Thoughts on this trade...

[Mithrandir]

13 team..mixed..5x5...$300 budget...8 keepers.

Bird, Eddie Rosario and Ervin Santana who are all $1 keepers for Scherzer who is $63 keeper.

Now of course on the surface it's not a really good offer. But does the salary price make any difference?

I guess it also depends on the quality of keepers each team has before the trade is made.

Thoughts?

[Gregg]

It does depend on the quality of keepers (and their salaries).

I believe you paid $84 for Kershaw last year. I like Scherzer better than Kershaw this year. Hard to imagine $63 is a "good deal" but it seems to be. With only 8 keepers I want the best. I would take the Scherzer side if I could.

[Ken]

Those 3 are okay, but hard to imagine you'd need them as keepers. We're talking about players who are going to cost what, a few bucks at most in a league that shallow?

In a shallow league like that it's all about the stars. To me the only question is whether Scherzer is worth it (or close). If he is then you take the Scherzer side of the trade every day. If he's not, then it really doesn't matter one way or the other.

$63 is a steep price for any keeper. $300 budget helps (and a side note, why do leagues do $300? Might as well stick with the standard $260)

So discount it down to $55 in a regular priced league.

Then the question is inflation. If we assume that Scherzer is a $35-$40 talent in a 13 team mixed ($260 base) league, then you need ~40% inflation to be worth keeping.

Is over 40% realistic? If not, then I wouldn't keep Scherzer.

[Mithrandir]

I cannot recall when my league went to the $300 budget. At least 10 years ago. Why? I think the guys just wanted more money to spend. Which made no sense to me.

[Ken]

I cannot recall when my league went to the $300 budget. At least 10 years ago. Why? I think the guys just wanted more money to spend. Which made no sense to me.

Changing an existing keeper league to a higher budget I guess is a good way to increase inflation and reward those with the best keeper lists already made at $260. Can't think of any other reason honestly unless you just like round numbers.

But regardless, what's your expected inflation rate?

[madducks]

I cannot recall when my league went to the $300 budget. At least 10 years ago. Why? I think the guys just wanted more money to spend. Which made no sense to me.

I joined the league in 1999 and the budget was $260 that year. Then i seem to recall we expanded the rosters in 2000 and increased the budget to $300. Then we expanded the league by two teams in 2001 and shrunk the rosters back down but kept the $300 budget.

And if i had Scherzer, i wouldn't trade him for those three players. Rosario is a nice keeper, but not enough for the #1 pitcher.

[Ken]

Here's another way I'd answer this question.

If you are even considering Scherzer as being reasonable at $63, then there is enough inflation in this league such that a team in which 3 of the 8 keepers kept are Bird/Rosario/Santana is going to be a bottom half team. You don't want to have that type of player as one of your 8 keepers in a league with that much inflation, especially not 3 of them (perhaps as your last keeper Rosario OR Bird makes sense).

So there's no way that I'd do that trade as the Scherzer owner if I'm even considering keeping him at $63.

[virgonomic]

I cannot recall when my league went to the $300 budget. At least 10 years ago. Why? I think the guys just wanted more money to spend. Which made no sense to me.

Increasing the budget to $300 decreases the value of $1, since there are more dollars to spend.

So, a $1 guy in a $300 league is a better value than a $1 guy in a $260 league, because you are paying less of the total pool of money for him. On the flip side, in a $300 league higher prices are inflated because you have to spend more inflated dollars to buy those players.

In a nutshell, a $300 league inflates the prices of higher-priced players.

[Ken]

Increasing the budget to $300 decreases the value of $1, since there are more dollars to spend.

So, a $1 guy in a $300 league is a better value than a $1 guy in a $260 league, because you are paying less of the total pool of money for him. On the flip side, in a $300 league higher prices are inflated because you have to spend more inflated dollars to buy those players.

In a nutshell, a $300 league inflates the prices of higher-priced players.

Not following you. It inflates them all exactly the same.

[The Feral Slasher]

Not following you. It inflates them all exactly the same.

In theory, yes. But perhaps not in practice ?

Edit: It inflates values all exactly the same, but depending on the league, perhaps not prices.

[Ken]

It inflates values all exactly the same, but depending on the league, perhaps not prices.

This is exactly right - which means there are opportunities to take advantage of the incorrect valuations

[cavebird]

Are any of these $1 guys keepers in a 13-team mixed league with only 8 keepers? I doubt Santana is. Nor is Bird (1B can get ugly, but that is in deeper leagues). So it is Rosario for Scherzer. I wonder whether I would keep any of those four players at all. If that is true, I guess the sides are equal.

[Redbirds Fan]

Does anyone else think it is bizarre that a league would expand and contract the money supply from one year to the next like some demonic Fantasy Federal Reserve, artificially and arbitrarily changing the value of keepers?

[Gregg]

Didn't someone in here play a game where players were like $2.75, $5.50, etc?

[chancellor]

Does anyone else think it is bizarre that a league would expand and contract the money supply from one year to the next like some demonic Fantasy Federal Reserve, artificially and arbitrarily changing the value of keepers?

Demonic Fantasy is probably a name for a rock band.

And I agree, but I like the turn of phrase "demonic Fantasy Federal Reserve" the best.