NL keeper review

[Ken]

Question for you - Using the Arraez example, if his keeper price was at the non inflated $21 or $22 instead of $18 would you keep him? What is the highest price point you would keep Arraez at given the league parameters in this case?

Yes I'd keep at $21 or $22.

The first question Id ask myself is do I buy the projection. If not, what's my alternative projection. And then I'd price that out. For ease of discussion I'll assume we agree on the projected numbers being somewhere around the .318 / 8 HR / 5 SB / 70 R / 65 RBI line that the projection systems generally agree on. (There's an upside above that if he plays a full 162 games rather than the projected 144).

Once I come to the answer on the stats, what are those stats worth? That can be answered with your favorite auction calculator (make sure to use $280 if that's the budget). I have written my own algo which is based on the SGP concept but most calculators these days agree.

Now inflation. In an inflationary league, the value of each $ is simply less. So if in the general "rebuy" sense a guy is worth $10, in a 30% inflated league he's worth ~$13. That $10 really no longer matters in our analysis, it's like talking about how much a guy is worth in pesos when everyone else is talking dollars. The $10 value point is not relevant in a league with inflation. The only caveat to that is that inflation doesn't play out linearly. So we could theoretically apply it in a curve instead, applying 40% at the top, 30% in the middle, etc. In this case though lets assume Arraez is in the middle (he's definitely not near the bottom), so the 30% value can hold.

So now I have a price, $22 and a value say $28 (post inflation, that's all that matters). So I'm saving $6 vs what I'd have to pay to get the same accumulation of stats once the bell rings to start my auction.

Now I consider my other options. Should I throw him back if he's the only keeper I have? No I should not, that's a waste of $6. Should I throw him back relative to other keepers? Well, it depends, do the same analysis as above on each of them and check if they are worth $6 more.

What's the highest price I'd pay? If I have a bad keeper list I'd at least consider keeping him at a $1 savings. There's some value in cost certainty as well - there are cases where your auction goes off the rails and all the inflation plays out at the top, in which case you risk walking away from the auction without spending all your money if you hold tight to your values. In most cases I'd want at least $2-5 of a discount but that varies by league.

There's another factor here which is can I get a better discount during the auction. That depends on your specific league. If you are in a league that's full of owners who are not very good at fantasy baseball or who regularly fail to understand inflation, you could theoretically assume that you'll average a $5-10 savings on every guy you buy. In that case you wouldn't necessarily want to keep a guy who only saves you $4 for example. That used to be the case for me in 1 or 2 leagues, but these days my leagues are very competitive and it's unlikely to be the case that I save a bunch on every player I buy. So locking in a known savings is a good idea.

I guess there's another case which is does this player fit in my strategy. There are situations relative to other players where you would not want to roster a certain player type. i.e. if you determine that you need to focus on power or speed for this position for some reason then you may not want Arraez. In the general case Arraez allows you to buy other guys with lower avg who help you in power and speed but if you want to avoid type of build, which can be complicated and perhaps riskier if you need specific players who may be overpriced, then I understand not going this path. It's easier to analyze guys who are more balanced across all 5 categories and build that way, although not necessarily optimal.

[harmon]

Appreciate your detailed response.

If league inflation is calculated at 30% then your team would need a group of keepers at that level to keep pace, otherwise the average team has a leg up on you entering the draft.

If Arraez cost $22 (equal to his calculated price) then his individual contribution to inflation is zero.

Just seems that he doesn't do anything to help keep pace in this example, but doesn't hurt I guess.

[Ken]

Appreciate your detailed response.

If league inflation is calculated at 30% then your team would need a group of keepers at that level to keep pace, otherwise the average team has a leg up on you entering the draft.

If Arraez cost $22 (equal to his calculated price) then his individual contribution to inflation is zero.

Just seems that he doesn't do anything to help keep pace in this example, but doesn't hurt I guess.

The question of whether you are ahead of other teams going into the auction is, in my opinion, a separate discussion. It can lead to a decision to play more for the long term.

But that's a more whole-team issue than an Arraez issue and should be treated as such.

I've gone into several auctions with a middling keeper roster though and won the league, with a lot of the winnings coming out of that auction. It's not easy, but IMO until you give up on the season your goal is always to improve each position on the team even on the margins. That means analyzing each choice on it's own and not allowing an overall idea of whether other teams have better keepers creep into it.

Just as a point of reference, I play in a couple high inflation keeper leagues. In those leagues its not uncommon for stars to be kept at very high prices, and in my opinion that is the correct decision. Someone just traded me a 1st round rookie draft pick for a $58 Kyle Tucker in one. That means that he is keeping him at that price. That's driving down inflation, but it still can be the correct choice (it often is - in this case he's overpaying - our inflation is down this year from last and he doesn't realize it, but that's a different topic).

One thing people rarely think about is that locking in value with expensive keepers means you have less $ that will be deflated in the auction. So yeah, maybe you overpaid for Tucker by $28, but that means $28 of your budget isnt getting deflated by auction prices.

It feels counter intuitive, but if you are locking in value, spending more of your money before the auction can be a good thing. It's like if your job forced you to move and you were closing on a house, and at the last second you find out it needs a new $20K roof the current owners wont cover. That would be a tough spot and you'd want to cancel your offer. But if you find out that tomorrow the price for new homes in this area is going up $50K, even though you are paying $20K more than you want to, it's still the right decision, because waiting (and paying more) is worse.

[Sharky]

Ken, a variety of good points and I tend to agree with you here. Tying two (conceptual) threads together: keeping higher priced guys at pre-inflation prices reduces the degree of purchasing power erosion you face at auction ….. AND having fewer dollars to spend at auction may mean fewer opportunities to successfully make value buys (if possible in your league). So the two need to be considered in tandem.

[Ken]

Ken, a variety of good points and I tend to agree with you here. Tying two (conceptual) threads together: keeping higher priced guys at pre-inflation prices reduces the degree of purchasing power erosion you face at auction ….. AND having fewer dollars to spend at auction may mean fewer opportunities to successfully make value buys (if possible in your league). So the two need to be considered in tandem.

I agree with you. In the leagues I focus on we have a really good set of owners and there aren't many value buys but you're right, the less $ you have the less likely you'll be able to get those.