratio of at least 2. I also looked at Batting Average Against on Balls in Play (BAABIP) to see whether “luck” played a factor in a pitcher’s success (or lack thereof). These screening criteria suggest that Volquez and Danks have the best chance at remaining successful, with Olson also being a possibility.

These criteria also turned up some veteran pitchers who may still be available in your league. Bronson Arroyo is off to an atrocious start due to a combination of bad luck (a .357 BAABIP) and a severe case of gopheritis (1.8 HRs allowed per 9 innings pitched). However, his 3-year averages suggest that he is a much better pitcher than that - if you have space on your bench, I would definitely take a flier on Arroyo rather than burn my waiver priority or Free Agent Acquisition Budget (FAAB) dollars on Clayton Kershaw, who has not pitched even a single game at the AAA level yet. If you’re going to gamble on an unproven pitcher currently in the minors, you’re far better off betting on Homer Bailey (the sequel) than you are putting your fantasy chips on Kershaw.

Other veterans who should do more for your fantasy staff than the likes of Darrell Rasner, Aaron Laffey, et. al. - Chad Gaudin (when, not if, he rejoins Oakland’s rotation); Wandy Rodriguez, Jason Schmidt, Kevin Milwood, and Curt Schilling (when they return from the DL). I’d also take a chance on Hong-Chih Kuo if he joins the Dodgers’ rotation. Shawn Hill and Jose Contreras are two other options to consider if you currently have holes in your pitching staff. Don’t get me wrong - none of the pitchers on this list will be receiving Cy Young votes this season, but they all have the potential to be serviceable starters at the back of your fantasy team’s rotation.

However, keep in mind that experience is not always an advantage - if you want to add Livan Hernandez, Matt Chico, or Sidney Ponson to your fantasy pitching staff, you do so at your own peril - they are definitely the fantasy baseball equivalents of the Trojan horse, and you will get no sympathy from me if you choose to add any of them!

Until next time,

The Sherpa

Many fantasy baseball leagues allow teams to claim available players from the free agent list/waiver wire on a first come, first served basis. Others have a weekly claim process in which the team currently at the bottom of the standings gets the first shot at the list of available players. My favorite method of awarding players to teams is the Free Agent Acquisition Budget (aka FAAB). Each team gets the same FAAB dollars (usually $100 or $1,000) to spend as it sees fit over the course of the season.

While the use of the FAAB system makes all unclaimed players available to all teams, many owners struggle with the question of how to spend their FAAB dollars as wisely as possible. Should the spending be front-loaded? Should the FAAB dollars be spent evenly over the course of the year? Should the money be hoarded until later in the season in case an injury to a real-life player necessitates a fantasy replacement or results in a hot-shot minor leaguer getting a shot at The Show?

Here are the Sherpa’s tips for spending your FAAB wisely - I call them my “FAAB Five”:

1. Pace yourself, but not too much. All else being equal, a player acquired earlier in the season is much more likely to affect your place in the year-end standings than a player acquired later in the season. If your league allows claims at the end of each week of the season, then a player claimed at the end of Week 1 (i.e. - the first claim) should have approximately 25 times the impact of a player claimed at the end of Week 25 (i.e. - the last claim). Your FAAB spending should reflect this reality, keeping in mind that most leagues require whole dollar bids of at least $1.
2. Assess other teams’ current needs before you bid. If you need to find a replacement next week for the DL’d Michael Barrett, and you’re the only team in your league that needs to pick up a Catcher, don’t bid against yourself. The notable exceptions to this tip involve players with potential contributions in the Steals and Saves categories. At least one other team will more than likely submit a bid on a player who may contribute in either of these two categories, even if they have no immediate need from a roster position standpoint.
3. Monitor other teams’ FAAB spending throughout the year. Unless your league creates automated reports tracking and summarizing FAAB spending by team, this can be time-consuming, but it’s well worth the effort to know how much money other teams have left if you may be bidding against them for a player.
4. Balance your remaining FAAB with a player’s actual abilities. Do not spend 50% of your FAAB dollars (or even 25% for that matter) on a pitcher like Livan Hernandez, even if you are unlucky enough to have Pedro Martinez, Rich Harden, John Lackey, Kelvim Escobar, and Doug Davis on your current pitching staff. Also, do not overspend for highly-touted rookies such as Clayton Kershaw, Evan Longoria, Colby Rasmus, Jay Bruce, etc. You may get lucky and get the next Ryan Braun or Hunter Pence, but you’re much more likely to get the next Nelson Cruz or Alex Escobar.
5. Timing is everything - don’t be afraid to speculate! If you have the roster positions to do so, speculate on desirable players before an injury, role change, or call-up from the minor leagues sends their value skyrocketing. Heath Bell, Rafael Betancourt, Tony Pena (the pitcher!), Carlos Quentin, and Joey Votto (if available in your league) will be much less expensive now than they will be if the players currently ahead of them on their respective teams’ depth charts falter or suffer an injury.

That said, the following is how I’d recommend spending a $100 FAAB if your league has 25 claims over the course of the season (i.e. - one at the end of each week starting with week 1). The week number is listed first, followed by the recommended amount to spend that week, followed by the recommended amount to spend year-to-date (YTD), and the implied FAAB dollars remaining. If you spend less than the recommended amount in a given week, then you will have more left over to spend in subsequent weeks, and vice versa.

• (End of) Week 1 - spend $8; $8 spent YTD, $92 remaining.
• Week 2 - $7; $15; $85.
• Week 3 - $7; $22; $78.
• Week 4 - $7; $29; $71.
• Week 5 - $6; $35; $65.
• Week 6 - $6; $41; $59.
• Week 7 - $6; $47; $53.
• Week 8 - $5; $52; $48.
• Week 9 - $5; $57; $43.
• Week 10 - $5; $62; $38.
• Week 11 - $5; $67; $33.
• Week 12 - $4; $71; $29.
• Week 13 - $4; $75; $25.
• Week 14 - $4; $79; $21.
• Week 15 - $3; $82; $18.
• Week 16 - $3; $85; $15.
• Week 17 - $3; $88; $12.
• Week 18 - $2; $90; $10.
• Week 19 - $2; $92; $8.
• Week 20 - $2; $94; $6.
• Week 21 - $2; $96; $4.
• Week 22 - $1; $97; $1.
• Week 23 - $1; $98; $1.
• Week 24 - $1; $99; $1.
• Week 25 - $1; $100; $0.

If your league also allows a claim before the first week of the season, here’s how I’d recommend adjusting your FAAB spending:

• (Start of) Week 1 - spend $7; $7 spent YTD, $93 remaining.
• Week 2 - $7; $14; $86.
• Week 3 - $7; $21; $79.
• Week 4 - $6; $27; $73.
• Week 5 - $6; $33; $67.
• Week 6 - $6; $39; $61.
• Week 7 - $6; $45; $55.
• Week 8 - $5; $50; $50.
• Week 9 - $5; $55; $45.
• Week 10 - $5; $60; $40.
• Week 11 - $5; $65; $35.
• Week 12 - $4; $69; $31.
• Week 13 - $4; $73; $27.
• Week 14 - $4; $77; $23.
• Week 15 - $3; $80; $20.
• Week 16 - $3; $83; $17.
• Week 17 - $3; $86; $14.
• Week 18 - $3; $89; $11.
• Week 19 - $2; $91; $9.
• Week 20 - $2; $93; $7.
• Week 21 - $2; $95; $5.
• Week 22 - $1; $96; $4.
• Week 23 - $1; $97; $3.
• Week 24 - $1; $98; $2.
• Week 25 - $1; $99; $1.
• Week 26 - $1; $100; $0.

I’ll post similar charts for a $1,000 FAAB later today.

Until then,

The Sherpa

With just over a week gone in the 2008 baseball season the sky is officially falling. Those who drafted/bought C.C. Sabathia, Roy Oswalt, Jason Bay, J.J. Putz, Robinson Cano etc., are wondering why these players are off to lousy starts. Those who drafted/bought Johnny Cueto, Nate McLouth, Mark Reynolds, Livan Hernandez, Jason Kendall, Kerry Woods, etc., are congratulating themselves on their foresight. So, is your team doing as well as expected? If not, what should you do now?

Predictably, many fantasy baseball columnists are now churning out (or, more likely, recycling from last year) columns on how 10 games is too small a sample size to draw conclusions, how you shouldn’t make any panic moves, blah, blah, blah. The more adventurous (or less lazy) among them actually develop lists of players off to hot/cold starts and offer their expert opinions on which players will continue to over/underwhelm, and which ones will “regress to the mean”. Very little of this is helpful to you in your effort to manage your fantasy team, and unless you’re reading these pieces for entertainment purposes, you’re better off ignoring them.

Put it another way - if these same players had the same results over a 10 game stretch in July or August, would you notice? Assuming you did, would you be concerned enough to make a change to your roster? Probably not. Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, we generally give more weight to events that take place at the very beginning of the season (aka “Tuffy Rhodes Syndrome“) or at the very end of the season (aka “Tom Glavine Syndrome“).

So, is there any reason to consider making trades this early in the season? Some experts advise fantasy team owners to sit on their hands until at least the end of May before hitting the “Submit Trade” button unless your roster is decimated by an injury. I disagree. In addition to injuries, there are at least two other reasons to explore potential trades even this early in the season: (1) To shore up weak categories, and (2) To take advantage of another team owner’s desire to make quick and sweeping changes.

First, let me explain what I mean by shoring up weak categories. Do not judge which categories you’re weak in by the results of the first 10 days of the season. Rather, go back to the analysis you did on your team immediately following your draft/auction. Trust the instincts you had at that time over the reaction you currently have now that 10 games are in the books. Before a draft/auction I set a goal to assemble a team that can finish in the top third in every category. If I can achieve that kind of balance, there’s a good chance I’ll finish at the top of my league. Of course, trades, free agent acquisitions, and waiver claims are also necessary to maintain/improve your team during the course of the season, but without a good draft/auction, you’re digging yourself a deep hole that’s almost impossible to climb out of. Identify your post-draft/auction weaknesses and address them as soon as you are able.

Regarding the second reason to make trades at this point in the season, there’s at least one owner in every league who seems to panic and make an early-season trade that ultimately hurts their team more than it helps. Don’t let that be you! Case in point - last year I saw someone who panicked after Garrett Atkins got off to a slow start, then traded Atkins and Johan Santana for Alex Rodriguez and the overachieving Boof Bonser. Not surprisingly, the owner who received Atkins and Santana finished much higher in the standings at the end of the year.

Not every trade will be that one-sided, nor should it be. I obviously want my team to be better after a trade than it was before the trade; however, I don’t want the other owner to have buyer’s remorse to the point where they’d never want to trade with me again. Here are my recommendations in executing a trade, particularly early in the season:

1. Assess your roster’s strengths and weaknesses. The earlier you are in the season, the more weight you should be giving a player’s preseason projected performance vs. his actual season-to-date performance. Of course, you need to be mindful of injuries and role changes (e.g. - everyday players who lose their jobs, newly-minted Closers, etc.)
2. Assess your leaguemates’ rosters’ strengths and weaknesses. The obvious goal in doing so is to find several potential trading partners (not just one!) whose strengths match up well with your weaknesses, and vice versa.
3. Send out trade feelers without making formal proposals. Initiate contact with specific owners. One of my fantasy sports pet peeves is owners who update their “Trading Block” page with a list of the categories they’re weak in, followed by a list of the players they’re willing to trade in order to improve their team (usually their weakest players). Sorry, I’m not trading you A-Rod and Carlos Zambrano for Pedro Feliz and Jose Contreras. As with most other things in life, you’re much more likely to get what you want if you ask for it rather than wait for it to come to you.
4. Sort through the responses to your trade feelers, then make a specific proposal where it makes sense to do so. Most trade talks will die after the previous step. If you do identify an owner who seems interested in discussing matters further, throw out an initial proposal. This should not be your “best offer”, but it should be good enough that the other owner isn’t insulted and actually has to give your offer some serious thought. It’s fine to pursue this stage with multiple owners simultaneously, even if you’re offering the same player(s) to several of them.
5. Negotiate. Expect the other owner(s) to counter your initial proposal - that’s part of the game. Keep a sense of humor about this - after all, we’re talking about fantasy sports here, not a life and death matter!
6. Assess your options. After some finite period of time you’ll get a good sense of whether owners are willing to pull the trigger on a deal or not. Trust your instincts here too - if your potential trading partner is constantly hedging or stalling, you’re probably better off moving on. Compare the impact of a trade to the impact of adding a player through a free agent bid or waiver wire claim.
7. Decide. While it may seem like a waste of time to come this far, then decide not to complete a deal, it’s not. The adage “sometimes the best trades are the ones you don’t make” applies just as much in the fantasy sports world as it does in the professional sports world. At the very worst you’ll receive a more accurate read on how your fellow owners value your players, as well as how they value their own players. You may unknowingly be sowing the seeds for a future trade. If you decide to complete a deal, don’t look back! If the player you’ve just traded away hits three home runs in a game or pitches a complete game shutout, let it go. You’re making the trade for the rest of the season, not just for the next game or two.

Until next time,

The Sherpa