How to attack auction??

[luckyheel]

So, our leagues are trying something new this year with regard to keepers and I'd like to get some opinions on how it will impact inflation at the auction. Starting at this auction ALL previous keepers will have $5 added to their salary if we keep the player. Essentially, if I have a player that has a $1 salary and I decide to keep him, his salary will be $6 this year.

My inclination is that this will SIGNIFICANTLY reduce inflation, almost to the point of being negative.

I have not done all of the 'accurate' evaluations of our potential keepers in the league, but my thoughts are based off of a simple assumption.

First, let's base inflation on the old rules of the player simply retaining the salary currently assigned to him. Let's assume each team has 10 $1 players they are intending on keeping. Let's also assume that for all 100 players kept, their average projected value is $8. Each team has $260 to spend at the auction. The inflation calculation would be Total available $ to spend (2600) - Total keeper cost (100) = 2500. Then, the total available spend (2600) - total keeper value (100 players at $8/each = 800) = 1800. Inflation in this scenario = 2500/1800 = ~39%.
In the new rules, there would be 2600 to spend - the keeper cost of $600 as each $1 player has $5 added to his salary. This equals 2000. The denominator doesn't change as their projected values are the same (1800). In this scenario, inflation is reduced to about 11%. That is a HUGE reduction. Essentially, up to $500 is taken off the table for spend.

Now, we all know that owners will be keeping many players at much higher prices than $1 ($6 in the new rules), so the above scenarios are not 100% accurate. However, given that fact and the likelihood of players not earning 800% of their cost ($8 to $1 spend), the inflation in our new rules is likely going to be closer to 0%.

ALL OF THIS SAID, what is the best approach to take on players "at value"? Is a Scherzer at $29/$34 a keeper or is he likely going to go for less than that given a very low inflation rate? Do you think the 'stud' players who typically go for 40-50 will still go in that price range? Do I let the other owners spend like that and then target 13 $15-20 players?

I ask all of this with a question as to whether I should target players like Votto at $50 or Bruce at $44 or even Goldschmidt at $34 (all prices with the +$5 already added)? Or, do I just go in with my total keeper costs at ~$85 and let the high price players go for well above their value?

[james33]

I disagree with the assumption you've made. You are essentially assuming now that the average keeper now will be kept for $6 with a value of $8. I bet that the spread of the average keeper price-value will be more than $2.

Also the $1 assumption matters. Do the math - a bunch of $28 value guys kept at $26 has a bigger effect on inflation than a bunch of $8 kept at $6, even thought the $2 spread is the same.

So inflation may not be as low as you are thinking. But it will certainly be lower than in past years, and some owners will take some time to adjust. For auction strategy, I'd probably wait early on in the auction, assuming that folks do overbid.

[Gregg]

I agree with James that the inflation numbers are not right.

That said I would be all over Goldschmidt at $34.

One of the things you might look at is how many studs will be back in the auction. It is a bad thing to have a lot of money and no one or very few to spend it on. That is how you get a $50 Votto. I would hope there would be better ways to spend $50.00 at auction than Votto (and I like him).

[axman]

I've played in the leagues with this keeper structure and your assumptions are pretty accurate. Inflation will drop off significantly. Typically I have found it ends up around 10% (highly depends on minor leaguers starting prices). If this is new to the majority of your league and you have a few people who don't do a lot of research, prices will be inflated to start the draft. I wouldn't just load up on third tier type guys at good value because the value left at the end when everyone has overspent can be pretty big.

Another note with this structure: young talent / rookies often lose a lot of value with this format. In a standard format keeping a $6 Profar for couple years while he gets more productive is almost always going to pay off. For example:

Standard keeper format
2014 - $6
2015 - $6
option time say two years @ $11
2016 - $11
2017 - $11
Total cost - $34

Your new format - losing rookie eligibility in 2013
2014 - $11
2015 - $16
2016 - $21
2017 - $26
Total cost - $74

[chancellor]

I disagree with the assumption you've made. You are essentially assuming now that the average keeper now will be kept for $6 with a value of $8. I bet that the spread of the average keeper price-value will be more than $2.

This nails it perfectly. A lot more players will come back into the pool - which will drive inflation down some of the way - but if you want to take an early swing at inflation values, you need to assume the spread will be much larger, say, about $6.

And, as Gregg said, if you can get Goldschmidt for $34, buy. With a smile on your face.

[The Dane]

My longtime league uses this system and your breakdown is logical. Here are the differences I notice, and how I play them:

1) Less inflation means that if you go the extra buck, you tend to get the guy you want. If you want to control the team you have, you can do this easier with less inflation.

2) The cheap keeper is considerably more valuable. When most guys are keeping $15 talent at $13, that $6 guy with upside becomes might sexy, especially when it means you have a better chance to land an expensive star. I find that late-game, people fight less over the $1 players at the end. It's almost like the WORST thing that could happen is to pay $3 for someone you could have had for $1, so when in dollar days, most players just let you get your $1 and they just take the next one. Sure, there are occasional skirmishes, but so many players are kept just at value (or even over value in some cases) that everyone wants to backfill, so it becomes less like an auction and more like a draft in the later rounds.

3) Good players at value are better keepers than they would be in other leagues. Say you project Joey Votto to be worth $33 and you have him at $33, but you KNOW he won't go for less than $37 if you toss him back. If you want to keep him, he's worth keeping at that point, even if you are keeping him at value, because there will be tons of other players that you also project at $33 that will go for $37 an you will have saved the $4. This is true in all leagues, but it seems more acute in these.

4) Because of the desperation to acquire $1 players as potential keepers in the late game, I find these drafts have more money left on the table. If I have $25 for 10 positions in most drafts, I feel like I'm in a great place, enough cash to price enforce a little, especially for late game gems and there is little risk of leaving any more than $1 or $2 at the table. In this league, if you have $25 for 10 positions, you could very well leave $15 on the table because you simply got all the players you wanted for less than you thought it would take to get them. It can be distressing until you realize that, league-wide, there was a lot left at the end because people were just waiting to get their $1 guys.

Just my experience, your results may vary.

[luckyheel]

4) Because of the desperation to acquire $1 players as potential keepers in the late game, I find these drafts have more money left on the table. If I have $25 for 10 positions in most drafts, I feel like I'm in a great place, enough cash to price enforce a little, especially for late game gems and there is little risk of leaving any more than $1 or $2 at the table. In this league, if you have $25 for 10 positions, you could very well leave $15 on the table because you simply got all the players you wanted for less than you thought it would take to get them. It can be distressing until you realize that, league-wide, there was a lot left at the end because people were just waiting to get their $1 guys.

Interesting concept...
That would lead me to believe that the best strategy would be to spend early and often and leave about $10 for your last 5 players. I mean...if I'm in it to win this year, I shouldn't care about picking up a $1 player who, next year, will still be a $6 keeper. I get what I need and play the end game.

[The Dane]

Interesting concept...
That would lead me to believe that the best strategy would be to spend early and often and leave about $10 for your last 5 players. I mean...if I'm in it to win this year, I shouldn't care about picking up a $1 player who, next year, will still be a $6 keeper. I get what I need and play the end game.

Yes, that is how I usually approach things.

My league also has a $5 minimum salary for FAABs, so I guy who gets FAABed in-season has his salary tagged at his FAAB price or $5, whichever is higher. So, if you grab a great $1 FAAB during the season, he is keepable at $10 for the next season, which means that many teams keep cheap guys with low upside just to have more to spend at auction. I see this as good for me because those types of players are not allowed on my roster so it's simply less competition for the players I really want.