I Took Him Because He Was Next On My List

[DOUGHBOYS]

'I took him because he was next on my list'. Whenever I hear this, I think a little less of the drafter. Through our growing years in fantasy baseball, we have all just taken the next guy on our list. At this level, we can't unless there is truly a need for the next guy on the list.
A lot of drafters do not take roster construction under consideration. Roster construction in the NFBC based on a 1 to 10 rating is a 15.
It's the reason why tier drafting isn't the optimal course of action in the NFBC.

Let's try an example....

Round 1- Chris Davis- 1B
Round 2- Evan Longoria- 3B
Round 3- Jose Bautista- OF
Round 4- Buster Posey- C
Round 5- Greg Holland- CL
Round 6- Gerrit Cole- SP

The next available player on his list is Jayson Werth. Also available are Everth Cabrera, Jordan Zimmerman, and David Ortiz.

Let's work through his draft....
Chris Davis is power. It's the only thing that can be counted on. No speed and contrary to what your projections or ANYBODY'S projections say, Davis could hit anywhere from .220 to .310

Evan Longoria is power with risk of injury. Little speed and his batting average should be a help, not hindrance.

Jose Bautista is power with risk of injury. Little speed. His batting average should be median

Buster Posey is best of the catchers on paper. Ok power. His batting average will help this team.

Greg Holland is a high end Closer.

Gerrit Cole is a speculative number one pitcher.

Positionally, this team is covered well. Instead of two starters at this stage, the drafter has decided on a high end Closer.
He has Catcher and his two corners covered as well as an outfielder. This pick should not be position driven unless feeling a little naked with only one starter.
There are tons of pitchers left. Zimmerman ranks highest for him.

ROTOally,(I need a spellchecker that understands fantasy slang!) this drafters team is lacking. He has been drafting strictly using his list. He hasn't lost the draft, but he is well on his way if only following, 'the next guy on his list'.
At this point, he can back burner power. His first four picks offensively were power first, all else second.
This is a case where Werth becomes his worst choice even though he is next on his list.

If the drafter leaned a little towards positionality, Everth Cabrera would be his logical choice. Cabrera gives him coverage at shortstop and speed. He also would contribute in the least talked about category in roto, runs scored.
It may be hard to believe, but Buster Posey has only scored more than 65 runs once.
Longoria hasn't scored 100 runs since 2009.
Chis Davis hit 53 homers last year. He had 43 other extra base hits and walked 72 times.
Still, he only managed 103 runs scored. That's right, he knocked himself in more than all other Orioles hitters.

If the drafter did not lean towards positionality, David Ortiz is available.
He is similar to Werth in power. However, Ortiz is less risky injury-wise and more apt to help with average.
The problem being that with Ortiz or Werth, overall roster construction sags.

I won't make this pick for the drafter. What I will do is re-direct him from his list in not taking Werth and making Zimmerman or Cabrera his top choices.
That being said, I know a few of you will chime in and say that speed is more readily available later in the draft.
And this may be true.
There are players like Craig Gentry, Rajai Davis, Jarrod Dyson, and other judys who are readily available.
The problem being that they are truly one-trick judys.
41, 50, 34, 46, 45 that is how many bases Rajai Davis has stolen over the last five years. A lot of drafters make the mistake of equating speed with scoring runs. Rajai Davis does not score many runs. The most he has ever scored in his career is 66.
Over the last three years, he has only scored 32 more runs than his stolen base total.
When drafting, we may look at a guy like Davis as stolen base relief.
When inserting him in a lineup, we are robbing a roster spot for a more skilled player. We also know, by now, that plenty of speed is available on faab.
There are judys who score (apologies to Leslie Gore) and those who don't.

If liking this post, there are a couple of examples that drafters have shared with me, that I can share with you.
If no responses, no problem there as well.

[Money]

Next on my list is only for the first 16 picks in a 15 team draft and the first 13 picks in a 12 team draft. After that all bets are off and instincts and pre determined strategy rule the day. I sure would like to have the choice of taking next on my list from the number 1 spot.

[Hells Satans]

If Gerrrit Cole is your No .1, you've already lost so who cares what you pick in Rd. 7.

[DOUGHBOYS]

If Gerrrit Cole is your No .1, you've already lost so who cares what you pick in Rd. 7.

His start would not be my cup of tea either.
But, on a DC level or satelite level, the draft is not lost. He can score 40 pitching points and still win his league.
I submit that he has put himself in a hole however.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Next on my list is only for the first 16 picks in a 15 team draft and the first 13 picks in a 12 team draft. After that all bets are off and instincts and pre determined strategy rule the day. I sure would like to have the choice of taking next on my list from the number 1 spot.

I know a fella that does this with his top 50 players. Once those 50 players are drafted, he lets the draft dictate in who to pick next. Here is a draft he sent to me

1st Round- Robinson Cano
2nd Round- Carlos Gomez
3rd Round- Jay Bruce
4th Round- Chris Sale
5th Round- David Price

Now, in it's the sixth round and he still has one 'top 50' player from his list, Jason Heyward.
I personally like the genesis of this team.
He is trying to stick to his guns in picking Heyward. At the same time, positionality is tugging at him. Filling three outfield spots with his first six picks does not appeal to him.
Ben Zobrist, Jonathon Lucroy, Sal Perez, and a dropping Ian Kinsler are there to be taken.
He knows that Kinsler has 'fallen' and would be the adp pick, but does not care for him in a Tigers uni.
Zobrist has been featured on RotoWorld in a bad way, and also doesn't think much of him.
Lucroy and Perez are positional picks, as well as picks he'll never see in the next round.
Who does he pick?

My suggestion was that he take Heyward. Screw positionality. He thought enough of Heyward to put him on his list and does not think of the others in near the same way. This would be a case where a list could be right.

[Money]

Next on my list is only for the first 16 picks in a 15 team draft and the first 13 picks in a 12 team draft. After that all bets are off and instincts and pre determined strategy rule the day. I sure would like to have the choice of taking next on my list from the number 1 spot.

I know a fella that does this with his top 50 players. Once those 50 players are drafted, he lets the draft dictate in who to pick next. Here is a draft he sent to me

1st Round- Robinson Cano
2nd Round- Carlos Gomez
3rd Round- Jay Bruce
4th Round- Chris Sale
5th Round- David Price

Now, in it's the sixth round and he still has one 'top 50' player from his list, Jason Heyward.
I personally like the genesis of this team.
He is trying to stick to his guns in picking Heyward. At the same time, positionality is tugging at him. Filling three outfield spots with his first six picks does not appeal to him.
Ben Zobrist, Jonathon Lucroy, Sal Perez, and a dropping Ian Kinsler are there to be taken.
He knows that Kinsler has 'fallen' and would be the adp pick, but does not care for him in a Tigers uni.
Zobrist has been featured on RotoWorld in a bad way, and also doesn't think much of him.
Lucroy and Perez are positional picks, as well as picks he'll never see in the next round.
Who does he pick?

My suggestion was that he take Heyward. Screw positionality. He thought enough of Heyward to put him on his list and does not think of the others in near the same way. This would be a case where a list could be right.

My first thought is that he probably had a better non OF choice when taking Bruce. That is the pick that throws this out of balance. With the choices here, he has no choice but to take Heyward. This will impact the rest of his draft. He's created an edge in OF, but the price to pay later could be significant.

[Bronx Yankees]

Great topic for a post. I found myself generally agreeing with you in the initial post - E. Cabrera or Zimmermann seemingly would be better picks than Werth given the existing roster composition.

In reading the post and subsequent replies, two issues strike me.

First, at what point do you start adding weight to "roster composition" over "best available player," and how much such weight should be added? For instance, in Round 1, you have no roster, so you clearly take the best player available. In Round 2, you have only rostered one player. While you might want a guy with some speed if your first pick primarily is a power hitter with no speed, I suspect many owners simply will take the best available player in Round 2. In your example, Round 7 is where the owner seemingly should be considering some speed/runs or an SP2 to go with a relatively weak SP1. Is this where roster composition first comes in? Others probably could argue that instead of Bautista, this team should have drafted someone like Segura or Desmond or Rios in Round 3 (if any of them were available) instead of Bautista to start creating a more balanced team. Had they done so, taking Werth over E. Cabrera in Round 7 would have been easier. But, what if this owner loves Bautista this year? There always are trade-offs. (What's better: Bautista/E. Cabrera or Segura/Werth?) In some rounds, or most rounds, you need to draft with roster composition in mind, but there will be rounds where you simply like (love?) one player that much more than any of the alternatives and if you go for the "want" player instead of the "need" player, you better get back to "need" players in subsequent rounds. There no easy or simple answer, and I can think of a number of teams that I have drafted, including one in the recent past, where I liked many of my individual selections but failed to achieve a desirable overall roster composition. Still learning, I guess.

Second, I disagree with arguments that you should not take Heyward in Round 6 of that example simply because he would be your third OF. Other than C and RP, I think positional scarcity is somewhat overrated. If I could get three OFs that collectively gave me a strong base in all five categories, or were clearly better than alternative selections, I would take them in Rounds 1-3 and worry about other positions later. If Heyward is the best selection in Round 6 and helps your team, take him. You always can load up on other positions later in the draft.

Just my two cents. Interesting topic, Dan.

Mike

[DOUGHBOYS]

For some, roster construction begins before the draft. Some will KDS, hoping for a player at a certain spot. Or even KDS for who they think will be available in other rounds. Some strategize a game plan. They don't fully know the players names, but their list may look like this...
1st round- Best Player
2nd round- Best SP
3rd round- Best 5 category player
4th round- Best Closer or Catcher
Etc, etc

Most of the time when attempting a draft that has been thought through beforehand, it comes unraveled due to a player coveted or 'best players' at a position not being near as tempting as those at another position.
Positionality plays a big part in a lot of drafters games. Some feel they are 'behind' if having three outfielders in the first six picks. The stats garnered become secondary to holes in the infield and pitching staff.
They're a little on tilt. A fourth outfielder could be the best player on the board when the next pick comes.
Most likely, he'll be bypassed to fill a positional need.
Is it the right decision?
We won't know till the season begins.

[Glenneration X]

You should be thinking roster construction from your first pick in the draft.

[Edwards Kings]

No surprise, but I agree with Glenn, but maybe in a different way. My roster construction is not about position, but stats. If I feel I need to "cheat" middle infielders, I will plan accordingly and anticipate only having 50-60 Run and/or RBI MI's. I am still focusing on roster construction, but not really concerned that I do not have a consensus top 10 in the middle.

I like the OF heavy up front. I know I am in the minority, but the pool for fourth and fifth outfielders is thin on talent to me.

Anyway, good post Dan. Nice perspective. I learned something. I can check that off my list. And by the way, if Judy HAD scored, the boy never would have gone back to Leslie. What does that tell you about Leslie?

[DOUGHBOYS]

I feel the need to add to this. There are some drafters who love their ADP. Others could give a rat's ass.
The followers of ADP say that ADP is not followed to the letter, but is a tool for draft decisions. Those that do not follow ADP, have a feel for where players should be taken and have a pr0gram that does not have them looking in at ADP much, if at all.

What about ADP itself?
It has been built through 50 round drafts. These draft and holds are entirely different than the big money drafts to come.
In 50 round drafts, we draft as in a hospital gown, always cognizant of making sure our ass is covered. In a lot of cases, positionality comes before statistics.
Fellas like Carpenter, Prado, Zobrist, and K Johnson get big boosts in 50 rounders that they won't get in 30's because versatility cannot be replaced in 50's.

Our style itself is also different. In Main Events, we'll say that a player really 'flew up the Boards'. Not necessarily so.
Last year, Bryce Harper went in the first round of many drafts after only going in a few first rounds in 50 round drafts.
He did not fly up the Boards. In drafting a 30 round draft, we are afforded to be a little more 'reckless' with our drafting.
We are more willing to tolerate an injury to a player, knowing that the faab replacement will be somebody of substance.
This player, most likely will be a better replacement than somebody drafted in the 37th round of a 50 rounder.

This year, I expect Yasiel Puig and Ryan Braun to 'fly up the boards'. Both players come with risks that are more tolerable in a 30 rounder. At best, Puig has been taken 13th in 50 rounders. I expect that to be close to the AVERAGE of where he is taken in Main Events. Braun has shown to be himself in spring training and is a more sexy pick among the 30's. I expect his average to be 6.5 for Main Events.

There is only one set ADP. Sure, we can put different time frames on it or make it 'Slow drafts' or 'all drafts'.
Either way, the 50 round influence is embedded in that ADP. It may even be called 'skewed data' for those embarking on big money drafts.
An online drafter for large events, I feel, is more prone to fall into drafting a 30 rounder as if a 50 rounder. This drafter could be stuck in seeing the same things and even if not meaning to do so, treats the draft like another 50 rounder.
The 'Live drafter' is a bit more fortunate. Different circumstances usually lead to different results.
It is up to us to figure out where.

[Money]

Dan, I believe early on in your post you're talking about experience. The guy that uses ADP as a guide simply wants to know that when his gut tells him that Tanaka belongs in the 4th round and is ready to take him there, he checks the adp and realizes that he can calculate and take him in the 6th and still probably get him. It's calculated risk and the best drafters are very good at calculating this risk. ADP is simply a tool to guide them and better calculate that risk, me included.

As players garnish more experience they don't have to check if they're too early, they simply know. I think you're at that end of the spectrum. I'm probably somewhere in the middle. Each season I become a bit more comfortable. That feel you speak of takes time.

New players not reviewing ADP during the course of a draft are doing themselves a disservice.

He might be next on my list, but hey there is a 90% chance I can get him two rounds later and each player needs to know that.

Just my 2 cents.

[DOUGHBOYS]

I get where you're coming from, Joe.
Not only does the drafter have to figure out ADP in his own way, they also have to call 'bullshit' on some of that ADP.
Some players come easy like Hamels or Iwakuma or even Kemp.
Some are not so easy.
It is not whether we 'follow' ADP or whether we don't. It is in how we look at each player ourselves.

In a way, it is a lot like Numerish and the visual. The Numerish are known to be driven by numbers, of course.
But even they put more stock in some numbers over others.
For instance, the Numerish dislike batters who swing and miss. Hardly any swing and miss hitters get love from the Numerish community. The visual have a bias against 'thumbers'. Thumbers are pitchers who don't throw hard. The visual would have more confidence in a fellow like Frieri over a guy like Jimmy Johnson.
In the end, we all do what we do. We have certain things that separate us from the next drafter. Whether it is ADP or how we arrive at an interest in a player, it is what makes every draft new and different.
And, damn it is fun, isn't it?

[Money]

It's absolutely fun Dan. For the player who follows the ADP they somewhat trust, the job at hand becomes finding their players that they think are in a prime spot, they move them up and better yet get them where the perceived value lies by the rest of the community and competition.

I apologize for the use of the word value. It could not be avoided here.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Perceived value is perfect.