*** VD 15 Commentary Thread ***

[hacko]

Where's that located?

2 nd post in Draft thread

[DMT]

So this is actually a common rookie mistake. It'll take you a while to acclimatize to what is a good / bad / mediocre, and more importantly, what is good / bad / mediocre at different times of the draft.

In terms of Career, anything over 2.90 ERA is moving into the negatives, 1.18 WHIP likewise
In terms of BY, anything over 1.90 ERA is moving into the negative, 0.98 WHIP likewise

The best tip is to look at previous drafts, and pay attention to where players are typically selected.

Nolan Ryan:

VD14 - 12th Round
VD13 - 9th Round
VD12 - 9th Round

That will tell you the approximate value of a player, even if you don't as yet know why. So why is Ryan a mid-round pick despite all those numbers?

1. His ratios are bad for this stage of the draft. The key number is IP ... 5386 IP of 3.19 ERA and 1.247 is going to be hard to recover from. And that BY WHIP is terrible. The ERA's would be manageable if the WHIP's weren't so toxic.

Why is it hard to recover? Because in order to make Ryan work in an all-round pitching squad, you'll end up damaging the competitiveness of your hitting. How will rescuing Ryan's ratios hurt my hitting?

All the good pitchers who can help recover those ratios will require earlier game picks, or you will have to burn good Letters/Franchises (or likely both). This will detract from other areas of your team. So while everyone else is load up on hitting stats, you'll be over-picking pitchers to try and make your ratios competitive again.

2. R is the 6th best letter after BCMSW. So you will be able to get good value from your R even in the later parts of the draft. You don't want to be taking too many negatives with early picks from big letters or Franchises.

3. Relative value - why pick Ryan in the 3rd, when you can get him in the 10th Round? Even if you really want him, it's always better to gamble, especially with the big letters / Franchises. if your gamble fails, you'll still get a good replacement. If you compare the average 3rd round player with the average 10th round player ... that will be quite a difference ... either in terns of raw value or letter/franchise value.

Tips:

As Bene suggested, you should probably lean into where Nolan Ryan is strong, rather than try to rescue his bad stats. Options:

1. Tank ratios completely - that is, completely abandon having competitive ratios. This will open up your late game player pool enormously. You will have a whole field of players no-one else will be interested in. That said, you will be playing with 4 less categories
2. Partially tank ratios:
- Ryan's BY ratios are more easily recoverable, so you could tank career ratios and try to remain competitive in BY ratios - so players with a single strong BY and bad career ratios.
- WHIP is easier to come by than ERA, and Ryan's ERA isn't atrocious, so maybe you could try and recover his ERA while abandoning his WHIP - so targeting players with low WHIP and bad ERA's

BUT be aware, with the partial-tank strats, the players you will be targeting will also be very desirable for all the other teams.

Good post. Determining relative value of pitching ratios was my biggest VD challenge, although I don't think I've ever picked the Express.

[cavebird]

I'll preface this by saying that draft discussion has been in the doldrums for years now, and it's good that you're back, and that we have some new players to reinvigorate things around here. Also one of the reasons why I'm pushing new kinds of draft and new data pools ... new stuff to talk and think about.

So while I'm 100% in agreement that more draft discussion is healthy and desirable (and that has been lacking lately as we've gotten too familiar with things!), it's really important that we hold steadfast to the "no talking about players" rule. That includes alluding to players in an obvious way, even if you don't mention them by name.

In this circumstance, you can easily discuss the merits of Quisenberry vis à vis other Q or QUIZY players without alluding to an actual undrafted player. And then once that other player has been selected, then discuss the specifics.

While this instance is innocuous and innocent, if we allow this kind of discussion to become commonplace, it will eventually lead to unnecessary arguments, bad feeling, and open the possibility of players trying to "game" discussions to get an edge or unfairly influence other picks.

It's a tough consideration. It was hard to explain without using a comparison, but I will try to avoid it in the future. I almost just compared to a pitching blank (I assume that is not considered name dropping; we all know that there are QUIZY pitching "blanks" taken near the end), but I wanted someone with actual ratios since the ratios are a big part of Quisenberry's value (it certainly isn't his K's). Apologies for the faux pas.

[cavebird]

I think you picked him at a good time. He could easily be a late first rounder in this format IMO. With Q or I being requirements, and the weak Franchise, I think he more than merits that (and I'm deliberately undervaluing Franchises a little until I get a handle on their actual value).

But first overall ... is that blue stuff on the streets again?

I guess we'll see about his value---or not since it is just one pick of 27. I just can't get my head around drafting someone with that light stats that early. But the extra QUIZ is going to be a mess. Time will tell.

[Ken]

It's a tough consideration. It was hard to explain without using a comparison, but I will try to avoid it in the future. I almost just compared to a pitching blank (I assume that is not considered name dropping; we all know that there are QUIZY pitching "blanks" taken near the end), but I wanted someone with actual ratios since the ratios are a big part of Quisenberry's value (it certainly isn't his K's). Apologies for the faux pas.

I have two thoughts.

1, the point of the "don't mention undrafted players" rule is to avoid bringing up names for others to pick - everyone should be doing the research on their own and coming up with names, and it's frustrating when you are 2 spots away and someone mentions a name and they get picked. Or you may be pushing someone to draft a particular player to work into the strategy you are using. Obviously that didn't happen here, and wouldn't since that player won't be picked for at least a little while, but the same concept applies. I'm personally fine with having that rule or not, it doesn't bother me, but if we are going to have it, lets stick with it right? And something that can easily be looked up is the same as naming the player, it takes 2 seconds to see who was the 7th pick in the 16th rd of VD 14. You might as well have typed out the name, it's no different functionally. It's like saying "Quad Challs" as a way to disguise the name.

2, let's be honest here, you were bragging about a pick in the last draft. It was a "look at the big brain on Adam" comment. Again, it doesn't bother me, but lets not try to hide it as talking strategy when really you were bragging about getting a pick much later in the draft who compares favorably to one early in this one. I don't mind the bravado at all honestly, it's fun commentary, and a little good natured shit talking never hurt anyone. It's clearly a big part of your persona on here to brag, and that doesn't bother me at all. But let's be honest about it, that's what it was! And that's okay.

Either way, I enjoy the discussion and this really didn't bother me, just wanted to try to stay consistent with our rules applications. Carry on!

[johnnya24]

I guess we'll see about his value---or not since it is just one pick of 27. I just can't get my head around drafting someone with that light stats that early. But the extra QUIZ is going to be a mess. Time will tell.

I've never drafted an early QUIZY (apart from Yaz / Yount etc). First time for everything.

[johnnya24]

2, let's be honest here, you were bragging about a pick in the last draft. It was a "look at the big brain on Adam" comment. Again, it doesn't bother me, but lets not try to hide it as talking strategy when really you were bragging about getting a pick much later in the draft who compares favorably to one early in this one. I don't mind the bravado at all honestly, it's fun commentary, and a little good natured shit talking never hurt anyone. It's clearly a big part of your persona on here to brag, and that doesn't bother me at all. But let's be honest about it, that's what it was! And that's okay.

Either way, I enjoy the discussion and this really didn't bother me, just wanted to try to stay consistent with our rules applications. Carry on!

Shit talking and bravado is a VD tradition from the old days. When we had Pogues and Squidward as well, it was almost a requirement.

[Ken]

Shit talking and bravado is a VD tradition from the old days. When we had Pogues and Squidward as well, it was almost a requirement.

Agree, nothing wrong with it at all!

[heyelander]

Agree, nothing wrong with it at all!

I'm okay with "My pick was great" Less so with... "I had a much better pick for you than you did"

[cavebird]

I have two thoughts.

1, the point of the "don't mention undrafted players" rule is to avoid bringing up names for others to pick - everyone should be doing the research on their own and coming up with names, and it's frustrating when you are 2 spots away and someone mentions a name and they get picked. Or you may be pushing someone to draft a particular player to work into the strategy you are using. Obviously that didn't happen here, and wouldn't since that player won't be picked for at least a little while, but the same concept applies. I'm personally fine with having that rule or not, it doesn't bother me, but if we are going to have it, lets stick with it right? And something that can easily be looked up is the same as naming the player, it takes 2 seconds to see who was the 7th pick in the 16th rd of VD 14. You might as well have typed out the name, it's no different functionally. It's like saying "Quad Challs" as a way to disguise the name.

2, let's be honest here, you were bragging about a pick in the last draft. It was a "look at the big brain on Adam" comment. Again, it doesn't bother me, but lets not try to hide it as talking strategy when really you were bragging about getting a pick much later in the draft who compares favorably to one early in this one. I don't mind the bravado at all honestly, it's fun commentary, and a little good natured shit talking never hurt anyone. It's clearly a big part of your persona on here to brag, and that doesn't bother me at all. But let's be honest about it, that's what it was! And that's okay.

Either way, I enjoy the discussion and this really didn't bother me, just wanted to try to stay consistent with our rules applications. Carry on!

It really was a strategy thought, not a bragging. (My comment in the VD 14 Commentary about renaming VD 13 The Two Towers, that was bragging.) It is a strategy that people do all the time (the early Izzy/Quisy/Ugi picks) that I just can't get into, for the reasons I described. My original plan was to substitute a pure pitching blank for Quis as a last round pick, but I didn't see any in VD 14 that actually fit the bill--the ones in the last round were all starters. So I just thought of the guy I thought of, probably because he was my pick, but it was just the first guy I thought of. Looking now, I see better ones to use, but I'll leave it at that to avoid any further name dropping.

[cavebird]

Shit talking and bravado is a VD tradition from the old days. When we had Pogues and Squidward as well, it was almost a requirement.

And really, that was barely bravado; when I want to, I am much better at it than that post.

[Ken]

And really, that was barely bravado; when I want to, I am much better at it than that post.

nothing like bragging about how well you brag

[cavebird]

I've never drafted an early QUIZY (apart from Yaz / Yount etc). First time for everything.

I didn't recall you doing that (although I missed a ton of drafts). But the extra QUIZ makes things different this time. There are always the big four Y's (all already drafted, not name dropping!) and they go first. Then these three. Now with the extra QUIZ, I wonder when the next QUIZY guys will go. Usually, there is a break between the first seven and the rest. I wonder what happens now.

[cavebird]

nothing like bragging about how well you brag

Exactly!

[Ken]

Heart set on one particular player. No way he makes it through 4 picks though.