NFBC Message Boards

A couple days ago there was an owner who confessed on the message board to drafting three shortstops with his first three picks of a recent DC draft. Soon, comments from other people followed, mocking him, calling it an idiotic decision. Some will say drafting 3 shortstops is a gimmick, I call it strategy.

Aren't we suppose to reward individuals who are creative and think outside the box? If I'm hiring someone for a position in my company, do I want the guy that tells me what I want to hear or the guy that has unique ideas, the one that will "go against the grain?" When I play poker, I don't like competing against the wild card. The guy who raises me out of position while holding a deuce jack poses the biggest threat to me.

I just finished a draft where an owner took three straight pitchers with his first three picks.
Then, there was another DC draft where an individual took 5 outfielders with his first five picks. Is that insane or strategic?
If the guy that drafted three straight shortstops wins the grand prize, guess what strategy many owners will start employing next year?

It's funny because you'll always hear owners commenting in the chat room about how they like this and that pick but you'll rarely ever hear a person say,"wow! I really like your draft strategy." Owners will rarely talk about their strategy, that's even if they have one.

Let's be honest. There are owners who print out an ADP and follow it throughout the draft, taking the best player on the "board." Or even worse, they just follow the default rankings. I've seen it, you've seen it.(I even witnessed one owner draft Kevin Youkilis) Most of the time those teams are dead in the water from the beginning.

Do I think drafting 3 shortstops is a good strategy? Sure.
Would I try this in one of my drafts? Yes, I already did. In one of my 2014 DC drafts, I took Hanley Ramirez, Jean Segura, and Ian Desmond with my first 3 picks.
Last year, in one of my drafts, I took 2 shortstops with my first 3 picks. It worked out pretty well as I finished in 1st Place. So, this year, I wanted to try something even more unconventional.

In my opinion, I think SS is really weak this year. I want to be solid up the middle. Look, Hanley Ramirez is 30 years old and in his contract year. He just saw his buddy Robinson Cano rake in a cool 240 million. He's no fool. He and agent have their eyes on that one HUGE contract.
Segura had monster numbers in the first half of 2013. Didn't someone once say that "once player displays a skill he owns it?"
Ian Desmond is a 20/20 player two years in a row. I'll take those numbers no matter what position he plays.

So, I'm potentially looking at 60 homeruns and 90 stolen bases from my first 3 players. Not a bad start. I'll have great depth at the SS and MI positions. The other 14 owners are now left to battle for the likes of Jimmy Rollins, Brandon Crawford, and Zack Cozart.

By the way, a word to those individuals who mocked this strategy.
Back in 2011, one particular team grabbed three of the top shortstops in a NL LABR draft. The team consisted of Greg Ambrosius and NFBC HOFer Shawn Childs. I'm pretty sure those two guys know a thing or two about draft strategy.

Krys

ikenbaseball wrote: By the way, a word to those individuals who mocked this strategy.
Back in 2011, one particular team grabbed three of the top shortstops in a NL LABR draft. The team consisted of Greg Ambrosius and NFBC HOFer Shawn Childs. I'm pretty sure those two guys know a thing or two about draft strategy.

Krys

Absolutely Greg and Shawn know a thing or two about draft strategy...of course in the league that did this they allowed trades. No small point.

Yes, others have tried this "corner the market" approach...trying to impact other teams rosters by creating scarcity. Can it work? Sure, anything like these non-traditional approaches CAN work. Would a polar bear happily accept an unscheduled (or even scheduled) proctological exam? A polar bear COULD be happy about it, but odds are against it.

Just remember, while someone is locking up SS, the other teams are locking up power hitting cornermen and outfielders, and are left with the flexibility of having an open UT spot. How much have you impacted other rosters compared to how much you have crippled yours?

So, the question becomes what is ventured and what is gained.

Any strategy can work if you pick the right players.

That said, I think the benefits of position-based scarcity drafting are more theoretical than real. You have to account for the market value of the position and players available. I think the "draft market" does a much better job of correcting for position scarcity than it does for category scarcity.

I too, threw away the Shawn/Greg argument right away. A trading league is a different animal. And even during the draft, Shawn told Greg that a Shortstop could be used for a trade....

It's not really creativity to draft three shortstops off the top of a draft. Anybody can do it. A few years ago, a drafter took two Closers with the fourth and fifth picks and was criticized. Being critical of these strategies goes with the territory. Sometimes, too much focus is made on one or two picks and not the draft as a whole.

In this case, the drafter stated that after taking Tulo, he needed to 'back him up' because of his injury history. That 'back up' usually comes with much later picks, not a second, and then a third round pick. If merely needing to back him up, Andrelton Simmons would be just as good of 'strategy' in the 10th round. At least to my way of thinking.
In the sense of it being a 'gimmick' or 'strategy, one thing remains, it'll always be poo-poo'ed. It'll be poo-poo'ed until somebody wins an Overall Championship using a similar 'gimmick' or 'strategy'.
Until then, it'll be like the Closers early or all hitting early, or all pitching early, or the punting of categories, or mostly relievers, or anything that is outside the box.
They are all capable of winning a league.
But, we all enter with a notion of competing for the Overall.
Balanced teams have held that niche for a long time.
Being creative, while maintaining a balanced team is more important than creativity, itself.

It's not textbook but a strategy is based on some level of thought and planning where the conclusion is doing it is beneficial.

A gimmick is more anecdotal -- trying something "just because" without any due diligence testing its viability.

That said, a gimmick strategy can become just strategy if it turns out doing it was in fact beneficial and led to a tangible edge as opposed to it working due to health or hitting on a later sleeper, etc.

3-stud SS could be considered strategy, however, continuing to draft more SS's of the mediocre variety at the expense of needed depth elsewhere exposed this as a flawed strategy ... generating considerable chat room discussion.

One thing I love about roto baseball is the variety of ways you can win a league, or lose a league, for that matter. I've never been a big believer in drafting for position scarcity. At least not from the top of the draft. Just as many people will essentially punt catcher, I've employed a similar strategy with 2B/SS/MI in some years. Anybody who decided to wait until round 14 to address their MI last year had options like Segura, Carpenter, Lowrie and Murphy available to them. Not to mention buy low veterans like Hanley and Utley who fell as low as round 10 in some drafts. The nice thing about using later round picks is you can be on the lookout for upgrades from the start of the year, not after you've stared in disbelief at Starlin Castro for a couple hundred excruciating ABs.

I got into trouble using this strategy a few years ago by unofficially declaring that all my MI spots would be filled by "cheap speed." Well, as we all know, cheap speed is cheap for good reasons. Primary among them, the inability to hit, physical frailty, managers being fickle about playing time or stingy with green lights.

Lately, I've approached MI in a similar fashion to the way I look at closers. I try to get one impact player, one solid but undervalued guy and one late rounder with upside. Making my impact guy Castro a couple times last year made me wish I was using the other strategy I mentioned, but I realize I would have been perfectly content with my choices if I had wound up with Pedroia, Desmond or Kipnis filling that impact guy role. As Hells Satan's said, "Any strategy can work if you pick the right players."

Thank you for your feedback and opinions. Good luck with your teams this season.

Krys