**UPDATED** Average Draft Position (Top 90)

[King of Queens]

A few days ago, I posted the Top 30 picks in terms of average draft position. I have now completed the Top 90 of all 20 main event leagues.



Player

Average draft position

Earliest draft position

Latest draft position



1. Alex Rodriguez 1.95-1-4

2. Carlos Beltran 2.50-1-4

3. Albert Pujols 2.65-1-4

4. Vladimir Guerrero 3.35-2-6

5. Miguel Tejada 5.65-3-8

6. Bobby Abreu 7.10-5-11

7. Johan Santana 7.30-2-11

8. Todd Helton 9.10-6-13

9. Alfonso Soriano 9.40-6-13

10. Carl Crawford 9.60-5-13

11. Randy Johnson 10.60-4-15

12. Manny Ramirez 10.70-6-18

13. Ichiro Suzuki 14.10-9-21

14. Jason Schmidt 16.85-10-23

15. Mark Teixeira 17.45-11-33

16. Scott Rolen 18.30-13-27

17. Derek Jeter 19.45-13-28

18. Adrian Beltre 19.50-11-27

19. Miguel Cabrera 21.30-15-34

20. David Ortiz 22.50-15-37

21. Jim Thome 24.75-13-39

22. Aramis Ramirez 25.35-13-37

23. Nomar Garciaparra 26.65-16-41

24. Gary Sheffield 27.00-16-41

25. Pedro Martinez 27.05-12-48

26. Juan Pierre 27.15-15-45

27. Ben Sheets 27.85-9-44

28. Jimmy Rollins 31.00-19-45

29. Michael Young 32.50-21-45

30. Aubrey Huff 32.50-24-51

31. Edgar Renteria 32.70-17-57

32. Eric Gagne 33.30-19-57

33. Curt Schilling 34.00-21-55

34. Eric Chavez 35.55-23-58

35. Brad Lidge 37.40-22-54

36. Barry Bonds 38.10-15-88

37. Roy Oswalt 38.45-23-51

38. Marcus Giles 38.70-21-51

39. Hank Blalock 38.70-22-64

40. Adam Dunn 41.30-21-69

41. Francisco Rodriguez 42.45-26-59

42. Scott Podsednik 43.55-30-61

43. Victor Martinez 44.80-25-60

44. Rafael Furcal 46.60-20-65

45. Melvin Mora 48.50-28-69

46. Tim Hudson 48.60-27-81

47. Carlos Zambrano 49.05-26-67

48. Ivan Rodriguez 51.10-31-70

49. Jim Edmonds 51.60-22-77

50. Carlos Delgado 51.95-27-76

51. Javy Lopez 52.20-43-67

52. Mariano Rivera 52.30-32-74

53. Jake Peavy 52.75-17-87

54. Derrek Lee 54.05-34-68

55. Jose Reyes 56.05-37-88

56. Oliver Perez 56.80-32-82

57. Carlos Lee 57.00-39-76

58. Corey Patterson 57.15-18-75

59. Chipper Jones 58.85-39-75

60. Hideki Matsui 59.00-40-76

61. Keith Foulke 60.40-33-80

62. Joe Nathan 62.05-48-74

63. Billy Wagner 64.95-43-107

64. David Wright 65.55-38-84

65. Mark Prior 66.25-31-93

66. Vernon Wells 68.70-36-102

67. Jeff Kent 68.95-41-93

68. Armando Benitez 69.90-53-89

69. Johnny Damon 73.90-58-90

70. Francisco Cordero 74.40-53-94

71. Trevor Hoffman 77.00-45-108

72. Josh Beckett 77.05-53-119

73. Jason Isringhausen 77.80-48-116

74. Shawn Green 78.95-37-123

75. Octavio Dotel 79.10-44-101

76. Travis Hafner 79.95-46-116

77. Rich Harden 80.85-60-102

78. Mike Lowell 84.00-62-117

79. Sean Casey 84.05-33-119

80. Orlando Cabrera 84.05-46-130

81. Bret Boone 84.50-42-117

82. Roger Clemens 85.40-39-123

83. Chone Figgins 86.00-46-110

84. Justin Morneau 86.05-40-137

85. John Smoltz 87.80-32-123

86. Paul Konerko 87.85-69-110

87. Jorge Posada 88.70-59-131

88. Richie Sexson 88.90-56-119

89. Magglio Ordonez 88.95-29-123

90. Mike Mussina 91.55-73-124



Since we're all competing against one another, an interesting way to look at this data is to figure out how many of the Top 90 are on your roster. Let's say you have 9 of these players on your roster--that means you have 9 Round 1-6 worthy players on your roster.



Also of note, please see the earliest and latest picks. There are some real doozies in there.



Enjoy!

[Plymouth]

Nice job KOQ, thanks! But alas, I have but 4 players on the list.

[Spyhunter]

Awesome data, thanks



I got:

Abreu +

Suzuki +

Edmonds -

Rivera +

Boone +

Sexon +



+ means I got after the average, - before the average... I was surprised not to see Woods, I thought I might have 7!!!



Spy

[Online Yeti]

I picked in the dreadful 15 spot but managed:



Schmidt +

Rolen even

V Mart +

C Lee -

Harden -

Boone -



Yikes 3 minuses not too good I guess. But you know a guy won't be there 30 picks later. Overall was pretty impressed with my league, nobody slipped very far in the top 10 rds at least. Bargain hunting was tough. It stinks to look at some of the bad drafting in certain other leagues (hint = sears tower), and realize you have to be fortunate enough to get into a crap league to have a real shot at winning it all IMO. I'd be shocked if anyone had more than 7 of the top 90 (pre-season) players. That would require some bad drafting by the league. Good luck to whoever took Furcal at 20 or M Giles at 21. No position is that scarce.



My views do not necessarily reflect good judgment.

[devilznj]

Great job K o Q!



Most interesting part was seeing the ranges (Vernon Wells, Jake Peavy, etc).

[nydownunder]

KOQ



So Roy Halladay fell outside 90?

[Patsy Dean]

Soriano even

Beltre +4

Chavez -5

Renteria +21

C.Lee +12

Hafner +6

Green +25

Casey +37



Picked from the 9th slot.



[ March 31, 2005, 07:04 AM: Message edited by: Patsy Dean ]

[eddiejag]

KING great work , i got 8 not bad.

PULJOS

SHEETS

E CHAVEZ

V WELLS

C LEE

B BOONE

F CORDERO

SEXSON

Ialso have wood , he must be 91.Anybody else with 8 or even 9. eddiejag

[nydownunder]

Originally posted by eddiejag:

KING great work , i got 8 not bad.

PULJOS

SHEETS

E CHAVEZ

V WELLS

C LEE

B BOONE

F CORDERO

SEXSON

Ialso have wood , he must be 91.Anybody else with 8 or even 9. eddiejag Cordero's one player listed in the top 90 that I would take with a grain of salt (ie with the injury risk, had no right being in the top 90).



Besides that, that's a pretty good head start.

[King of Queens]

Originally posted by nydownunder:

KOQ



So Roy Halladay fell outside 90? Halladay fell right outside of the Top 90 at #92. His average was 93.05, with a range of {61..122}.

[King of Queens]

Originally posted by eddiejag:

KING great work , i got 8 not bad.

PULJOS

SHEETS

E CHAVEZ

V WELLS

C LEE

B BOONE

F CORDERO

SEXSON

Ialso have wood , he must be 91.Anybody else with 8 or even 9. eddiejag I know of others that have 8 -- haven't seen anyone with 9 yet.



Kerry Wood was also right outside of the Top 90 at #94. His average pick was 93.50, with a range of {62..155}. Yes, Team 5 in Vegas 1 got him in the 11th round. Unreal, huh?

[Edwards Kings]

Did the same analysis. I ended up with 7 which is not bad picking 14th:



Rolen - picked 14, avg 16

Renteria - pick 17, avg 31 (could be oops, could be gamble)

Dotel - picked 44, avg 75 (In the middle of our closer run...picked him over Nathan, Benitez, Hoffman, Wagner...another gamble, but a calculated one)

Casey - pick 47, avg 80 (I see a pattern here...Dooh! Picked him over D. Lee and Delgado...should've taken Lee)

Matsui - Pick 74, avg 60 (OK, finally one that makes sense)

S. Green - pick 77, Avg 74 (actually, I think this one is a steal)

Posada - pick 107, avg 88 (my league was not showing any love to catchers).



Well, it looks like I lead with my heart on some key picks. I have predicted Casey, Dotel, Renteria, and Green with better than their respective average years, so if I miss, I can only blame myself.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Great job KOQ. STATS just finished an Excel document that lists every player drafted with the same type of data (average draft spot, minimim and maximum spots) so don't knock yourself any further. We'll find a way to e-mail that Excel document to all 2005 participants soon. We also have the average draft bids on that document, but unfortunately we have AL-only and NL-only numbers mixed in with the Mixed Auction Leagues. I'm going to see if we can fix that before we send it out.



But look for this data soon. It's awesome and it lists results from all 20 leagues.

[Kosher Meat]

Despite injuries to Thome and Pierre, at least this NFBC average likes my early picks.



Who I got What Pick NFBC Average

Vlad 4 3.35

Thome 27 24.75

Pierre 34 27.15

Zambrano 57 49.05

Hudson 64 48.60

F. Cordero 87 74.40



ALL SIX PICKS WERE TAKEN AFTER THE NFBC AVERAGE (Especially the pitchers)!!!!!!!!!!!

[Head 2 Head]

King of Queens - Thanks for the work.

[eddiejag]

KING i also hit 8 in the ultimate

SCHMIDT

M CABRERA

PODSEDNICK

DUNN

O PEREZ

HAFNER

B BOONE

SEXSON

Anybody hit nine BAD [ass ]ANGELS

[Dyv]

Alas, I only have 6 (but feel good about Berkman and Halladay anyway)



Abreu

Bonds

Sheffield

Delgado

Lowell

Prior



Intuitively, the teams picking at the front of the draft (say spots 1-7) SHOULD have 7 of these guys just to be even. I doubt any draft had these 90 picked in the first 90 and the overflow should more likely have been caught by the guys leading into round 7.



I'm sure there are numerous exceptions



Dave

[Top Dawg]

Eddie - Looks like my little team in the Ultimate also has 8, by position



Beltre 3B

Chavez CI

Kent 2B

Cabrera SS

Crawford OF

Matsui OF

Clemens P

Prior P



I understand Prior and Clemens can be hit or miss, but where we took them it was hard to pass.



Pete

[JohnZ]

My thoughts on this is that most of it don't mean squat.



It would have some meaning if you took out the high and the low on each player in the 20 leagues. It seems like one league, some players were taken way too early, or way to late.. I have info for picks 1-225 in LV1-9, CHI1.



Also, each league is it's own beast and you can easily see position runs at different points. Most had closers rds 4-5, a few had rds 6-7. It really depended if the Gagne type went 20 or 40.



There were also 28 MORE players taken that aren't in the "Top 90" that were taken less than #90 in a league.



[ March 31, 2005, 02:23 PM: Message edited by: UFS ]

[bjoak]

Let's say you have 9 of these players on your roster--that means you have 9 Round 1-6 worthy players on your roster.

Nope, I couldn't disagree more. Maybe it's just word choice, but I don't see all these guys being 'worthy' of the first 90 picks.



You can start and end this discussion with Sean Casey. Last year he was an overachiever in every area and he's too far past his prime to repeat it anyway. I have him .300/18/2. There are about 50 guys post round 10 that can give you that or the equivalent, i.e. more homeruns, less average. I took Mark Kotsay in round 16. You can jot him down for almost the same thing with a few more stolen bases. In fact, his 2004 totals weren't much different if you count stolen bases.



On the other hand (we argued this on another thread so I won't harp on it), it's ridiculous that Paul Konerko isn't even in here.



Anyway, this'll probably start a whole debate on these individual players, but it's kind of missing the point. I know people will disagree with this, otherwise players wouldn't go where they do, but if you get together some good rankings at the end of the season, and you find that you have ten of the first 90, then you've really got something, but I guess by then it won't matter because you'll know how good your team was.



The point is that it doesn't matter if you took Randy Johnson or Nick Johnson in the first round. All that matters is the team you created and how it performs. I know I said this before, but anyone can show up with the ESPN player ranking sheet and just cross off names, always taking the best available players, and you'd be bound to get eight of these guys, maybe 9, easy. That's not hard to do. Anyone can do that, but why are you even bothering to play if that's your drafting strategy.



People criticized me for taking Sheets in the first round, even though they agreed that he's a perennial Cy Young because he's a round 2 pick. Now if you don't like him, fine, but if you do like him (as much as first rounders), what sense does it make to say I'm going to wait even though I know he may not make it back to me? What is the sense in that? Should you really take the higher ranked player just so you can go on a message board and say look who I got and he should have gone 2 picks earlier!? That doesn't mean the player you took was any better and it doesn't mean your team is better.



[ March 31, 2005, 02:05 PM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

[Head 2 Head]

I was wondering who grabbed Sheets #9 overall. I wanted a top SP so considered Sheets along with Schmidt & Pedro but passed at 13 for a hitter. I was right in assuming that a premium SP who be available on my way back. I choose Schmidt over Sheets, but .. I understand the pick. Someone took Santana #2 overall.



I wondered if you should have gambled on the #22 spot and got a bigger discount. If I want a certain player (like you wanted Sheets) and thought he wouldn't be there at next pick I (you) have to grab him. I think that is the big item after the fourth or fifth round - finding value and acquiring it.



I came into the draft believing that I could find cheap CI - I found players picked #40 overall LV1 (Morneau), Overall average #79 (range 33-119) Casey (These numbers are thanks to King of Queens!) and #86 (Konerko) and #88 (Sexson)all too interchangeable to use a third or fourth round pick on. All look good at number 90.



I do however believe if you see a team with 8 or 9 players on this list that they have a VERY good base and did an excellent job of acquiring the value that was on the board.

[bjoak]

I love the tied for first signature.

[Top Dawg]

Guys, all valid points. Another thing not considered as you look over the average list, is which 6, 7, 8 or even 9 guys did you get. I would rather have only 5 of the top 90 if they were picks 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. If I have 9 and they are 90, 89, 88 etc, I doubt I will do as well.



Still, it is fun to look this stuff over while passing time until the games begin.



Pete



[ March 31, 2005, 02:45 PM: Message edited by: Top Dawg ]

[bjoak]

What's interesting to me is that no one would have criticized me if I took Santana at pick 9. He's a virtual clone of Sheets. Except that Sheets has even more potential since he was pitching in pain last year. He's also pitching in the NL, good for a half-run better ERA going forward. If you're looking at 2004 wins, then go get Oswalt and see how many wins he nets on that team this year. I don't see the Brewers offense being much worse than Milwaukee's in 2005.



I wasn't going to make this about individuals, but I'd like to know why others think Santana is a better pick.

[nydownunder]

Originally posted by bjoak:

What's interesting to me is that no one would have criticized me if I took Santana at pick 9. He's a virtual clone of Sheets. Except that Sheets has even more potential since he was pitching in pain last year. He's also pitching in the NL, good for a half-run better ERA going forward. If you're looking at 2004 wins, then go get Oswalt and see how many wins he nets on that team this year. I don't see the Brewers offense being much worse than Milwaukee's in 2005.



I wasn't going to make this about individuals, but I'd like to know why others think Santana is a better pick. Average Proj of 6 publications:



Santana

224 18 0 258 2.75 1.01

Sheets

233 15 0 248 3.10 1.04



This may not look like much, but it equates to about 3 Pitching points (out of 75). Mulitple that by 20 and you get 60 overall points in difference.



Also, I had both last year in another comp, and his run supoort was brutal. I am sure it will be better this year, but I am sure the stas already reflect that. Even if you say he gets 17 wins, its easy to argue that Santana could get 20. Sheets upside is about another 1.3 points with Santan's being 1.7. I had Santana ranked #1 overall with Sheets at #6. I considered Santana at my #1 slot (I chose Arod), but would never consider Sheets in the top 13.



Just an opinion.