Would you guys ever accept this fantasy baseball trade?

[tucker342]

I Trade
Beltran, Carlos
Eckstein, David
Garcia, Freddy
Maddux, Greg
Randa, Joe
Walker, Larry



I Recieve
Chavez, Eric
Garciaparra, Nomar

[TroyF]

No.

TroyF

[Fonzie]

Nope.

[General Mike]

I might If I had a really shitty bench, and didn't mind cutting people.

[QuikSand]

*ever* is a tough word...

[vtbub]

Only if you are trying to lose

[sterlingice]

If you really like losing or are in a league with only 2 active teams and you have one that is really good in all but 3B and SS.

SI

[Blackadar]

Hell no.

[QuikSand]

My point earlier is that the size of the league really matters when judging players like 3-4 out of the six you mention. If this is something like 10 teams, mixed AL&NL, then players like Eckstein, Garcia and Rand have zero value. So then, this becomes a much simpler deal - two or three players and a heap of junk for two players. Not quite so lopsided.

[kcchief19]

Exactly.

[bosshogg23]

You are trading too many good players at a low value. Maddux has his stats skewed from his first few starts, Larry Walker hasnt hit to his potential and Beltran was injured for awhile. Garcia may or may not recover, but still has value to most people.

[Fonzie]

Originally posted by QuikSand
My point earlier is that the size of the league really matters when judging players like 3-4 out of the six you mention. If this is something like 10 teams, mixed AL&NL, then players like Eckstein, Garcia and Rand have zero value. So then, this becomes a much simpler deal - two or three players and a heap of junk for two players. Not quite so lopsided.

As usual, Quiksand provides an astute response, which necessitates a caveat to my earlier "nope" reply. If you play in a league like Quiksand describes this trade will make sense (to me, at least) only under the following conditions:

1) Randa and Eckstein are your starters at 3B and SS, and you're looking at upgrading those positions, and;
2) You have a surplus of outfielders (Beltran would be especially hard to give up in 5 x 5 leagues), and;
3) You have at least a mild surplus at SP. If your league counts strikeouts, then Maddux is less of a loss.

Hope this helps. Good luck!

[Chief Rum]

Once again, "ever" is harder to judge, but ina normal circumstance and league, no way in hell. That's a crapload of talent for two players.

Chief Rum

[Radii]

Originally posted by QuikSand
My point earlier is that the size of the league really matters when judging players like 3-4 out of the six you mention. If this is something like 10 teams, mixed AL&NL, then players like Eckstein, Garcia and Rand have zero value. So then, this becomes a much simpler deal - two or three players and a heap of junk for two players. Not quite so lopsided.

I would question that Eckstein has zero value under any circumstances. He's currently floating between 8th-12th among major league shortstops in hits and OBP (which my league values greatly) and he's off to a slow start(only batting .250 right now). He also is tied for the lead w/ Rafael Furcal for steals from a shortstop so far. He's not a power hitter and his slugging pct is very low right now but I think he's worthy of a starting spot in almost any fantasy league.

Chavez is only hitting .262 right now and his career average is only .275. He's got 30 homers in the past couple of years, but 30 homers doesn't mean as much as it used to. Joe Randa's career average is higher than Chavez's, but you're getting a lot more power with Chavez.


I am finding it very hard to fathom any possible league situation where this would be a good trade.

Perhaps the upgrades of Chavez and Nomar for Randa and Eckstein would justify sending over Larry Walker... though Walker has been a consistantly great player the past few years. Are you sure you're getting enough of an improvement at 3B and SS to give up Walker?

I understand the concept of never say never... but this is pretty dang close.

[Ramzavail]

Id never do that trade.

You are trading 2 allstar OFs and 2 #1 Starting pitchers...just for an improvement in SS and 3b, sure its a big improvement, but if its fantasy baseball, odds are...pitching means alot in your league, therefore, pitching is at a premium and you are dealing 2 #1 pitchers and getting no pitchers back in return.

[tucker342]

Besides Maddux, no one else even really played. Those are my only weak positions.

[tucker342]

Originally posted by Radii
I would question that Eckstein has zero value under any circumstances. He's currently floating between 8th-12th among major league shortstops in hits and OBP (which my league values greatly) and he's off to a slow start(only batting .250 right now). He also is tied for the lead w/ Rafael Furcal for steals from a shortstop so far. He's not a power hitter and his slugging pct is very low right now but I think he's worthy of a starting spot in almost any fantasy league.

I'm playing on Yahoo, in my league, we don't even keep track of OBP and hits.

[tucker342]

I guess it doesn't really matter now, cause the trade didn't go through.

[tucker342]

which is probably a good thing......

[Radii]

Originally posted by tucker342
I'm playing on Yahoo, in my league, we don't even keep track of OBP and hits.

Which stats do you guys use? I'm in a private league where we argue for weeks before the season how to make the individual's accomplishments count the most, and we try to discount any stats that depend on other players around you. Thus, no runs, no RBIs, no wins for pitchers, etc. So on offense we use Hits/HR/SB/OBP/SLG, on defense CG/K/SV/ERA/WHIP. CG is always the crappy one, but there's no other good pitching stat really. It's an interesting league usually, though not perfect I'm sure

[bigdawg2003]

If I need a 3rd closer and have Magglio, Shawn Green, Kearns, and Andruw Jones, is Green for Urbina and Cruz a good deal for me?

[SackAttack]

Originally posted by Radii
Which stats do you guys use? I'm in a private league where we argue for weeks before the season how to make the individual's accomplishments count the most, and we try to discount any stats that depend on other players around you. Thus, no runs, no RBIs, no wins for pitchers, etc. So on offense we use Hits/HR/SB/OBP/SLG, on defense CG/K/SV/ERA/WHIP. CG is always the crappy one, but there's no other good pitching stat really. It's an interesting league usually, though not perfect I'm sure

Why not walks for hitters? That'd reward the patient fellas, although you might need a Bonds exception there.

On defense, I tend to think ERA is more dependent upon the defense behind the pitcher than on the pitcher himself. Look at a guy like Maddux, doesn't strike many guys out, so most of his outs come with a ball in play. If he has the Mets' defense, say, behind him, one of two things is gonna happen: either he's going to give up more earned runs than usual because he's relying on a weak defense to get the job done, or he's going to give up fewer earned runs because the sheer number of errors committed will prevent the runs scored from counting against him.

K/SV/WHIP are all good. what about BA against and OBP against? I wouldn't think they'd be any more difficult to award points for than WHIP would be, and I'd imagine they're at least as relevant.

[oykib]

I'd award for OBP, SLG, and OPS. I think that gives OBP and SLG 1.5 times the value of the other stats. That's a good thing. Thos two correlate most with winning.

Oh, and where the hell is Runs on your list? They are somewhat more context dependant than SB. But they are about a million times more indicative of ability.

You look at the list of Stolen Base leaders and you wind up with half the guys being Juan Pierre and Roger Cedeno types. The guys who lead in runs are very nearly all the best players in the game.

[SackAttack]

Originally posted by oykib
I'd award for OBP, SLG, and OPS. I think that gives OBP and SLG 1.5 times the value of the other stats. That's a good thing. Thos two correlate most with winning.

Oh, and where the hell is Runs on your list? They are somewhat more context dependant than SB. But they are about a million times more indicative of ability.

OBP is a great thing, but in and of itself, it's useless. Consider the following slightly outlandish example: leadoff man reaches base, #2 man reaches base, #3 guy GDP's, #4 guy makes out somehow. That's a .500 OBP, but you still haven't scored. SLG is, IMO, a stronger indicator of potential success. Look at the A's - Billy Beane has built that club around OBP, but they struggle come playoff time, because they can't deliver the hits when they get the men in scoring position.

As for Runs, that's also a teammate-dependent stat, which I believe his league is trying to avoid. A guy like Dave Roberts is a jackrabbit on the basepaths, but unless his teammates bring him home, he's probably not going to score much.

Josh

[oykib]

Originally posted by SackAttack
OBP is a great thing, but in and of itself, it's useless. Consider the following slightly outlandish example: leadoff man reaches base, #2 man reaches base, #3 guy GDP's, #4 guy makes out somehow. That's a .500 OBP, but you still haven't scored. SLG is, IMO, a stronger indicator of potential success. Look at the A's - Billy Beane has built that club around OBP, but they struggle come playoff time, because they can't deliver the hits when they get the men in scoring position.

As for Runs, that's also a teammate-dependent stat, which I believe his league is trying to avoid. A guy like Dave Roberts is a jackrabbit on the basepaths, but unless his teammates bring him home, he's probably not going to score much.

Josh

Actually OBP is slightly more valuable than Slugging. If guys get on base t a high clip, then they are also not making outs. That gives the other players on the team more chances. It's really only of marginally more utility than SLG, though.

Btw, your example is a bit absurd. Leadoff hitter hits a triple. Next guy hits a would-be sac fly, but the runner is thrown out at home. Next guy sinlges. Next guy doubles with the lead runner being held at third. Next guy lines to third and the lead runner is doubled off. Threre's a SLG of over 1.000 with no runs to show for it.

The point is that if your team's got an impressive OBP or SLG percentage, then they are going to score a lot of runs in the long run. But playoff series are the short run. The A's have lost in the playoffs because they are short series, where anything can happen. Also, they have run into good pitching. Good pitchers don't walk opposing batters and good pitchers don't give up many homeruns.

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by SackAttack
Why not walks for hitters? That'd reward the patient fellas, although you might need a Bonds exception there.

We had walks and IBB in my league last year. It was only 6 teams, but I had Bonds, Berkman, Giles and Thome on that team. Thems a lot of walks (unfortunately on the flip side, we also had Hits and Singles as stats )

[Radii]

Originally posted by SackAttack
Why not walks for hitters? That'd reward the patient fellas, although you might need a Bonds exception there.

K/SV/WHIP are all good. what about BA against and OBP against? I wouldn't think they'd be any more difficult to award points for than WHIP would be, and I'd imagine they're at least as relevant.

OPS isn't available in yahoo leagues, or else I'm sure that would be used instead of OBP and SLG and we'd have another batting stat to play with.

For the pitchers, BA against and OBP against aren't stats yahoo will track and allow in its leagues. We rather begrudgingly end up settling on CG as our 5th pitching stat because there just isn't much there. I definitely agree, BA against would be great.

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by Radii
OPS isn't available in yahoo leagues, or else I'm sure that would be used instead of OBP and SLG and we'd have another batting stat to play with.

Actually OPS is available, at least in private leagues. We're running a league with the following (my non-FOFC league ) :

R H 1B 2B 3B HR RBI SB AVG OPS W SHO SV K HLD ERA WHIP K/BB K/9

[oykib]

Maybe it's just me. But I think the categories should be things that would represent winning players. Is "Triples" a category that really represents winning? Where did the '27 Yankees rank in the league in Triples?

I guess it comes down to whether you want to have an exercise in team building and trading, or a representation of the owners' understanding of the game.

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by oykib
Maybe it's just me. But I think the categories should be things that would represent winning players. Is "Triples" a category that really represents winning? Where did the '27 Yankees rank in the league in Triples?

I guess it comes down to whether you want to have an exercise in team building and trading, or a representation of the owners' understanding of the game.

Yeah, I had an issue with that one too, but it got in there anyway. I would have knocked SB out of there as well, but I guess that adds an element to have to consider. I would have bounced SHO too. Holds I like, not as a relevant stat but for the fact that it makes a manager decide if it is worth having a roster spot devoted to a middle reliever (IMO, the right guy could also help with ERA, WHIP K/BB, K/9. Now if Octavio could just stop saving games ). One of my leagues last year left out WHIP and K/BB, but had SHO and CG. That became a travesty, where one team (the commissioner, I think) was just continuously dropping/adding players just to have them start games (of course, he often lost the 'ER' category). He did the same with position players, just to get guys who would play on "off" days. What annoyed me was that none of the other teams would pick up any of the players he dropped (it was only a 6 team league, so there were a number of decent players out there).