Ranking top 4 arms on downside

[Sour Masher]

For the first time in many years, three of the top 4 arms are available in my 14 team points leagues auction. I own the 4th, Kluber. My plan is to land one of the others in the auction, but I'm having a hard time ranking Scherzer, Sale, and Kershaw.

Since they all have such ridiculously good upsides, and since I'm a contender who is much, much more concerned with blowing a huge chunk of my auction dollars on a bust/injury than I am picking the one of these three that will be the best, it makes sense for me to rank these guys on downside rather than upside. All three guys have some risk, if you look hard enough. How would you rank them, least to most risky?

Right now, I have them ranked based on risk as I list them above--Scherzer, Sale, and Kershaw. To me, the guy I already own is the safest, but I know I may have a Kluber bias. I ask for his inclusion in your rankings simply because I think ranking all 4 elite tier arms based on downside would be more universally useful for other mixed leaguers.

[wombat104]

I would rank them the same way.

[BigJonEmpire]

Scherzer
Kluber
Kershaw
Sale

Without any actual evidence I think Sale pushed through injury at the end of 2017. Kershaw has his issues but the Dodgers have babied him through them even when Kershaw himself would have pushed through.I haven't been concerned at all about Scherzer or Kluber at this point.

[joncarlos]

I think Kluber is the least risky, he beats Scherzer on age. Then I'd go Scherzer, Sale, Kershaw.

[Hammer]

Scherzer
Kluber
Sale
Kershaw


I dont know how anyone but CK can be the most risky. He has frequented the DL more than the other 3 combined I think. CK has averaged 30 IP less than each of the other three over the last 3 seasons.

[Ken]

Kershaw obviously has the most risk.

Of the other 3, none has a significant injury history, so as far as risk goes it may be best to rank them by age, Sale being the youngest.

[chancellor]

If you want the safest, it's Max, IMO. Even more than the Klubot, who's a very close #2. Then Sale.

[Sour Masher]

If you want the safest, it's Max, IMO. Even more than the Klubot, who's a very close #2. Then Sale.

I think Max is the safest too. I guess I am having cold feet, because he did get a bit banged up last year, and there is a lot of chatter on this forum of late about guys in their mid-30s suddenly falling off a cliff health/performance wise. I'm not entirely sure why I think he is safer than Sale, as I can find no evidence that Sale's late season fade was injury related, and he looks great right now. As Ken said, Sale is the youngest of all of these guys, so maybe he is safer than Scherzer? Why not? I think I may think he isn't simply because I read for years when he was a pup that his mechanics would lead to TJ surgery. But I've got nothing besides that, and that seems to have been debunked by now.

[Ken]

I can find no evidence that Sale's late season fade

I'm not even sure there was a late season fade. Sale's SO9 by month went 12.4, 12.9, 11.4, 14.5, 12.9, 13.7.

His best month of 2017 was July, when he went 3-1 with a 1.04 ERA, .779 WHIP, and 56Ks in 34.2 IP.

His ERA was up at 4.38 in August and the WHIP was up to 1.35 in September, but those type numbers are not abnormal for small sample sizes (He had a 4.24 ERA in May, for example).

Looks like the same Chris Sale to me.

[Sour Masher]

I'm not even sure there was a late season fade. Sale's SO9 by month went 12.4, 12.9, 11.4, 14.5, 12.9, 13.7.

His best month of 2017 was July, when he went 3-1 with a 1.04 ERA, .779 WHIP, and 56Ks in 34.2 IP.

His ERA was up at 4.38 in August and the WHIP was up to 1.35 in September, but those type numbers are not abnormal for small sample sizes (He had a 4.24 ERA in May, for example).

Looks like the same Chris Sale to me.

I suspect, but do not know, that Scherzer will go for more than Sale in my league, so maybe I should target Sale. Maybe the perception that Scherzer carries less risk than Sale is a fallacy I can take advantage of. IDK. If someone could guarantee me that one of these guys will pitch over 200 IPs in line with past production, I'd happily take any of them, and it fits my strategy to win to spend for one of these guys. It is scary, though, especially as an early favorite in the league, to commit so much capital to one player, one arm, especially. I really want one, but I really want one that will hold up as expected all year. But I guess that is impossible to really bank on, which is why I've never landed a pitcher of this caliber in one of our auction, because their prices are highly inflated. I may chicken out and spread my risk over some lesser players. I could overcome a couple of lesser players failing, but it would be tough to contend for a title if I invest heavily in one of these studs and he crashes.

[cavebird]

Why not just be in on all of them to a certain point and then bale? Kershaw is both the most and least risky. He is more likely to pitch only 150 innings, but they'll probably be a better 150 innings than the others. I have no way to decide between the three/four (in my league, Sale is kept, other three are in the auction). My plan is just to decide where I won't pay for any of them and see what the market brings.

[Sour Masher]

Why not just be in on all of them to a certain point and then bale? Kershaw is both the most and least risky. He is more likely to pitch only 150 innings, but they'll probably be a better 150 innings than the others. I have no way to decide between the three/four (in my league, Sale is kept, other three are in the auction). My plan is just to decide where I won't pay for any of them and see what the market brings.

Yeah, I suspect in my league, I don't end.up with any of them that way. But that is what i may do.

Not sure Kershaw is still a clear lock for the best numbers per inning. He showed some slight signs of regression last year. He lost a half a mile on is fastball, which went from +2 to +.7 in effectiveness last year, and his slider went from +3.5 to +2 (fangraph numbers). Admittedly these are nits I am picking. I've long been a vocal supporter as Kershaw as not only the clear cut best pitcher in the game today, but an all time great. But he did have some tiny signs of decline last year. Enough to put the other big three arms at least in a conversation with him as best per inning pitcher.

But that just brings it back to your point. Maybe it is best to let the market dictate which, if any, I land.

I guess my worry is more of a strategy one. If your team is arguably the best team heading into your auction, and you think you have a good shot at winning this year, do you do that by spending big on an arm that, if healthy, will really help you get there? Or, given that you team is already very strong, do you try to diffuse your risk across multiple lesser players?

I think if I know they will give me what they have done in the past, I should spend what it takes to land one of these guys. However, if the guy I pick goes down to injury or significant sudden regression, that is such a big hole I've put myself in by committing so much to one guy. Still, if I get one of these guys, and he pitches 200+ elite innings, I'm in very good shape.

[cavebird]

Yeah, I suspect in my league, I don't end.up with any of them that way. But that is what i may do.

Not sure Kershaw is still a clear lock for the best numbers per inning. He showed some slight signs of regression last year. He lost a half a mile on is fastball, which went from +2 to +.7 in effectiveness last year, and his slider went from +3.5 to +2 (fangraph numbers). Admittedly these are nits I am picking. I've long been a vocal supporter as Kershaw as not only the clear cut best pitcher in the game today, but an all time great. But he did have some tiny signs of decline last year. Enough to put the other big three arms at least in a conversation with him as best per inning pitcher.

But that just brings it back to your point. Maybe it is best to let the market dictate which, if any, I land.

I guess my worry is more of a strategy one. If your team is arguably the best team heading into your auction, and you think you have a good shot at winning this year, do you do that by spending big on an arm that, if healthy, will really help you get there? Or, given that you team is already very strong, do you try to diffuse your risk across multiple lesser players?

I think if I know they will give me what they have done in the past, I should spend what it takes to land one of these guys. However, if the guy I pick goes down to injury or significant sudden regression, that is such a big hole I've put myself in by committing so much to one guy. Still, if I get one of these guys, and he pitches 200+ elite innings, I'm in very good shape.

I am in the same boat. I understand the worries. Actually, I am worse. I have the best keeper list, but it is all hitters and Hector Neris and the league has 6 SP and 5 RP slots. I have to be all in on pitching, but it always goes for so much. So is getting studs necessary or at least one of the big four, or can you spread the risk? I don't know. I want a stud and to spread the risk, but those pesky rules explain that you can only spend so much at auction. I hate going into an auction with a good keeper list and a fluid plan---that is a recipe for disaster, but I so is the rigid plan.

[Mithrandir]

I have spent $70 and $84 out of a $300 budget on Kershaw the last two years. Will I have the nerve to do that again this year? Not sure yet. I think that the other 3 will be kept for $51, $52 and $63. So Kershaw is it as far as the auction goes.

[cavebird]

It's so tough. The big four get tossed first. Do you overspend or hope that you can get depth because the second tier will be cheaper? What will guys like Strasburg, Carrasco, and MadBum go for?