SOSH Real Fantasy Draft 2014: Draft Order, Rules, and Draft Thread

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,363
I like Manny, I really do and I was thinking about picking him with my first round pick. I was fucking shocked how much of his value was tied to defense though, at least according to Fangraphs.
 

ForceAtHome

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2008
4,011
Maine
MakMan44 said:
I like Manny, I really do and I was thinking about picking him with my first round pick. I was fucking shocked how much of his value was tied to defense though, at least according to Fangraphs.
 
Player A: .283/.314/.432/.746
Player B: .250/.307/.432/.739
 
Machado is Player A and Player B is Josh Hamilton's atrocious 2013. That being said, there are tons of things to like about Machado. He's is 21 years old. And Machado plays elite defense at a premium position like 3B. And he can also play SS. But yeah, as of now, a ton of Machado's value is tied to his youth/projection and defense. He also started last year really well and then cooled off significantly.
 
Apr/May/Jun (379 PA): .321/.350/.489/.839
Jul/Aug/Sep (331 PA): .239/.272/.366/.638
 

Frank Fenway

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2009
5,339
San Jose, CA
The Best Catch in 100 Years said:
Good pick. Would have definitely taken him over Hanley, for one.
 
He had major knee surgery and could have complications down the line. 
 
And yes I understand Hanley's injury history. I just view Hanley as being a better bat over the next three years. And seriously, Machado's knee injury was horrible. 
 

keninten

New Member
Nov 24, 2005
588
Tennessee
The knee is what scares me the most. It`s his 51 doubles at 21 years old. If he grows a little more he could be a monster bat.
 

Frank Fenway

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2009
5,339
San Jose, CA
keninten said:
The knee is what scares me the most. It`s his 51 doubles at 21 years old. If he grows a little more he could be a monster bat.
 
There's only a 16.2% chance he has complications, according to this study on medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction in young patients.
 

Scoops Bolling

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2007
5,874
Machado is an interesting case, and I'm definitely happy I didn't have to make that decision. Definitely a high risk/high reward type selection.
 

Rich Garces Belly

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2009
340
I really like the Manny Machado pick and I was leaning towards him at 13 if Goldschmidt was gone, I would play him at shortstop though.  The first half last year he had a real chance to break the doubles record, then tailed off.  This is what is fun with this exercise, I do not consider Machado a dominant player, but when he moves to shortstop and can replicate those offensive numbers he easily becomes one and he is only entering his age 21 season.  I think that as he matures a lot of those doubles will become home runs as well.  Great pick (assuming he is your shortstop).
 

Fishercat

Svelte and sexy!
SoSH Member
May 18, 2007
8,266
Manchester, N.H.
I don't really mind Machado there, but I am thinking there are a couple guys still on the board I'd rather take my chances on with a first round pick (well, at least one for sure).
 

Rich Garces Belly

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2009
340
Fishercat said:
I don't really mind Machado there, but I am thinking there are a couple guys still on the board I'd rather take my chances on with a first round pick (well, at least one for sure).
 
I believe I know who you are talking about and I would agree with that.
 

Rich Garces Belly

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2009
340
MakMan44 said:
I think it's pretty insane that's it's only the first round and we've only had one pick in nearly 48 hours.
 
Mak Im sure you remember that last year the first couple rounds flew by then it got slower as the draft went on, I also remember during the February blizzard a lot of picks were made, so I am holding out hope that in the storm tonight/tomorrow a lot of people will make some picks, otherwise this will be going on until August and won't be nearly as fun.
 

terrisus

formerly: imgran
SoSH Member
Seriously.
 
So, knucklecup was PMed at 12:08PM yesterday and told he could make his pick. Is it finally my turn at 12:08PM, or do I wait 24 hours from when keninten made his taxi pick at 11:57PM last night, or do we wait until 11:57PM passes and then have another 24 hours for either keninten or soxfan121 or someone made a taxi squad pick for knucklecup?
 
I'm starting to think it will never actually be my turn.
All this waiting just to draft Nick Punto.
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,363
Well I edited my comment out because I knew what I was signing up for. If I didn't like the 24 clock I shouldn't have agreed to it.

As for terri, I have no clue man. My gut says the clock reset to 11:57 last night but I'll defer to whatever scoops says.
 

Fishercat

Svelte and sexy!
SoSH Member
May 18, 2007
8,266
Manchester, N.H.
The thing that is most interesting about this first round, at least compared to last year, is how different the risk tolerance is.
 
I cannot go too deep with consideration to the rule about not talking about unpicked players, but looking back at last year's draft, you didn't see a ton of high-risk players in the first round. Certainly, there were some a year or so off of traumatic injury and definitely some who had/have injury questions or consistency issues, but even one of the rawest players chosen in that Top 30 still had a year of MLB time or so on Manny Machado, Jose Fernandez, or Yasiel Puig, who had great rookie/post-rookie campaigns but do have some real game-based questions to them.
 
It seems like owners, at least early on, are aiming for the (justifiably) high ceilings of some guys who would have dropped a bit more last year. Even Tulo went seven slots higher than he did last year, after 3/4 of a great season, and we've discussed CarGo's jump. Last year, you had to wait until the second half of the first round to really see players go who had notable possibilities of dropping off a cliff, not living up to a huge year, or who had notable risk attached to them.
 
None of this is a judgment really, I just think it's kind of interesting to see the type of a shift a single year can have, especially when there are players falling who actually did have really good years in 2013. 
 

terrisus

formerly: imgran
SoSH Member
MakMan44 said:
Well I edited my comment out because I knew what I was signing up for. If I didn't like the 24 clock I shouldn't have agreed to it.

As for terri, I have no clue man. My gut says the clock reset to 11:57 last night but I'll defer to whatever scoops says.
 
It's not that I'm objecting to the 24-hour clock, that's perfectly fine.
 
Just, it sucks when the person who's up doesn't pick within that 24 hours, and then we have to try to figure out what to do and wait even longer.
And for that to happen twice in a row sucks even more.
 
EDIT: I sent Scoops a PM mentioning these posts to see if we can get a ruling. Otherwise, I guess I'll just wait some more.
 

Why Not Grebeck?

New Member
Feb 29, 2008
378
With the draft moving as slowly as it is, I've decided to write a bit about my team:
 
The Los Angeles area already has two baseball teams. It does not need a third. With the Angels representing the sprawling San Gabriel Valley and the Dodgers playing close to downtown, most native Angelinos already have a deep rooting interest. The battle lines have been in place since the early 1960s.
 
That is about to change.
 
When outgoing commissioner Selig announced that the league would be expanding in 2014, franchise proposals came in fast and furious. Both San Antonio and Austin made a strong push but were ultimately noncompetitive. Portland, Oregon could not raise any public funds for the domed stadium that would be needed in the pacific northwest. Local political upheaval in Nashville scuttled efforts in Tennessee. In the end, it came down to a crowd-sourced, local effort in Brooklyn, New York and an undisclosed corporate bid from northern Los Angeles. After a brief legal fight with Dodgers ownership over the territorial rights to the San Fernando Valley, Selig followed the money.
 
The new ownership in LA was a tight association of television studio bosses and land developers. They had already parceled out a large plot for the stadium in Sun Valley, a northern neighborhood in LA's San Fernando Valley in desperate need of gentrification. Real estate in the area is cheap (by LA standards) and the new team had already begun buying up most of the scrapyards and older Hispanic-owned homes in the area. By 2020, the entire area around the stadium is slated to be developed in a 'new urban' style, complete with a self-contained light rail, faux brick row houses, and the new corporate headquarters for Warner Brothers, who retain stadium naming rights in perpetuity along with the entire block of luxury boxes behind home plate. Until the park opens for the 2015 season, home games will be played alternately in Dodger Stadium and Angels Stadium of Anaheim.
 
The name of the team was put up to public vote. To the embarrassment of ownership, "LA Valley Girls" was an early favorite and was pulled from the website after the first three days of voting with no explanation. The team was ultimately named The Burbank Bombers after the area's rich aerospace history, and also to piss off the Yankees. It also continued the baffling SoCal trend of naming teams after places they where they aren't actually located. 
 
While it is expected to take a while for the native locals to embrace the new team, film and television professionals in the Burbank/North Hollywood/Sherman Oaks area as well as suburban sports fans from Santa Clarita, Northridge, Simi Valley, and Thousand Oaks that cannot fight the traffic to Dodger Stadium will be expected to drive revenue and interest. This combined area is both large enough and wealthy enough to support a team. Of course, it remains to be seen if they show up before the start of the third inning.
 
Ownership has given its rookie GM a clear mandate and strategy that will be revealed after the expansion draft.   
 

Just a bit outside

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 6, 2011
7,940
Monument, CO
Fishercat said:
The thing that is most interesting about this first round, at least compared to last year, is how different the risk tolerance is.
 
I cannot go too deep with consideration to the rule about not talking about unpicked players, but looking back at last year's draft, you didn't see a ton of high-risk players in the first round. Certainly, there were some a year or so off of traumatic injury and definitely some who had/have injury questions or consistency issues, but even one of the rawest players chosen in that Top 30 still had a year of MLB time or so on Manny Machado, Jose Fernandez, or Yasiel Puig, who had great rookie/post-rookie campaigns but do have some real game-based questions to them.
 
It seems like owners, at least early on, are aiming for the (justifiably) high ceilings of some guys who would have dropped a bit more last year. Even Tulo went seven slots higher than he did last year, after 3/4 of a great season, and we've discussed CarGo's jump. Last year, you had to wait until the second half of the first round to really see players go who had notable possibilities of dropping off a cliff, not living up to a huge year, or who had notable risk attached to them.
 
None of this is a judgment really, I just think it's kind of interesting to see the type of a shift a single year can have, especially when there are players falling who actually did have really good years in 2013.
The decision to go with very young, high risk/reward players over more established veterans is interesting because it gives insight into how each person views being a gm.  I know with the number 2 pick it came down to McCutchen or Harper.  I decided to go with McCutchen and one of the main reasons was I was looking at having a winning team for 5 years.  I decided that I am not the gm of an expansion team and wanted to win in that window.  The alternative is taking the view as you are starting an organization from scratch and want to build for the next 15 years.  If I took that stance I would have drafted Harper.  This pick does not guarantee that McCutchen will be better than Harper for the next 5 years but I thought there was more variability in Harper, risk/reward, vs consistency with McCutchen.
 
With that in my mind, I disagree with some of the picks that have been made.  I would not have chosen Machado because he is so young, coming off an injury, and has low obp skills.  In 5 years he may increase hip obp skills and be the best player in baseball, I just don't see it in the next couple of years.
 

Moosey

Mooseyed Farvin
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
4,214
CT
I was amazed last time at how high pitchers started going and that really has not changed this year.  I am not disputing how good some of the pitchers are but I am personally scared off from choosing them high in the first due to my perception of the increased volatility in the position.
 

Why Not Grebeck?

New Member
Feb 29, 2008
378
Taking pitching early is interesting. Useful position players dry up WAY faster, and there's a much bigger chance your early round pitcher is going to end up being useless in three years than any hitter.
 
At the same time, we all saw in the playoffs this year just how crucial it is to have someone you can trust at the top of your rotation. Even the best offenses are going to be held down by a great 1-2 punch. With wild card play-in games now, I think having an ace is even more important than ever before - especially someone you can count on to go deep into games year in, year out.  
 

MakMan44

stole corsi's dream
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2009
19,363
I'd have to look at the chart (on mobile right now) but I really think that Kershaw is the only pitcher that I would agree is a sure fire first round pick.
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
Why Not Grebeck? said:
Taking pitching early is interesting. Useful position players dry up WAY faster, and there's a much bigger chance your early round pitcher is going to end up being useless in three years than any hitter.
 
At the same time, we all saw in the playoffs this year just how crucial it is to have someone you can trust at the top of your rotation. Even the best offenses are going to be held down by a great 1-2 punch. With wild card play-in games now, I think having an ace is even more important than ever before - especially someone you can count on to go deep into games year in, year out.  
 
The question, as it was last year, is where is the line between that kind of pitcher and the guys in the next tier (very good but not elite) who are not likely to be more valuable than the best position players around.  Of course approach is once again an important factor and if a team is focusing on drafting a young roster that can grow in the coming years, that risk tolerance will have to be greater than in a team that is looking to compete right now.
 
It's definitely been interesting to see this first round develop so far, especially when compared to last year.  I know how I would be building my team if I was doing this again.  Of course, my team from last year did far worse than I was expecting, so what do I know? :)
 

PrometheusWakefield

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2009
10,441
Boston, MA
The lesson I learned from my team last year is don't bet on pitchers with high potential but injury concerns.  The team that rolls the dice with Brett Anderson this year will not be me.
 
It would be interesting to see an effort to quantify the difference in range of outcomes between pitchers and hitters and between players with an established level of performance versus younger players who have less depth to their MLB statistics but are at a better point on the aging curve.  I think people underestimate the fact that all players are risks of some degree.  Josh Hamilton and Albert Pujols would once have been on lists of sure things.  
 

Snodgrass'Muff

oppresses WARmongers
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2008
27,644
Roanoke, VA
PrometheusWakefield said:
The lesson I learned from my team last year is don't bet on pitchers with high potential but injury concerns.  The team that rolls the dice with Brett Anderson this year will not be me.
 
It would be interesting to see an effort to quantify the difference in range of outcomes between pitchers and hitters and between players with an established level of performance versus younger players who have less depth to their MLB statistics but are at a better point on the aging curve.  I think people underestimate the fact that all players are risks of some degree.  Josh Hamilton and Albert Pujols would once have been on lists of sure things.  
 
Hell, Pujols was drafted 24th last year and Hamilton 38th.  Both were considered very good bets by last year's GM's.  It'll be interesting to see where they go this year.
 

Scoops Bolling

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2007
5,874
Sorry for then delayed response y'all, I'm in Indonesia and my current lodgings are devoid of American chargers so I'm now operating on my tablet only. Knucklecup's time has expired, terrisus, you are up.

For future reference, the clock resets immediately upon the last pick being made, and if a team is skipped, the new team on the clock gets 24 hours from when the prior team was skipped, I.e., 48 hours from the last pick.
 

terrisus

formerly: imgran
SoSH Member
Well, that was quite the wait. But, it was worth it. It's not often in a draft that, at Pick 20, you get a chance to select someone who was a ROY coming up, has won a Cy Young and MVP Award (take that, Pedro!), and will still only be 31 at the start of next season.
 
Justin Verlander (SP1)
 

 
And, he gives a pretty mean dugout interview as well.
 
 
PMed BigMike
 

Why Not Grebeck?

New Member
Feb 29, 2008
378
Verlander, eh? His best days are almost certainly behind him, and he wasn't great for long stretches in 2013. His 2012 was otherworldly, though, and he looked great in the playoffs to finish the year. I suppose he could be seen as something of a 'buy low,' but it's the 20th overall pick so what is low, exactly?
 
At first I thought his fastball decline was the problem, but it looks like movement issues with his secondary stuff was more of an issue. Here's an interesting article about it: http://www.baseballprof.com/2013/08/justin-verlanders-declining-skills/
 
I'm pretty sure there are at least 5 or 6 other pitchers I'd have taken over him, though they all have risks.
 

terrisus

formerly: imgran
SoSH Member
I was thinking of going another direction (and yes, I do know the player that has been alluded to a couple of times through earlier posts as surprised he's dropped so low), but I know Verlander wouldn't slip back to my next turn, especially with a couple pitchers gone already, and I wanted someone to anchor my staff for the next 5-7 years.
 

Moosey

Mooseyed Farvin
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
4,214
CT
Snodgrass'Muff said:
 
The question, as it was last year, is where is the line between that kind of pitcher and the guys in the next tier (very good but not elite) who are not likely to be more valuable than the best position players around.  Of course approach is once again an important factor and if a team is focusing on drafting a young roster that can grow in the coming years, that risk tolerance will have to be greater than in a team that is looking to compete right now.
 
It's definitely been interesting to see this first round develop so far, especially when compared to last year.  I know how I would be building my team if I was doing this again.  Of course, my team from last year did far worse than I was expecting, so what do I know? :)
 
PM your thoughts to me when it rolls back around towards me Snod.  That way I have plausible deniability when I suck again.
 
Actually, my team last year ended up better than I thought considering Hart never played, but it surprised me in that bullpen ended up being a strength while my lineup was anemic.
 
Interestingly when making my picks last year I looked at easily 4 times the information on my position players.  Now I have a thoughtful exercise in that I am going to go with the same bullpen logic this year and see how it pans out.
 
Also, and less politely now that I have been drinking, all you people taking pitchers are crazy.  =)
 

Rich Garces Belly

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2009
340
Why Not Grebeck? said:
Verlander, eh? His best days are almost certainly behind him, and he wasn't great for long stretches in 2013. His 2012 was otherworldly, though, and he looked great in the playoffs to finish the year. I suppose he could be seen as something of a 'buy low,' but it's the 20th overall pick so what is low, exactly?
 
At first I thought his fastball decline was the problem, but it looks like movement issues with his secondary stuff was more of an issue. Here's an interesting article about it: http://www.baseballprof.com/2013/08/justin-verlanders-declining-skills/
 
I'm pretty sure there are at least 5 or 6 other pitchers I'd have taken over him, though they all have risks.
I agree and its not that it's a bad pick, its just that there is still a couple elite bats available and I wonder what the difference in pitching between the 20th and their 2nd/3rd round pick would be after 2/3 seasons.  I did not pick a starting pitcher until the 3rd round last year and I am very happy with how that worked out for me, especially taking Matt Harvey in the 4th.  I think Verlander even coming off an off year last year is still a good pick, but I would always take the elite bat in this situation as pitching is a lot deeper.
 

BigMike

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Sep 26, 2000
23,244
I guess I will go with the safe and sensible choice.  A middle of the order bat, playing a hard to get position, right in the beginning of his prime years, and just a guy who has delivered whenever healthy
 
Evan Longoria 3B
 
 

Fishercat

Svelte and sexy!
SoSH Member
May 18, 2007
8,266
Manchester, N.H.
That took long enough, cripes. Was Top 10 last year, was 7th ranked in Fangraphs WAR for hitters last year, had a full healthy season, is still reasonably young, and plays in a position that was hell to find talent in in the draft last year. Even with the emergence of a couple guys, that depth chart gets UGLY as you go lower.
 
If Longoria went 6th I wouldn't have blinked, he's a complete steal there at 20.
 

Moosey

Mooseyed Farvin
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
4,214
CT
Fishercat said:
That took long enough, cripes. Was Top 10 last year, was 7th ranked in Fangraphs WAR for hitters last year, had a full healthy season, is still reasonably young, and plays in a position that was hell to find talent in in the draft last year. Even with the emergence of a couple guys, that depth chart gets UGLY as you go lower.
 
If Longoria went 6th I wouldn't have blinked, he's a complete steal there at 20.
 
Agreed on all fronts, and was on my short list at 6 incidentally.  He gave me more pause than Stanton before I selected Posey.
 

Frank Fenway

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2009
5,339
San Jose, CA
Just white knuckled the Boston-Providence commute, sat in front of the PC and cracked open an IPA. 
 
Time to live dangerously. 
 
Hanley Ramirez will have a higher OPS, ISO, wRC+ and wOBA than Longo in 2014. 
 

Frank Fenway

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2009
5,339
San Jose, CA
Fishercat said:
I mean, that's technically true for 2013 too. I wouldn't take his 2013 over Longo's though.
 
Stop using logic to defeat me. 
 
Edit for BBWAA:
 
Whose team made the playoffs? 
 
Extra Edit:
 
I'm insane, the Rays were in the damn playoffs. 
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,900
Alexandria, VA
BoredViewer said:
Freddie Freeman.
 
He's really, really good and only 24.
Note for the future: Please post positions with your picks--Freddie's a 1B, but as we get into later rounds I don't want to be looking things up or guessing whether player X is going in your LF or RF.
 

The Tax Man

really digs the Beatles
SoSH Member
Jun 8, 2009
735
Mansfield, MA
There's a few starting pitchers I like and I almost went that route.  However, I decided to go for the elusive middle of the order power bat.  The 27 year old gold glover lead all of MLB with 53 homers, was third in OPS+, and 24th in OBP.  He only just put his skills together in 2012 during his 26 year old season, but I have high hopes that the plate discipline isn't a fluke and the homer regression isn't too drastic. 
 
The new starting 1B for They'll Certainly Screw Ya
 
Chris Davis
 
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
FarvinMoosey said:
 
PM your thoughts to me when it rolls back around towards me Snod.  That way I have plausible deniability when I suck again.
 
Actually, my team last year ended up better than I thought considering Hart never played, but it surprised me in that bullpen ended up being a strength while my lineup was anemic.
 
Interestingly when making my picks last year I looked at easily 4 times the information on my position players.  Now I have a thoughtful exercise in that I am going to go with the same bullpen logic this year and see how it pans out.
 
Also, and less politely now that I have been drinking, all you people taking pitchers are crazy.  =)
 
Oh favorite avatared poster of mine, when will you learn? You can get an excellent bullpen if you don't draft an RP until round 15 and don't draft the majority of them until Round 20 and after. There is nothing, NOTHING more overvalued or overrated as relief pitching. 
 
The Best Catch in 100 Years said:
What is knucklecup's deal? He has been on since the skip. Should soxfan121 take over?
 
I have no interest in knucklecup's sloppy seconds, as they are often thirds or fourths. And I'm not a long-term take-over option - I can come in, make a few picks, help out someone with some unbiased advice but I don't want to participate in 24 more rounds of terrisus whining about how long it takes someone to pick. 
 
Y'all need to chill the fuck out. This is SUPPOSED to take four more months. Cristiano Ronaldo, anything to add?
 

Moosey

Mooseyed Farvin
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
4,214
CT
soxfan121 said:
 
Oh favorite avatared poster of mine, when will you learn? You can get an excellent bullpen if you don't draft an RP until round 15 and don't draft the majority of them until Round 20 and after. There is nothing, NOTHING more overvalued or overrated as relief pitching. 
 
 
You made me go look at last year's chart and that is essentially what I did.  Who knew?  Well, I guess you did.  Chances are my bullpen effectiveness was pure shit luck.
 
Hoping for a repeat, somewhere in the round 15-25 range.  ;-)
 

Eck'sSneakyCheese

Member
SoSH Member
May 11, 2011
10,392
NH
I went RP early last year and while injuries were an issue, I don't think I did half bad. I will agree though that I could've waited and most relievers are overrated. There are a few guys that may be worth an early flier but for the most part it's probably better to wait.
 

terrisus

formerly: imgran
SoSH Member
Yeah, I mean, I drafted the 2nd RP taken in Papelbon (9th round), and also had Rafael Soriano (16th) and Huston Street (17th round), and they all had good seasons, and I still only got 3.4 bWAR between the three of them. 
 
 
soxfan121 said:
I have no interest in knucklecup's sloppy seconds, as they are often thirds or fourths. And I'm not a long-term take-over option - I can come in, make a few picks, help out someone with some unbiased advice but I don't want to participate in 24 more rounds of terrisus whining about how long it takes someone to pick. 
 
Y'all need to chill the fuck out. This is SUPPOSED to take four more months. Cristiano Ronaldo, anything to add?
 
Hey now, I didn't complain about how long it took anyone to pick - I complained about people missing picks entirely. The two people before me still haven't posted for their pick at all - one ended up going to a taxi member, and the other pick is still empty. I don't mind waiting at all, but people missing picks sucks.