Paying full inflation on Trout

[DMT]

12-team mixed 5x5 with on-base and slug replacing BA and HR.

The average projected value of Trout is about $60. I've calculated inflation in my league to be about around 28% which results in a $77 price tag. Interestingly, that's what his projected price was last year and I actually won him at $77. And finished 11th. (For reference, Goldschmidt went for $71, Altuve $69 to two teams that also did not finish in the money...and both are also available again).

Betts is being kept at $51, so the next highest priced player is Jose Ramirez at $57. Now, I know how great Trout is, but is he really worth $20 more than Ramirez? I just don't know if I can do it again after last year. Thoughts?

[Ken]

Pros:

If I'm ever going to go to crazy high bids for top players its in a shallow league. And 12 team mixed is about as shallow as I'd go for. The replacement level there is so high that you can't be too worried about the end of your roster, you focus your money towards the top of it and get your stars.

Cons:

If I'm paying $77 I want to pay it at the auction, not for keepers. I want my keepers to represent a profit - players who I can get at prices lower than their value + inflation. If I'm paying full price, I may as well just throw the player back and rebuy.
If you had told me $67. That's a big number, but it's a $10 profit by your calculation, so I'm fine with it. But paying full price for a keeper doesn't make much sense to me.


Combining the pros and cons I think I'd throw Trout back and allocate $77 in my plan to buying him right back at auction. If you get him cheaper, GREAT. If he goes a buck or 2 more, no big loss, go ahead and buy (in theory you may be saving $2 with your last keeper that you keep instead of Trout). If it goes way too high, then re-allocate the money, it's not the end of the world and Trout will go early in the auction so you have plenty of time to recover.

Just my 2c.

[DMT]

Pros:

If I'm ever going to go to crazy high bids for top players its in a shallow league. And 12 team mixed is about as shallow as I'd go for. The replacement level there is so high that you can't be too worried about the end of your roster, you focus your money towards the top of it and get your stars.

Cons:

If I'm paying $77 I want to pay it at the auction, not for keepers. I want my keepers to represent a profit - players who I can get at prices lower than their value + inflation. If I'm paying full price, I may as well just throw the player back and rebuy.
If you had told me $67. That's a big number, but it's a $10 profit by your calculation, so I'm fine with it. But paying full price for a keeper doesn't make much sense to me.


Combining the pros and cons I think I'd throw Trout back and allocate $77 in my plan to buying him right back at auction. If you get him cheaper, GREAT. If he goes a buck or 2 more, no big loss, go ahead and buy (in theory you may be saving $2 with your last keeper that you keep instead of Trout). If it goes way too high, then re-allocate the money, it's not the end of the world and Trout will go early in the auction so you have plenty of time to recover.

Just my 2c.

I must not have been clear, I don't have him as a keeper. I auctioned him last year, then dumped him. We have a running gag in our league because no one who's rostered the most expensive player in the auction has ever won. Trout is obviously that guy this year, and I'm just not sure I want to spend so much more on him again than next tier guys (Betts went for $51). By the sound of your reply, you'd have no problem paying that much for him again. That's what I'm unsure of.

[Ken]

I must not have been clear, I don't have him as a keeper. I auctioned him last year, then dumped him. We have a running gag in our league because no one who's rostered the most expensive player in the auction has ever won. Trout is obviously that guy this year, and I'm just not sure I want to spend so much more on him again than next tier guys (Betts went for $51). By the sound of your reply, you'd have no problem paying that much for him again. That's what I'm unsure of.

Ah gotcha. If my process tells me he's worth $77 I'd certainly go to $77 personally. I've won many leagues with the most expensive player rostered. Hell I think I bought the 2 most expensive players last year. I bought both Altuve and Kershaw in the same auction last year (Trout and several others were kept at more reasonable prices) and I went stars and scrubs to go along with my keepers. But I also had the 1st pick in the reserves (Acuna), and I picked up Snell for cheap, and I had kept Diaz for cheap, etc.

I think we put too much emphasis on the price of a star player. Even when they fail you can recover if the rest of your roster is solid enough.

[DMT]

Ah gotcha. If my process tells me he's worth $77 I'd certainly go to $77 personally. I've won many leagues with the most expensive player rostered. Hell I think I bought the 2 most expensive players last year. I bought both Altuve and Kershaw in the same auction last year (Trout and several others were kept at more reasonable prices) and I went stars and scrubs to go along with my keepers. But I also had the 1st pick in the reserves (Acuna), and I picked up Snell for cheap, and I had kept Diaz for cheap, etc.

I think we put too much emphasis on the price of a star player. Even when they fail you can recover if the rest of your roster is solid enough.

Good points. I had Carpenter, Bumgarner, Seager, and my team was buried by May 10th (or so I thought). I traded Carpenter like the day he caught fire.

[Ken]

Here's the auction I'm talking about from last year:

http://forum.rotojunkiefix.com/showthread.php/15466-15-team-mixed-keepers-due-Saturday?p=300379&highlight=Altuve#post300379

[Mithrandir]

Ah gotcha. If my process tells me he's worth $77 I'd certainly go to $77 personally. I've won many leagues with the most expensive player rostered. Hell I think I bought the 2 most expensive players last year. I bought both Altuve and Kershaw in the same auction last year (Trout and several others were kept at more reasonable prices) and I went stars and scrubs to go along with my keepers. But I also had the 1st pick in the reserves (Acuna), and I picked up Snell for cheap, and I had kept Diaz for cheap, etc.

I think we put too much emphasis on the price of a star player. Even when they fail you can recover if the rest of your roster is solid enough.

Agree with the part I put in bold. I think you need stars to compete for the title. Hell I am keeping 3 players who are each over $50 in a 14 team mixed keeper league. Budget is $300. So I say go get Trout for up to that $77...or $78..or $79.

[Judge Jude]

last year I froze Rizzo 42, Kershaw 42, and Harper 41.

none was worth it, but I still finished 4th. if any of the three had a huge year, I could have/would have won. I placed 16 points back, and Kershaw alone cost me 10 points off his peak. with a flip in two categories vs the leader, that gets me within 4 points by that one adjustment'.

now, "well, you should have known Kershaw would get hurt" is fine - but not really the point. if I had been able to buy Scherzer for 42, for instance (frozen at 39), there you go - even being dragged down by 2 expensive hitters in a non-OPB league.

agreed on the shallowness of this league making the big bid more alluring. if one starting player gets hurt, you can just replace him with another one. the dropoff is less.

[DMT]

But my point is, would you rather have Trout or Jose Ramirez + $20? There's no guarantee that will happen but as I said Betts went for $27 less (to the 3rd place finisher). I'm just not sure if Trout is that much better. (Last year I was more confident that he was).

[Judge Jude]

well, I would be more comfortable with inflation-adjusted prices on healthy studs like these (as opposed to getting locked in on a value for a Daniel Murphy, Jordan Hicks, Clayton Kershaw, etc.).

I'd rather pay $50 for a $55 inflation-adjusted player than $77 for a $77 inflation-adjusted player.

[cavebird]

But my point is, would you rather have Trout or Jose Ramirez + $20? There's no guarantee that will happen but as I said Betts went for $27 less (to the 3rd place finisher). I'm just not sure if Trout is that much better. (Last year I was more confident that he was).

Hope that Ramirez is tossed first? My guess is that the difference won't be $20 this year. And, hell, it's a 12-teamer. Buy them both.

[DMT]

Agree with the part I put in bold. I think you need stars to compete for the title. Hell I am keeping 3 players who are each over $50 in a 14 team mixed keeper league. Budget is $300. So I say go get Trout for up to that $77...or $78..or $79.

Ok, but that translates to $43 with a $260 budget. $79 meanwhile translates to $91.

[DMT]

Hope that Ramirez is tossed first? My guess is that the difference won't be $20 this year. And, hell, it's a 12-teamer. Buy them both.

No, I asked him and he's either nominating Trout or Scherzer. Scherzer is another guy who I don't think I'd pay the inflated price for ($47). I already have Bauer, Flaherty, Folty, and EdRod for $17 and want to focus on hitting.

But it sounds like the consensus here is pay full price for the best players rather than stick to a plan. Not sure I agree.

[Ken]

Hold up, something feels off here.

If Trout's is worth $77 in your inflated prices, then it seems like Scherzer is worth more than $47.

[Mithrandir]

Ok, but that translates to $43 with a $260 budget. $79 meanwhile translates to $91.

I'm not convinced that Trout is THAT much better than the other hitters in his Tier, but if one has a nice set of cheap keepers, why not pay top $$$ for him.