Auction Strategies

[Phineas to Ferb]

I've always found the specific strategies in an attempt to win a league to be interesting. I think I've got a handle on most of them, but are there any I've omitted?

Stars & Scrubs - spending all money on few stars, and spending the rest on cheaper players. Not likely to win, but a recommended strategy for those rebuilding as the "star" players can be flipped for keepers and the multitude of cheaper players should produce a few keepers themselves for the next year.

LIMA Plan Low Investment Mound Aces plan, named for Jose Lima, drafting cheaper pitchers with certain skills and spending $200 or so of auction budget towards hitting.

$1 Dollar Pitcher Plan - an extreme strategy that mainly works in shallower mixed leagues where there are a number of starting pitchers that won't kill you. Use the excess hitting (you better have it) for the pitching you'll need requires some skill in trading.

Nobody over $30 Plan - a middle of the road strategy, not spending more than $30 on any one player. It will keep you from getting the established stars in the league, but no one injury will cripple you. A full understanding of the values of all players is crucial, but isn't it always?

I attempted to spend half my money on pitching one time (it's half the points, right?) but found that I couldn't get nearly enough hitting stats to be remotely competitive hitting wise. It's easier to find hidden gems with cheap pitching than finding hidden gems with cheap hitting. Failed miserably.

Is there another strategy that I've missed, aside from "Pick all players whose true worth are not valued by the rest of the league, not have any players get injured and have more total points in pitching and hitting to win the league" plan? Is there another strategy that you've implemented or heard of and what was it's result?

[Lucky]

"Spread The Risk" is a widely accepted strategy, contrasted with "Stars and Scrubs".

There are also the lesser known "Sweeney" plan, the "Labadini" plan, and the "Bernhard" plan. These work primarily with 4x4 leagues, though, and are designed to assure a money finish, but not necessarily a win.

[Moonlight J]

Back in the day, Zwilling/Melnick said nobody over $25 on their roster

Strategies should also surround when you throw out players, how to bid on them, and paying attention to behaviors and $$s of the other teams.

[DMT]

I think another important strategy decision to recognize is flexibility/rigidity with regards to any strategy you choose. In other words, do you go into an auction with a set strategy that you stick to no matter what, or do you go in with an open mind and adjust your strategy to dynamics of that particular auction. I am much more in the latter camp as I don't think I've ever fully committed to any of these strategies.

[Phineas to Ferb]

I think another important strategy decision to recognize is flexibility/rigidity with regards to any strategy you choose. In other words, do you go into an auction with a set strategy that you stick to no matter what, or do you go in with an open mind and adjust your strategy to dynamics of that particular auction. I am much more in the latter camp as I don't think I've ever fully committed to any of these strategies.

I think most people go into a draft with league-specific, their-team-specific strategy. Except for redraft leagues, the mixture of free agents, keepers, league rules and owner tendencies create an infinite amount of possible parameters to work with. I try to have a general plan of attack, with probable variations on that depending if I get certain players at certain prices. The beauty (or b*tch) of the auction is that tends to fluctuate, often in unanticipated directions.

[DMT]

I think most people go into a draft with league-specific, their-team-specific strategy. Except for redraft leagues, the mixture of free agents, keepers, league rules and owner tendencies create an infinite amount of possible parameters to work with. I try to have a general plan of attack, with probable variations on that depending if I get certain players at certain prices. The beauty (or b*tch) of the auction is that tends to fluctuate, often in unanticipated directions.

Exactly. I group players into clusters and target certain clusters based on who's available. If there are 7 ~$20 SPs available, I will try to grab one. Of course, if all of them go for $25+ I'll adjust accordingly, either by grabbing one 'over-value' or grabbing a $15 SP and shifting the $5 elsewhere.

I'd say the one strategy I generally stick to is paying full value (+ inflation) for 2-3 of the top players (usually hitters) early. Every year I laugh at the guys who horde their $ waiting for the bargains and then end up completely overpaying for a mediocre player once they realize all the top players are gone.

[Lucky]

I think this hits exactly what a winning strategy should include when it comes to auction and also touches on why I think "spread the risk" is not the best strategy out there.

I don't think "spread the risk" is intended for use in keeper leagues, which have a totally different dynamic. With no keepers, and everyone with $260, it can be devastating to pay $45 for a guy and have him get hurt or traded to the other league. In a keeper league, especially a "mixed" league, if you start with a good keeper list and have a decent auction, you can survive having one of your studs get hurt.

I think DMT's approach works great for keeper leagues (and it is what I try to do), but I've had success spreading the risk in AL-only redraft leagues.

[Teenwolf]

Has anybody ever tried the "shadowing" strategy?

I heard it mentioned in a magazine years ago. Basically, if your league has one dominant owner who really knows his stuff, you outbid him on every single player that he's bidding on. You then end up either owning his players at a couple dollars above what that owner projected, or making him pay more for the players he wanted.

I've thought about doing this in my AL only. Kevin Seitzer is pretty brilliant, and I can't think of anybody else I'd rather try out this strategy on.

Also, there is a risk that the owner catches on and tries to stick you with players that you don't want. But at that point, you're taking the other owner so far out of their element that it's pretty much a win already.

Now, rules I do play by:

Scarcity: I ALWAYS have 2 stud catchers. Last 4-5 years have been Posada/V-Mart. I feel like having studs where most have $1 guys earning negative value is an advantage. But that's just my OCD.

Nobody $40+: The "sure thing" players always go too high. I'm just not comfortable with a guaranteed loss on investment.

If he's on my team, he starts: Benching your SP's when they're cold means you'll miss the eventual shutout. I'd rather rack up Wins and K's and know that in the end, the ratios will work out.

AB/IP: You always hear about the term "pay for skills, not roles", but I'd rather take the guys with some skill that are guaranteed to play.

[Trader Mac]

What worked well for me the last few years is just go out and get the players you need. In the past, I was held onto my money so that I could get the bargains in the end. That may have worked once in a while, but usually I would wind up with too much money left on the table and/or not get those bargains I was targeting. Plus, I didn't worry too much if I had to spend over $40 on a player though that came back to bit me a couple times with Reyes and Sizemore.

[Porcello]

I think another important strategy decision to recognize is flexibility/rigidity with regards to any strategy you choose. In other words, do you go into an auction with a set strategy that you stick to no matter what, or do you go in with an open mind and adjust your strategy to dynamics of that particular auction. I am much more in the latter camp as I don't think I've ever fully committed to any of these strategies.

Yes. I would advise that people in auctions without much experience should experiment with the different strategies so they're prepared for whatever is thrown at them auction day. I have a good idea about what I'll be doing in mine, but I've played with these people before and know where they're going to spend their money.

[Gregg]

Never, never, never leave money on the table.

I always leave a total of $3 for my last 2 spots. I leave three in case someone throws out my $1 target middle reliever or second catcher so I can go $2.If during the auction I get a good price on the second catcher I immediately plan on the last two spots being pitching. The most I leave is a buck. Since we have FAAB I always can replace the pitching with the hot hand.

I never want to lose out on a good player by a buck and have $5 left at the end. Never!

[DMT]

Has anybody ever tried the "shadowing" strategy?

I heard it mentioned in a magazine years ago. Basically, if your league has one dominant owner who really knows his stuff, you outbid him on every single player that he's bidding on. You then end up either owning his players at a couple dollars above what that owner projected, or making him pay more for the players he wanted.

In my non-RJ league, I am that guy (3 titles [lost at least 2 more with the best roto team b/c we were a H2H format for 5 years] and only 1 non-$ finish in the past decade). Every year a couple of owners come in having done little or no prep and try to use this strategy. It did work the 1st time when I got rattled but since these guys aren't even aware of the concept of inflation I am usually able now to get the guys I want b/c they think I'm way overbidding on the players I get.

[Judge Jude]

I got burned last year - and it cost me the title, basically - by deciding to nominate Wandy Rodriguez in the second round. Several perceived better SPs, like Hamels, were still on the board, so I didn't think anyone would go the mat for Wandy when they still thought they could get someone better.

I wound up playing 'up the ladder' with a rival owner, and paid a whopping $26 for Wandy. The other guy got Hamels a little later for 24. Hamels wound up having a $7 first half and $16 second half, while Wandy had a ZERO dollar first half and $16 second half.

It's not unusual for me to have one player - could be the only elite closer or base stealer - as an "either or." I set up parallel scenarios of how I play the rest of the auction based on whether I get that guy or not. I'm ok with it either way, really, it's just good to know and then move on in the direction the auction dynamic demands.

Intuitively I like the psychological concept of rivals hesitating to bid too high early when better players remain for later, but I have to accept that "what the heck, I'm flush with cash, I'll bid some more" trumps it. I'll probably sit on any Wandy 2011s longer this time around, although the flip side can be the panic bidding because 3 guys have lots of money and weak starting pitching, and they all realize at once that they have to overpay for the last "pretty girl" on the board or be left with a staff of Bea Arthurs (too soon?).

We tend to freeze about 90-130 bucks out of 260. I like to get to about 200 reasonably early - not first, but close. At that point I have a lot of good players and can be patient for the rest of the auction. In 27 years, I've never waited too long and been stuck with 5+ dollars at the end or not stuck at that only because I paid 24 for a Franklin Stubbs-type who is the last regular out there.

[Lucky]

Has anybody ever tried the "shadowing" strategy?

I heard it mentioned in a magazine years ago. Basically, if your league has one dominant owner who really knows his stuff, you outbid him on every single player that he's bidding on. You then end up either owning his players at a couple dollars above what that owner projected, or making him pay more for the players he wanted.

I had a guy do this to me one year. (I'm not saying I was a dominant owner, but apparently I was the one he picked.) I confronted him at a break, and he admitted that he didn't prepare and figured he would just go after everyone I wanted.

There was another year when an owner "borrowed" my sheet that I take into the auction with me. We wound up bidding on the same guys all day long. It wound up screwing both of us. I wasn't very happy.

[Judge Jude]

"Has anybody ever tried the "shadowing" strategy?"

The guy who ran me up for Wandy last year is the only one I keep locking horns with in bidding.
Funny thing is, I get the guy in the end - one year I paid 49 for Reyes and 45 for Holliday, shocking the room. But I had the best freeze list and was willing to throw down if need be. Won that year, too.

He doesn't do it over and over, though, so he's not truly shadowing. We do have more similar valuations than others, I guess. This is the guy who became the first ever to win all 5 offensive categories, in 2005. I beat him anyway, but it wasn't easy.