|
RotoGuru Menu Baseball
Football
Basketball
General
|
|
![]() Baseball Feedback This page is devoted to feedback I've received from you. If you have a question to ask or a comment to make, send me an email and if I think it's of general interest, I'll post it here.Click here to move ahead to current feedback letters. Guru: Only 1 team in the top 68 has at least $18 mil. left to spend (Deanos Dogs, #32). All others have no more than $15 mil and most are $13 mil or less. It's kind of lame, really. What's more challenging? A few weeks of glory at the top or working your way from the pack in the end? Actually, I like your strategy, and it may work out in the end. Just this week I've decided to save precious "termination fees" and keep some bye week players (F. Taylor, P. Holmes on both, as well as Pickens on another) and just eat the lack of points in order to benefit from the cheaper salaries in the long run (although I did get rid of Brunell - couldn't see myself wasting $250k for nothing). - Greg R. (9/30) response from Guru:Now that Smallworld baseball is over, I need to spend some more time working on this team. I've still been spending pretty lightly, though I picked up Young right after his bye (hopefully he can avoid this year's concussion!), and am generally looking to pick up the more expensive players as they come off their bye week. Will probably nab Fred Taylor next week, for example. We'll see how it goes. As for the early standings, it's comparable to the SW baseball leaders early in the year, when the leaders were all rotating pitchers daily. So, looking at the leaders at this point isn't a good indicator of potential performance. - Guru Guru: As for updated player status, watch SportsCenter, NFL 2Night, and at Espnet you can watch "the wire" for the latest news info coming across. You can read the newspaper each Friday for injury reports, but sometimes it's a game time decision (like Elway). In that case, the ESPN sources above are your best bets. - Gareth (9/25) response from Guru:Thanks for the sucking up, Gareth. Actually, a lot of you have paid me nice compliments when you've sent in your team names for the RotoGuru rankings. It's nice to hear positive feedback. Thanks to you all for that. - Guru Guru: Second, Smallworld had/has an error in Jerald Moore's stat from week 1 which, despite repeated mail to them they have not acknowledged or fixed. He scored a touchdown on a recovered fumble in the endzone. All the stat services and your RotoGuru stats have it right, but SW doesn't They may be going to do something about this someday but it would sure be nice if they at least acknowledged they would look into it. - Mick K. (9/25) response from Guru:I'll do something to make it easier to figure out where you stand on the RotoGuru rankings. Hopefully by next week. I also reported the Moore error to SW several weeks ago, and others have written to me to say they've reported it, too. Beyond that, I'm powerless. But at least I've given you the space to vent, eh? - Guru Guru: Yikes! I guess getting an extra 4 trades doesn't quite make you whole, does it? - Guru Guru: Most fantasy players do not follow the game like we (RotoGuru readers) do. I guess that:
Any thoughts on this theory? - Steve W. (9/24) response from Guru:Certainly, there are a lot of SW players in your third category. 25% might be low (though I'll bet a lot of 10 year olds are probably in higher categories!) Trading a player to avoid his bye week seems pretty elementary, but when we see the rules being simplified because too many players can't figure out how 4 trades per week can co-exist with 50 trades per year, you realize that for some, bye week management might as well be rocket science. Still, I'd hope that more people would figure this out after a few weeks. That said, the limited data on the SW site (even the self-hyped enhanced manager's statement) makes it very difficult to figure out what a player did in his last game, so some of the knuckleheads may not even realize they're getting nothing from a bye week player. - Guru Guru: I'll try to remember to adjust the next time I update. - Guru Guru: My original team is "RotoGuru.com". Not too tough to guess, is it? At the last moment I decided to enter a second team, which I called "Afterthoughts". This team started with a completely different roster, mostly made up of guys who "just missed the cut" on my first team. Currently, they the two rosters overlap on about 3 players. Neither one is burning up the league. Decidedly mediocre. - Guru Guru: I'll take it under advisement. I'm a little reluctant to get too carried away, lest you guys actually start relying on what may be dubious. But the link may be useful for others to use. - Guru Guru: I don't think anything is foolproof. The last I saw at RotoNews said that Bruce had missed practice for a couple of days, but was likely to play. I usually use RotoNews to keep track of things like this. But when a player is questionable up until gametime, I don't think there is any source that can help. As late as Saturday, Bruce said the leg was fine and that he would play. Anyone else have any other good sources? - Guru Guru: I realize that there is a little good and bad that comes with my suggestion:
This is probably the most conflicted issue I have to deal with. During the preseason, I've especially tried to avoid mentioning any players, since at that point, trading is "free", and I don't want to do anything which leads to a lot of copycat rosters. I do try to provide the tools to help you make your own decisions - which, frankly, is the essence of the game. During the season, I'll often point out a notable achievement from the prior day's games, or a recent streak, while trying not to frame those comments as a "You should buy this guy". Admittedly, there have been a few times when a player's price looks so out of line with performance that I do suggest that buys are likely - but these are rare, and tend to be when I think the pick is pretty obvious anyway. I've said many times that my strength is on the number crunching, analytical side of the game, and not on the assessment of athletic talent. I still believe that the best role I can play is to provide my thoughts on strategy, and my tables of stats, but to try as much as possible to let each of you do your own, independent player selection. And I'm sure you benefit much more by thinking through your own decisions - regardless of whether they turn out well or not. In fact, I'm a firm believer that you learn more by making bad decisions (i.e., you don't really learn how to do something right until you screw it up a few times). So, I'm going to continue my general posture of not spoon-feeding you my player picks. - Guru Guru: Have you investigated having links to the player pages from the Assimilator results page? That would make getting the latest news on my teams easier. - David C. (9/17) response from Guru:Interesting observation on trades. Actually, it makes perfect sense, since second week point data was barely available at all before Wednesday morning at the SW site. Of course, even first week points were difficult to access - for non-RotoGuru users, that is. Your Assimilator idea is a good one. I thought about pursuing that once earlier in the summer, but encountered some problems with MSIE. I could just use regular links to a separate browser window, I suppose. I'll work on it. - Guru Guru: I suspect that prices reflect trades right up until repricing time. Who knows, though. There are at least a few other possibilities:
Guru: I understand that a player's performance will undoubtedly affect how many managers buy or sell him, but a fellow manager informed me that even if (hypothetically) nobody buys or sells that player, his value may change based solely on performance. Specifically, my fellow manager said I should hold onto Steve Young until after the pricing changes on Wednesday because his price will go up. I disagree because I think everybody is going to dump him beforehand and his price will go down. Could you offer some sage advice? - Matt W. (9/16) response from Guru:Performance has no direct impact on price. Only buys and sells. And occasionally, if there are no buys or sells, but a lot of people own a certain player, SW could bump up the price. That is likely to be rare, though. If Steve Young goes up in price today, it will only be because there were more buyers than sellers. If managers are paying attention to the schedule, he'll go down - unless there are a lot of others who misunderstand the pricing framework. - Guru Guru: This is addressed in the FAQ page at the SW site. This year, there will be no temporary price freezes related to bye weeks. As the page indicates, if you want to be sure you can drop a player and get him back at the same price, sell him after Wednesday of his bye week, and buy him back at the beginning of the following week. Of course, that's probably a suboptimal strategy, since his price is likely to drop on the Wednesday prior to the bye week. The better strategy is probably to drop him in advance of "bye Wednesday", and then pick him up at the beginning of the following week, when his price is (presumably) depressed from bye-related sales. - Guru Guru: The follow up should be "Did he strike them all out?" Don't know about Maris. And why isn't his record of total strikeouts ever mentioned as one of the unbreakables? - Mike V. (9/12) response from Guru:Can't answer your follow-up. Anyone? Actually, I have heard Ryan's career strikeout record mentioned as probably unbreakable. I think this season, though, the focus has been on single season unbreakables, given the nature of the McGwire/Sosa assault. - Guru Guru: As an example, suppose I had a 10-man roster for week 1, with a total roster cost of about $450K. If I keep this roster for many weeks to try to build an excess of $$$, it may eventually cost me a million, or more(!), just to get rid of what are at best 2nd-tier starters in the NFL to pick up the real stars that produce consistent positive starts. Also, don't forget the extraordinary value of "1 week of the NFL schedule" that you must spend each week on cheapie production. The season may be too short for the extra $$$ saved to work for you in time. (And remember, at season's end, many stars sit out the last week or 2 in prep for the playoffs.) - David L. (9/12) response from Guru:Thanks for pointing out my misinterpretation of the rules. I see that it does say that the termination fee is one-half of his "market salary". I'm not sure that changes my view on strategy, though - since cheap players whose value has inflated are probably the ones I'd want to keep, anyway. It's the cheap ones who stay cheap that are the likely ones to terminate. But you're right when you say that one shouldn't carry a cheap roster for too long. My hunch is that as teams get past their bye weeks, their better players are probably ripe for the picking. - Guru Guru: While I am sure that many felt burned by the lack of repricing this week, some of your specific assumptions may not be totally warranted. It's not clear that Garrison Hearst would have gone up the max after week one, for just the reason you mention: he would have to be sold a week later. Granted, there are probably some who would have bought him, but I suspect alert managers would not have grabbed him for a single week. In fact, many people probably didn't draft him for just that reason, so you're probably already somewhat unique just to have his point bonanza, with or without a price gain. Second, since trading was possible before the presumed price change on Wednesday, everyone already had a "second chance" to pick up any player at his draft price. I don't think the extra week makes much difference in that regard. We're all playing under the same conditions, so you need to focus on how to make the best of your current situation. When the world serves you a lemon, make lemonade! - Guru Guru: Yes, once you're out of money, you get no more points. I don't know how points will be allocated on the day you run out, however. Will points be proportioned down to the amount available to spend? Or will player points be accumulated from the top of the list down? In any event, that's not of paramount concern today, but could be an issue as the season winds down. Another interesting aspect is that I've noticed that the leaders have generally spent heavily in week one. Clearly, at this pace they will either run dry, or have to scale back considerably. It's similar to the SW baseball phenomenon at the beginning of this season, when the leaderboard was loaded with teams that were rotating starting pitchers. My general Touchdown strategy has been to look for a variety of cheap players early on. Some of these will hopefully turn out to be screaming bargains, and some will probably disappoint. However, the cost of dumping a cheap disappointment is much less than the cost of dumping an expensive underachiever (or injury). Once I've cemented the bargains, I can spend more heavily on the proven producers. Since there is not direct profit to capture, it's not the same as trading for gains in the SW games, but there is a bit of a parallel, I suppose. BTW, several RotoGuru users have noted that "RotoGuru Rooter" leagues are showing up prominently on the "strongest leagues" leaderboard already, not only in the Touchdown game, but also the Quick Strike game. Although I've just downplayed the relevance of early leads, I think it still demonstrates that RotoGuru users are among the most astute fantasy sports players around. Let's keep it going! - Guru Guru: To quote an ancient Lite beer commercial [Billy Martin, as I recall], "I feel strongly both ways." - Guru Guru: A la baseball, can one "trade for starts" in fantasy football by making some wise moves say late Sunday night or early Monday morning to obtain some players (or team defenses) playing on Monday Night Football...? Would this strategy earn the fantasy football player extra points, or is this strategy nullified by one's roster being "set" for the weekend...? Extending this further, would this strategy work for Thursday games and the Saturday games that take place at the end of the year? [And of course, if this is viable, then the downside is burning up valuable trades.] If this strategy would indeed "work," your sage thoughts about its appropriateness is sought. - Steve W. (9/10) response from Guru:Although this is specifically addressed in the rules, Steve was about the fifth person to ask me this question, so I figured it was worth addressing here, too. This strategy doesn't work. The roster freeze period is the morning of the first game of the weekend. (As you note, this can be as early as Thursday.) As of that time, the roster is frozen for the entire weekend, all the way through the Monday night game. You can make trades in the meantime, but for scoring purposes they won't become effective until the following weekend. - Guru Guru: It might raise a public outcry, but it wouldn't be unprecedented. For example, back in 1973, the Mets won the NL East with a record of 82-79, but until the last minute, it was possible that the Eastern Division winner could have had a losing record. Meanwhile, the West winner was the Big Red Machine at 99-63, while the Dodgers finished 2nd at 95-66. The Giants finished third, a full 11 games behind Cincinnati, but they also had a better record than the Mets. (The Mets then went on to defeat Cincy 3-2, before losing to Oakland in a 7-game World Series.) - Guru Guru: Thanks. Interesting perspective. - Guru Guru: So, my girlfriend and I were off to St. Louis. It was about 6:20 by the time we got there. Game time was 7:10. Parking was impossible, we ended up in a decrepit old garage about a mile away from Busch, but it only set me back $5. As we walked up to the stadium, we were asked about a million times if we had any extra tickets. I overheard a guy offering to sell left-field seats for the "low low price" of $500. Another guy wanted $600 for a ticket, but I don't know where it was. Also, there were at least 15-20 news vans parked outside the stadium. We dropped off a ticket at the will-call for a family member, and headed inside at about 6:45 or so. First off, we headed for the scorecards. The guy who set me up with the ticket wanted one, so I felt pretty obligated. However, the scorecards were extremely hot because they had the date on the inside. They were only $1.50, so people were walking around lugging dozens of them. We found that 58,000 had originally been printed, and they were all gone. Bummer. So we headed for our seats, which were in the right-field bleachers. (F.Y.I., they were $6.) I sat down, and my girlfriend set off to find her pops a scorecard. Luckily, 15,000 extras were whipped up out of the blue, so she stood in line for half an hour to pick up seven of them. Meanwhile, the game was starting, so I headed out behind the left-field bleachers in hopes of catching #62. I knew I had a snowball's chance in hell, but couldn't stop thinking, "What if..." So there I was, standing in a cluster of about 50 people who had the same bright idea as me. We waited while Mercker gave up 2 runs in a long top of the first. Sometime during the inning, a bald guy who couldn't have been over 5'7" and was drunk off his @$$ decided to use me for an armrest. But I wasn't going anywhere. Also, I looked behind me in the ever-growing mass of money-mongers and saw none other than the Wonderdog, Rex Hudler, drinking a beer. I said hi, shook his hand, and turned back around. He was really nice. He showed off scars on his arms and explained how he'd left half of his skin cells on the Busch Stadium's old carpet. Cool. Anyway, McGwire grounded out, so I snuck a peek at the always-busy concession stands in dead center. There was absolutely no one in line. So I hustled over, picked up a footlong and a Coke ($5.50, but the footlong was quite delectable), and headed back for my spot in the middle of the right-field bleachers. On my way down, I spilled some of my Coke on the guy sitting next to me. Oopsie! The next time McGwire came up, I decided to give up and stay put. There were tons of people where I was last time, and I didn't feel like crawling all over everybody to get out. So on the first pitch, well, he hit it. It had to have been the shortest home run he's ever hit. The place went absolutely nuts. I was trying to take pictures, so I didn't see a whole lot. I did see him go back for first base, though, and it reminded me of a kid on my high school team who hit a home run but missed home plate and was called out. (What a moron.) I thought what would have happened if they would've called McGwire out. Yeah, right. As you know, the ball went under the billboards in left. Believe it or not, I have been behind the wall in that spot before. It was about five years back, when the stadium still had turf. What's back there, you ask? Well, when I was back there, there were huge rolls of artificial turf, those little carts the groundskeepers use, and other assorted groundskeeping items. Which is why it made sense to me when I found out that a groundskeeper got the ball. I'm sure you all know what happened on the field during all this, so I won't go into it. Anyway, as soon as the inning was over, the scoreboard flashed that "62 merchandise is now available throughout the stadium." So we followed the masses of people out to the concourse to go treasure hunting. There were pennants (12,000) of which were made), baseballs (16,000 made), exclusive 8x10's (don't know how many), all for a mere $10 each. I ended up picking up four pennants and three 8x10's. Call me an idiot, but I had to fight through a crowd to get them. Also, while I was pushing my way through the souvenir line, a bunch of kids who had gathered outside managed to somehow break a steel gate. About 15 of them rushed in. There was an usher watching the gate who was about 65 years old, but he really couldn't do anything. About 5 minutes later, some more punk kids broke in. By the way, there were a ton of people right outside the gates the whole game. More could've gotten in when the kids came in, but luckily they had some respect. Later on, a couple security guards came over and staked out the broken gate. Also at this time, a guy outside the gate was offering $20 for ticket stubs. That was really about it. It was a good game, by the way. We went back behind home plate, in the upper deck, for the ceremony afterwards. They let people in off the streets for the ceremony. There were probably about 45,000 people still in the stadium for the ceremony, which was really great. So we headed for the exits. At this time, people were offering $40-$50 for ticket stubs and $10 for scorecards, and getting few, if any, takers. We got outside, and saw some people carrying commemorative newspapers put out by the Post-Dispatch. They had put them out Monday also, which were the first "extras" they had made since World War II. We saw a guy holding a bundle of papers, and asked him where to head. He pointed us in the right direction. From other sources, we learned that there were 150,000 to be made, and that they were being sold out of trucks and vans. So we wandered around the streets near the Bowling Hall of Fame, which is right across from the stadium. I almost bought a couple for $5 apiece. Then we saw a little bit of a fracas. A bunch of people were chewing out some guy who had bought a whole trunk load of the papers. He yelled back, saying they could have bought them too and that more trucks would be pulling up soon with more papers. Hearing this, we headed further down the street. Once we started getting away from the crowds, we saw an SUV pull up, so I sprinted for it. It was full of papers. About 200 other people went sprinting for it at this point. Three cops were there in a heartbeat. One was screaming, "We're not going through this sh*t again, make a line!" He only let the newspaper guys open up one door. By this time, there was a huge crowd there, but I had a pretty good spot in line. I ended up picking up 20 of them for 50 cents apiece. And I could've sold each and every one of them for $10 apiece in a heartbeat, but I didn't. Finally, I headed home, and learned that Mike Shannon got the call on KMOX, not Jack Buck, which upset me a little, but I wasn't really in a position to complain. I got to my girlfriend's house at about 1:00 A.M. I kissed her dad's feet for a while (he gave me the ticket), and he gave me 1 of the special papers from Monday in exchange for 10 of today's. Hey, I think I owed him a little. Anyway, I got home at about 1:30, and it's 2:43 now. I should be tired, but I'm not. It was a great night, one I'll never forget. If anybody wants to know anything, feel free to drop me a line. But don't even ask about buying anything from me; nothing's for sale. I've said that enough tonight. Well, I'm going to try to sleep. I hope I didn't leave anything out, and I hope it's somewhat readable. Later. Ryan Pastrovich rpastro@mt-olive.com (9/9) response from Guru:Thanks for inviting us along for the replay, Ryan - Guru Guru: According to the Jays game last night, there were two other 30/30 teammates. Burks/Bichette of the Rockies (1996) and Johnson/Strawberry of the Mets (1987). - Joe V. (9/5) response from Guru:Thanks for the info, Joe. A pretty rare feat, obviously. - Guru Guru: We all learned that how SW handled poor initial pricing in baseball was not as effective as we would have liked. I had Robin Ventura for most of the season because his price never went up, and I could find better marginal production increases at other positions. Similarly, I didn't pick up Randy Johnson (until today) because, despite his poor performance in the American League, his price never dropped below $9.85m. We assume that this happened because lots of people bought Ventura at the beginning of the season, and very few bought Johnson. And because SW's pricing scheme didn't take into account the notion that some of their initial prices could have been WAY off, those who made those bargain buys suffered, and only the super-rich could afford Johnson, not that they would have bought him until last month. So we'll see if football pricing works better. This is certainly an evolving market model. It wouldn't surprise me if the initial buys are taken into account, generating momentum for those heavily purchased players (and teams) that pushes their prices up for several weeks. - David C. (9/4) response from Guru:Actually, Robin Ventura was a real anomaly, because he was so heavily drafted. I estimate that he was on roughly one-half of all roster when the season opened. And I think SW did boost his price somewhat to compensate for this in the second repricing. Once that happened, though, a lot of managers sold him, which just pushed his price back down again. It looks to me like the initial football pricing is better than the baseball prices were. At least, a scan of preseason rosters indicates that there are no Ventura-like player concentrations. Oakland only shows up on 10-15% of rosters, which is a far cry from 50%. So while it's a proportionately high concentration, I don't think it will be overly distorting. Plus, it may actually be priced at the right level. Time will tell. - Guru Guru: When SmallWorld says they determine prices based on last year's stats, what they mean is that they determine this year's prices based on last year's value. Correct? They may make slight modifications to account for expectations this year, but, for the most part, prices are based on last year's value. Jerry Rice didn't play last year. If his price was based on his stats he'd be the steal of the draft. Anyway, getting back to the point, a reader commented that the best values are the players who were hurt or only played half of last year's games. I take that a step further: The best values are the players who were injured or did not play at the end of last year. Look at Corey Dillon vs. Curtis Martin. Dillon didn't play in the beginning of the season, but was turning it on at the end of last year. His price was rising accordingly. On the other hand we have Curtis Martin. Martin's career numbers were similar to (if not as good as) Terrell Davis' numbers over the course of his career. Martin gained 1150 yards in the first 11 games and then he was injured and missed most of the last 5 games. He averaged roughly 10 SWP/G more than Dillon, but he is priced $700,000 cheaper than Dillon. Why? When he stopped playing, owners sold him and his price dropped. Dillon was gaining yards and fantasy value at the end of last season and therefore he is priced accordingly to start this year. He still may be a value, but not as much of a value as Martin. Look for players who played well, but were hurt or didn't play at the end of the year. - Gareth (9/4) response from Guru:Thanks for the input, Gareth. I've often used your browser technique when the server is slow. I don't think last year's final prices has much to do with this year draft prices. Last year's game used a different SWP formula, had a different roster makeup, repriced daily, and had a number of other differences. I think the starting point for this year's prices was a simple formula using this year's SWP forum applied to last year's stats. From there, prices were adjusted to compensate for down time, expectations, rookies, etc. As to impact of the timing of last year's performance on relative value, you may be right. The opposing argument would be that Dillon's second half was more indicative of his projected 1998 performance, and that Martin has more uncertainty, given that he is on a new team (albeit with an old coach). - Guru Guru: Since two different guys each suggested this same idea, I thought it was worth commenting on. I think this would be a dangerous strategy. The rules also state "You get points each week for your players as long as your roster is full and valid during our Freeze Period." Also, "In order for your roster to be valid, you must have a team defense and 10 players." So is there a contradiction? Not necessarily. Veteran SW managers will recall occasions during which the valid roster rule was waived. Typically, this has happened during periods of server congestion, when managers may not have had ample opportunity to get rosters fully set - especially just before the opening game of the season. The clause in the FAQ that you mention is probably designed to address this eventuality. Normally, the lack of a valid roster would just wipe out all points for that week. There's an even more Draconian possibility here. If you take everything at face value, then having ten players but no defense could result in getting no points for the players, plus losing 325 for no defense, for a net weekly production of -325 SWP. Yikes! - Guru Guru: As to preseason evaluation, wouldn't you agree that the best value comes from players who played or started only 1/2 the year last year, are healthy and starting this year, and whose cost in preseason is based on their production as if they played and started all year? I can't see how a Favre or Barry Sanders will do twice as good as last year under any scenario, but someone who only played about 8 games, should easily be able to do better over 16 this year than he did in 8 last year and could conceivably do twice as good, thus giving me as much as twice the points for the amount of $$$ I spend on him (and getting all the $$$ I want in FF is quite dubious with the short season and limited appreciation). - David L. (8/31) response from Guru:I generally agree with your assessments. Especially with the limited number of trades, looking ahead 2-3 weeks will be important to make sure you can make the moves you need to make. And I could use some of that raw unmitigated luck, too. - Guru Guru: Thanks for the tips, David. - Guru Click here for prior feedback letters, by month: August . . . . . July . . . . . June . . . . . May . . . . . April . . . . . March . . . . . RotoGuru is produced by Dave Hall (a.k.a. the Guru), an avid fantasy sports player. He is neither employed by nor compensated by any of the fantasy sports games discussed within this site, and all opinions expressed are solely his own. Questions or comments are welcome, and should be emailed to Guru<davehall@home.com>. |