Do sleepers still exist?

[Gregg]

With all of the information at our fingertips do sleepers still exist?

Or maybe a better question would be has the term sleeper changed in the last 5 years?

[joncarlos]

There are still players who are undervalued.

There aren't likely to be players nobody knows about.

So yes I think the definition has changed.

[Mithrandir]

Who misses those good old days when you called out a player and everyone else went, "Huh?"

[Erik]

Who misses those good old days when you called out a player and everyone else went, "Huh?"

Ha, those were the days.

My league is mostly people who are between 35 and 55 and who are parents, and some of them don't have the time to learn all the bench and bullpen guys. Every so often we get "I have no idea who that is" from one or two people, or in one case last year, "I have no idea who that is, but I bid $2." But the days of you being the only one who knew somebody are long gone.

[The Dane]

There aren't sleepers like there used to be, but there is now an opposite effect that is equally exploitable. Since all the cheap targets are well-published, that means that they are well-targeted as well.

Here's an NL-only example of what can happen:
Jerad Eickhoff shows up on a few "sleeper" lists, gets mentioned in a guide or two, on a number of websites. Owners raise him in their minds or put him on their radar if he wasn't there before. When the draft comes, there's a small bidding war on Jerad Eickhoff, and a player who -by all rights- should never have gone for more than $3, goes for $7. When this happens across the board, it means that other players, especially ones coming off a bad year, go for less. Someone like Julio Teheran. I doubt Eickhoff will ever go for more than Teheran in an NL-only auction outside of Philly, but I bet their prices are closer than they should be.

People LOVE sleepers. They love the hope and excitement that comes from feeling that you know something no one else does. And they will pay for that feeling.

Simply put, they will overpay for a bargain.

[Sour Masher]

Yeah, the information available now is such that sleepers don't exist as they used to, but there are still market inefficiencies, the biggest being what The Dane points out--folks overpay for sleepers, leaving value in more proven, unsexy commodities.

Although, even with that being true, I still target them, because every once in awhile, one inexplicably still goes for a lot lower than I think they should. I snagged Kluber cheap a few years ago, even though some were touting a break out. I got Michael Brantley cheap the year after that, because I think folks saw him as a low ceiling sleeper. Sometimes folks overspend on their sleepers so much, there is still value to be had on some others. Most of the time, those still undervalued sleepers are perceived to have lower ceilings, like Kluber, Keuchel, and Brantley, but as those three show, sometimes those moderate sleepers end up wildly outperforming expectations.

[onejayhawk]

How were Odobel Herrera and Delino deShields not sleepers in 2015? Rhd had them on his list, but they were down a ways. Contrast Bryant, Schwarber and Pederson.

J

[The Dane]

How were Odobel Herrera and Delino deShields not sleepers in 2015? Rhd had them on his list, but they were down a ways. Contrast Bryant, Schwarber and Pederson.

J

I guess that depends on the depth of your league. In all four of my NL-only leagues, except one, Herrera was the subject of a little bidding war.

[Hammer]

Odubel went for $12 in my 10 team NL last year. Not under the radar IMO.