Glenneration X wrote:DOUGHBOYS wrote:Glenneration X wrote: The biggest lightning rod of all being Shandler. I'm not sure why.
What is wrong is the timing. He struck while the iron was cold.
And it's certainly not right for the experienced fantasy player.
It appeals to the Yahoo Kids.
Doughy, this is one of the issues I have with this thread. I highlighted just two parts of your post to make this last point.
I believe many here criticizing Shandler's article are looking at it from the narrow prism of an NFBC-er's eye. From that context, those who drafted Trout are stuck with him, for better or for worse. Therefore the Shandler article serves no benefit and appears only as an "I told you so" statement to those who play within the NFBC format.
However, while there may be thousands who play in the NFBC, there are millions who play fantasy baseball in other leagues and formats. The vast majority of those formats are trading leagues. While you say the timing is wrong and the iron is cold, that's only for leagues without trading like the NFBC. For those with trading, the timing is right and the iron is still very hot. As someone who used to play in trading leagues, now is the time you'd have to make the decision on whether to put Trout on the market to get full value. If he continues to regress as Shandler believes he will, his trading value regresses as well.
Shandler made his points on Trout before one game was played and Trout was the apple of everyone's draft eye. He gave us something to think about, whether we followed the advice or not. This is not jumping on the bandwagon after the train has already left the station (mixing of metaphors? sorry for that.
). He's reiterating his point now for many a player who still has an opportunity to trade Trout or trade for him, again giving them something to think about.
There are many experienced players who don't play the NFBC. I never even heard of the contest before the day I joined in 2009. Every fantasy article can't be geared towards the small fraction who play here. Some experienced players elsewhere may appreciate some thought evoking advice.
Your right, Glenn. And this morning I wrote a post mostly to remind myself that Shandler and others do not write for an NFBC'ers benefit, but for the myriad of other fantasy players.
We are under the NFBC Dome.
No trading allowed.
15 TEAMS premium.
12 TEAMS acceptable
10 TEAMS or less to be mocked. Pun not intended.
It is this reason why we separate ourselves from writers such as Ron. They write for the masses and when we see an article like the one on Trout, we take it personally.
We feel it is 'beneath him' to contrast a year's worth of stats to one month's.
But Shandler may see this as a help to 'traders' or other leagues where others play.
At the same time, it puts more space between Shandler's etchings and NFBC'ers. A space that seems to widen each year and I believe that is the reason why the 'Experts threads' spring up every once in awhile.
Fantasy baseball has become so splintered with different rules, different leagues, and different types, that a fantasy writer is very relevant for some, and not so for others.
I have to remember that.
Just an edit to this post-
Fantasy baseball has become so large. We have auctions. We have snakes. Leagues with anywhere from 6 to 15 teams.
Points, head to head, roto.
Trading. No trading. FAAB. No FAAB. Daily, biweekly, weekly moves.
Daily Leagues. Yearly leagues. Half year leagues.
It goes on and on.
Yet, we still have writers that do not write to specific leagues. They are all generalized.
Maybe the next step for fantasy baseball will be writers that specialize in certain facets or leagues of fantasy baseball. Instead of trying to please the masses and making the masses fit their square writings into their needed round hole.
