Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Bobby J
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:00 pm

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Bobby J » Sun Mar 16, 2008 2:53 pm

I am not one to usually post my lineup, but we had a very interesting draft in Chicago #2 and wanted some opinions.



1 - Cabrera

2 - Pujols

3 - Markakis

4 - Manny

5 - C Guillen

6 - Victorino

7 - J Shields

8 - Bay

9 - Billingsley

10 - Pedro

11 - Lidge

12 - Damon

13 - B Wilson

14 - Harden

15 - F Sanchez

16 - Bartlett

17 - Blanton

18 - L Scott

19 - Jacobs

20 - Paulino

21 - L Castillo

22 - Bonser

23 - J Buck

24 - Owings

25 - Colon

26 - J Sanchez

27 - Andrew Miller

28 - Gathright

29 - S Shields

30 - Balentin



Manny falling to the 4th, Guillen 5th, Bay 8th, Damon 12th, were all a shock when they were still there, I think this is the lastest all 4 of them went in any satellite or any of the other 3 in Chicago. The offense projects out very well, high 280 average, lots of runs, hr, and rbi, average on steals, but can slip in Castillo and Gathright to bump up the numbers. What are you thoughts on pitching, we took a lot of upside guys, Pedro, Harden, Bonser, Colon, Sanchez to try and make up for starting a little later than I wanted to for pitching, but could not pass up the value on offense that was there. By the way, Dye went about 5 picks after Damon and JD Drew went in the 23rd round. Very strange draft to say the least. Pierre in the 4th, Hamilton 5th, Bourn and Taveras 6th.



[ March 16, 2008, 09:30 PM: Message edited by: Bobby J ]
Some Assembly Required

Spyhunter
Posts: 1560
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 6:00 pm
Contact:

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Spyhunter » Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:41 pm

what # did you pick?

Quack
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 6:00 pm
Contact:

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Quack » Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:42 pm

wow, what an offense that is...if that pitching comes up with the upside on potential, congrats on the 100+K

Bobby J
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:00 pm

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Bobby J » Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:44 pm

I had the 9th pick
Some Assembly Required

Spyhunter
Posts: 1560
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 6:00 pm
Contact:

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Spyhunter » Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:47 pm

very nice top 5 in particular. If pujols is healthy then you are in great offensive shape. As for pitching, I think your closer are very risky, but keep working on that during the season and you will be in great shape



Spy

Da bears
Posts: 358
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 6:00 pm
Contact:

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Da bears » Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:50 pm

Could be a lethal combo of Cabrera and Pujols. Nice job on offense!



[ March 16, 2008, 09:52 PM: Message edited by: Da bears ]
-Bauler Shot Caller

freddiezee
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:00 pm
Contact:

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by freddiezee » Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:43 am

I can't believe how good that team is.

User avatar
KJ Duke
Posts: 6574
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2004 6:00 pm

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by KJ Duke » Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:51 am

A great top 12 with the exception of Bay, but I think you gave back much of the edge as the draft wore on.

TheKing
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 6:00 pm
Contact:

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by TheKing » Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:15 am

Awesome team. Well done.
"When your strategy is deep and far reaching, what you gain by your calculations can allow you to win before you fight."

Vander
Posts: 758
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 6:00 pm

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Vander » Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:51 am

Yours is the team I fear most. If you get some luck with the higher risk pitchers it could be lights out. Less than dave did great early and has a strong team too. I really meant it when I said you guys were the teams to beat. Yours may be stronger throughout than his. With some luck $100,000 is not out of the question. So let me be the first to hope Pujols, Pedro, and Harden are on the dl by May. Just kidding, but that would be good news for me.

Vander
Posts: 758
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 6:00 pm

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Vander » Mon Mar 17, 2008 7:15 am

Put another way, if your pitching holds up your dangerous and the best I may hope for is to be this years Paul Weber stuck in the same league as Terry Haney.

Chest Rockwell
Posts: 2400
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 6:00 pm
Contact:

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Chest Rockwell » Mon Mar 17, 2008 7:17 am

Congrats well done Bobby. Missed drafting with you this year.

GOD Loves You
Posts: 997
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 6:00 pm

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by GOD Loves You » Mon Mar 17, 2008 7:42 am

On the surface it looks good, but you will need those pitchers to actually PITCH. If they do, whew, could be a long season for the rest of your leaguemates. I think your catchers might eventually break your heart. Both could be out of a job by May.



Who else was available that was a worthwhile OF when you selected Bay?

Bobby J
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:00 pm

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Bobby J » Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:41 am

Thanks for the kind words Vander, I really felt good about the team after the draft, especially the first 12 picks. I wanted to get Napoli or Ruiz in the 19th and then Snyder in the 20th, but that did not work. I have no issue at all with Paulino keeping the job, Buck is the one I am afraid of but Navarro was a target also and went 2 picks in front of me in the 23rd. Because of getting players of so much value early, it changed my overall plan a little on pitching and catching, so I was about 2 rounds behind the curve on both
Some Assembly Required

Bobby J
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:00 pm

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Bobby J » Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:45 am

Hey Kent, I really missed drafting with the guys in Florida this year, I know you switched to Vegas and since the draft moved to Orlando, I missed my free room and board with family in Tampa. Honestly, with only 2 leagues in Tampa, the competition was very tough. I went from 1st in 2006 to last in 2007, alot of that was preparation, which I spent about 10 times as much time this year on and hopefully it paid off with my Chicago team. It was a humbling experience last year
Some Assembly Required

Bobby J
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:00 pm

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Bobby J » Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:50 am

GLY, did not have to have an outfielder in the 8th and I was 100% targeting a SP, but the one's I wanted were gone too early for my taste. I absolutely loved Bay falling to me in the 8th. My goal going in was to only have 2 or 3 OF by the 13th round, but ended up with Markakis, Manny (could not pass on at 4.7), Victorino (could not pass on at 6.7), Bay at 8.7 and Damon at 12.7, just way too much value to pass on
Some Assembly Required

Bobby J
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:00 pm

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Bobby J » Mon Mar 17, 2008 10:51 am

I am a little worried about the pitching, it can be scary good or just plain scary if they do not live up to the hype
Some Assembly Required

freddiezee
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:00 pm
Contact:

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by freddiezee » Tue Mar 18, 2008 3:01 am

I went back and looked at this team again today. Wow, did some guys ever fall far to you. Guillen, Victorino, Bay, Pedro and Damon were all huge steals that should have gone one or even two rounds earlier...and they did in just about every draft. Finding one or two of those guys in a draft is great, but finding 5 is amazing.

I wonder.....do you think some of the teams in your league are bad, when you look at the results, or do you think you just got a perfect storm of falling players?

Bobby J
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:00 pm

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Bobby J » Tue Mar 18, 2008 3:15 pm

Not sure about bad teams, I think there are always a few that are unprepared that excel in local leagues and want to try the big time. I am not sure how many first timers were in our league, maybe more than others. I drafted with a past overall runner up in NFBC, and at least 2 that were in the top 50 last year
Some Assembly Required

LAMONSTERS
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 6:00 pm
Contact:

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by LAMONSTERS » Wed Mar 19, 2008 3:42 am

Your DOOMED ! Very good team and everyone agrees. It is just the way the baseball gods work! LOL

Less than Dave
Posts: 712
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 6:00 pm
Contact:

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Less than Dave » Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:02 am

Bobby, it was great talkin with ya at the draft, man. I still like my team better (as I think anyone should like their own team better pretty much), but yours is definitely really really good. I think our league will have 3 studs, 3 duds, and a whole lot in between. Vander, out of curiosity, which of my picks in the middle-late didn't you like? I obviously know you weren't a fan of me getting Braun and Howard

Less than Dave
Posts: 712
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 6:00 pm
Contact:

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Less than Dave » Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:04 am

Originally posted by freddiezee:

I went back and looked at this team again today. Wow, did some guys ever fall far to you. Guillen, Victorino, Bay, Pedro and Damon were all huge steals that should have gone one or even two rounds earlier...and they did in just about every draft. Finding one or two of those guys in a draft is great, but finding 5 is amazing.

I wonder.....do you think some of the teams in your league are bad, when you look at the results, or do you think you just got a perfect storm of falling players? We definitely had some bad teams... some guys you could tell were just overmatched and not ready for this kind of draft. It was definitely noticeable.

sranaghan
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:00 pm

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by sranaghan » Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:05 am

I mean that is a good draft and all..not that I think any our way better or worse for that matter but the rounds 7-14 there are a ton of questions there...



8 - Bay

9 - Billingsley

10 - Pedro

11 - Lidge

12 - Damon

13 - B Wilson

14 - Harden





bay has been awful since surgery..billingsley is solid but still very unproven, pedro is a pitch away from missing 10-15 games, lidge is a headcase, damon is very injury prone, brian wilson is on just an awful team and harden is hurt year after year..there is a ton of upside but you have to solid from pick 1-30..I think that is what makes this format so tough/good...best of luck with your teams...its so hard to tell this early who is good and who is not...just my opinion...

Less than Dave
Posts: 712
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 6:00 pm
Contact:

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by Less than Dave » Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:09 am

Originally posted by sranaghan:

I mean that is a good draft and all..not that I think any our way better or worse for that matter but the rounds 7-14 there are a ton of questions there...



8 - Bay

9 - Billingsley

10 - Pedro

11 - Lidge

12 - Damon

13 - B Wilson

14 - Harden





bay has been awful since surgery..billingsley is solid but still very unproven, pedro is a pitch away from missing 10-15 games, lidge is a headcase, damon is very injury prone, brian wilson is on just an awful team and harden is hurt year after year..there is a ton of upside but you have to solid from pick 1-30..I think that is what makes this format so tough/good...best of luck with your teams...its so hard to tell this early who is good and who is not...just my opinion... I really don't see how you can call any of those picks other than Lidge maybe as questionable. Johnny Damon in the 12th... I mean, even if he plays 100 games he's still a steal there! Billingsley and Pedro where he got them are fantastic. I would have loved if Billingsley fell to me. Almost took Pedro but went with McGowan instead.. wanted healthy pitchers.

sranaghan
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 6:00 pm

Chicago 2, pick#9, a very strange draft

Post by sranaghan » Wed Mar 19, 2008 4:11 am

yeah I mean people talk about value, but a guy drops for reasons. you cannot just assume all the players that drop will perform like they did in the past....half of them will, half will not...its a crapshoot a lot of times picking the bounce back players...its way too early to tell anything....

Post Reply