What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

***OFFICIAL*** FFA MLB Draft (1 Viewer)

True or False:

Jumaine Jones is the best player in the NBA right now.

(Answer in a few minutes)
FalseSince Pickles isn't here, I'll go off his vague list and give him Dave Parker, OF
Nice, can hit for power, average, solid glove in his day and he's a lefty. Funny in a recent who should get in the HOF thread him Jim Rice and Dawson were mentioned as being fairly similar numbers wise. Interesting how much earlier Rice went than these two, I agree he's the best of the three(followed by Dawson then Parker) but 7 rounds better I don't know. Both picks were real good value here in round 19.
Agreed. :thumbup: Plus they have the nickname factor. Who doesn't love the Cobra and the Hawk???

 
In Round 17 I took Graig Nettles - 3B. It somehow missed the latest updated lists.
CorrectedRose and Pesky are also out of position, but Nipsey will just have to figure it out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D'oh! I thought I'd have all nigfht with mrharrier on the clock ... the last post I read was the one before his selection of Soscia.. Then he goes and makes a speed pick.

Updating my chart, and will pick shortly.

 
is "at the basepaths" = "at the plate"???I never said Thomas was a better player, i said he was a better HITTER...HE HIT THE BALL BETTER, GOT ON BASE BETTER, ETC.!!Bonds' stole more bases and played better defense, and was a better all around player, but Thomas was a better hitter...
I looked at Bonds and Thomas from 90-99 totaled their numbers and devided by 10. The only hitting catigories where Thomas averaged higher then bonds were:Hits Thomas 156 - Bonds 148Doubles 32 - 30Strikeouts 74 - 75Batting Average .322 - .301OBP .442 - .432Catigories Bonds wins:HR, Runs, RBI, 3B, Walks, Slugging, Total Bases, OPS and OPS+ Funny thing to, they had identical total # of at bats throughout those 10 seasons.I think you're wrong
:own3d: :own3d: :own3d: :own3d: :own3d: Nice work, Kraft.Larry: *** ZAP *** You're a golden dragon!
there's a reason he dind't post the margin that Bonds had over Thomas, because Bonds had like a VERY small amount of homeruns (under 2 a year) more than Thomas, whereas Thomas had .021 better batting average than Bonds over the decade...8 more hits....010 OB%Bonds was a better all-around player (hence more runs, 'cuz of his baserunning)... Thomas had 2 MVPs and he was barely there on defense and wasn't exactly a great baserunner....Yes, Bonds had 3... But Bonds was a great all-around player...Before 2000, Thomas is arguably (easily) the better batter, even though Bonds was always the better player...
I didn't post the other numbers because I didn't want to type them all out, well here they are(Average number from 1990-1999). Thomas BondsG 137.1 143.4AB 489.2 489.4R 96.8 109.1H 156.4 147.82B 31.7 29.93B 1 4.2HR 30.1 36.1RBI 104 107.6SB 2.8 34.3CS 1.8 9.4BB 107.6 114.6SO 74.1 74.7BA 0.3215 0.301OBP 0.4423 0.4321SLG 0.5748 0.603TB 280.4 294.4SH 0 0.1SF 8.2 6IBB 13.3 25.7HBP 4.1 4.5GDP 15.1 9.6SLG 0.5748 0.603OPS 1.0173 1.0352OPS+ 171.1 178.7 Thomas was not a better hitter than Bonds "Before 2000" it's as simple as that. You are WRONG.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
is "at the basepaths" = "at the plate"???I never said Thomas was a better player, i said he was a better HITTER...HE HIT THE BALL BETTER, GOT ON BASE BETTER, ETC.!!Bonds' stole more bases and played better defense, and was a better all around player, but Thomas was a better hitter...
I looked at Bonds and Thomas from 90-99 totaled their numbers and devided by 10. The only hitting catigories where Thomas averaged higher then bonds were:Hits Thomas 156 - Bonds 148Doubles 32 - 30Strikeouts 74 - 75Batting Average .322 - .301OBP .442 - .432Catigories Bonds wins:HR, Runs, RBI, 3B, Walks, Slugging, Total Bases, OPS and OPS+ Funny thing to, they had identical total # of at bats throughout those 10 seasons.I think you're wrong
:own3d: :own3d: :own3d: :own3d: :own3d: Nice work, Kraft.Larry: *** ZAP *** You're a golden dragon!
there's a reason he dind't post the margin that Bonds had over Thomas, because Bonds had like a VERY small amount of homeruns (under 2 a year) more than Thomas, whereas Thomas had .021 better batting average than Bonds over the decade...8 more hits....010 OB%Bonds was a better all-around player (hence more runs, 'cuz of his baserunning)... Thomas had 2 MVPs and he was barely there on defense and wasn't exactly a great baserunner....Yes, Bonds had 3... But Bonds was a great all-around player...Before 2000, Thomas is arguably (easily) the better batter, even though Bonds was always the better player...
I didn't post the other numbers because I didn't want to type them all out, well here they are(Average number from 1990-1999). Thomas BondsG 137.1 143.4AB 489.2 489.4R 96.8 109.1H 156.4 147.82B 31.7 29.93B 1 4.2HR 30.1 36.1RBI 104 107.6SB 2.8 34.3CS 1.8 9.4BB 107.6 114.6SO 74.1 74.7BA 0.3215 0.301OBP 0.4423 0.4321SLG 0.5748 0.603TB 280.4 294.4SH 0 0.1SF 8.2 6IBB 13.3 25.7HBP 4.1 4.5GDP 15.1 9.6SLG 0.5748 0.603OPS 1.0173 1.0352OPS+ 171.1 178.7 Thomas was not a better hitter than Bonds "Before 2000" it's as simple as that. You are WRONG.
:popcorn:
 
C Mike Scioscia
No props for this great pick? Maybe not a great batter (though certainly serviceable), but there are few catchers that managed a game so well, and I needed a great defensive replacement just in case I get up 4-5 runs and need to pull Piazza for the 7-9th innings.
 
Thomas Bonds

HR 30.1 36.1

SB 2.8 34.3

BB 107.6 114.6

SLG 0.5748 0.603

TB 280.4 294.4

OPS 1.0173 1.0352

OPS+ 171.1 178.7

Thomas was not a better hitter than Bonds "Before 2000" it's as simple as that. You are WRONG.
And Larry said there was barely a difference between their HR... it isn't even close. Those are not small margins there.
 
C Mike Scioscia
No props for this great pick? Maybe not a great batter (though certainly serviceable), but there are few catchers that managed a game so well, and I needed a great defensive replacement just in case I get up 4-5 runs and need to pull Piazza for the 7-9th innings.
Why would you need to pull a great defensive catcher, in Piazza? :popcorn:

 
Hey Sammy, thanks for posting that list. Can you go ahead and post the future pick plans and the write-up on your team that Nipsey and I requested?

 
C Mike Scioscia
No props for this great pick? Maybe not a great batter (though certainly serviceable), but there are few catchers that managed a game so well, and I needed a great defensive replacement just in case I get up 4-5 runs and need to pull Piazza for the 7-9th innings.
Why would you need to pull a great defensive catcher, in Piazza? :popcorn:
Well in the sim, I likely won't. But for the FFA voters, it should help.
 
C Mike Scioscia
No props for this great pick? Maybe not a great batter (though certainly serviceable), but there are few catchers that managed a game so well, and I needed a great defensive replacement just in case I get up 4-5 runs and need to pull Piazza for the 7-9th innings.
Why would you need to pull a great defensive catcher, in Piazza? :popcorn:
Well in the sim, I likely won't. But for the FFA voters, it should help.
The D rankings on the sim from what I see are not exactly great. Mize a better fielder than Richie Ashburn?Um.... no.

This actually raises a question - for those of us drafting according to our rules and not checking the sim (afterthought), what happens when I have a 1B eligible Schmidt who is not eligible to play first in the sim? Or Arod and 3B. These played a role in my drafting, as I do not need as many utility players since I have stars that can play more than one position, if needed.

However, if the sim wont let me put ARod at third, or Schmidt at first (late innings, double switch lets say), then what happens? Again, if because we are locked into one particular sim I am screwed, so be it, I dont want a twelve page arguement, but am curious if there is a fair way to deal with these types of situations.

tia

 
19.10 - Joe Wood - RP

Great pitcher whose career was cut short, therefore he never got the "career numbers" of the greats.

2.04 ERA (4th All-Time)

1.085 WHIP (10th All-Time)

0.79 Hits Allowed per Inning (12th All-Time)

146 Adjusted ERA (3rd All-Time) Tied with bullpen mate Quisenberry

0.671 Win% (11th All-Time)

Again, building my staff on low ERA/low WHIP this guy is a perfect fit for the bullpen.

 
C Mike Scioscia
No props for this great pick? Maybe not a great batter (though certainly serviceable), but there are few catchers that managed a game so well, and I needed a great defensive replacement just in case I get up 4-5 runs and need to pull Piazza for the 7-9th innings.
Why would you need to pull a great defensive catcher, in Piazza? :popcorn:
Well in the sim, I likely won't. But for the FFA voters, it should help.
The D rankings on the sim from what I see are not exactly great. Mize a better fielder than Richie Ashburn?Um.... no.

This actually raises a question - for those of us drafting according to our rules and not checking the sim (afterthought), what happens when I have a 1B eligible Schmidt who is not eligible to play first in the sim? Or Arod and 3B. These played a role in my drafting, as I do not need as many utility players since I have stars that can play more than one position, if needed.

However, if the sim wont let me put ARod at third, or Schmidt at first (late innings, double switch lets say), then what happens? Again, if because we are locked into one particular sim I am screwed, so be it, I dont want a twelve page arguement, but am curious if there is a fair way to deal with these types of situations.

tia
You can they just won't do so great. I personally think that's fair.
 
C Mike Scioscia
No props for this great pick? Maybe not a great batter (though certainly serviceable), but there are few catchers that managed a game so well, and I needed a great defensive replacement just in case I get up 4-5 runs and need to pull Piazza for the 7-9th innings.
Why would you need to pull a great defensive catcher, in Piazza? :popcorn:
Well in the sim, I likely won't. But for the FFA voters, it should help.
The D rankings on the sim from what I see are not exactly great. Mize a better fielder than Richie Ashburn?Um.... no.

This actually raises a question - for those of us drafting according to our rules and not checking the sim (afterthought), what happens when I have a 1B eligible Schmidt who is not eligible to play first in the sim? Or Arod and 3B. These played a role in my drafting, as I do not need as many utility players since I have stars that can play more than one position, if needed.

However, if the sim wont let me put ARod at third, or Schmidt at first (late innings, double switch lets say), then what happens? Again, if because we are locked into one particular sim I am screwed, so be it, I dont want a twelve page arguement, but am curious if there is a fair way to deal with these types of situations.

tia
You can just play them at whatever positions you want. Their defense will probably suffer but so be it.What I don't understand is your approach. Can you not play Schmidt at 3B? Unless there is a real problem, why bring it up except that you just love to cause the argument and keep banging your drum for the 4th year and wrose thing?

 
The D rankings on the sim from what I see are not exactly great. Mize a better fielder than Richie Ashburn?Um.... no.
To be fair, I've looked through their ratings, and every single one is based directly on fielding percentage. Sometimes our memories of guys' athleticism as fielders is not an accurate measure of their consistency. If Mize's was better, his rating should be better. It's your memory that's wrong. The statistics aren't wrong. And all the ratings are is a direct correlation to the statistics.
 
LATEST THREE ROUNDS:

17 257 pumpnick SP Johnny Antonelli

17 258 Spock 3B Edgar Martinez

17 259 lastresort SP Red Ruffing

17 260 Capella 2B Jeff Kent

17 261 Nipsey SP Jimmy Key

17 262 Sammy3469 SP Eppa Rixey

17 263 Pickles SP Jerry Koosman

17 264 Harrier OF Jake Stenzel

17 265 Doug B SS Joe Sewell

17 266 bogart 3B Graig Nettles

17 267 Koya SP Mike Cuellar

17 268 funkley SP Ed Ciccote

17 269 Kraft OF Tony Oliva

17 270 UCONN 3B Robin Ventura

17 271 Spartans RP Dave Righetti

17 272 Larryboy SP Satchel Paige

18 273 Larryboy SP Tim Wakefield

18 274 Spartans 2B Bobby Grich

18 275 UCONN 1B Zeke Bonura

18 276 Kraft 2B Johnny Pesky

18 277 funkley 3B Ken Boyer

18 278 Koya SS Lou Boudreau

18 279 bogart 3B Bill Dahlen

18 280 Doug B OF Frank Howard

18 281 Harrier SP Slim Sallee

18 282 Pickles 1B Will Clark

18 283 Sammy3469 3B Bob Elliot

18 284 Nipsey SP Dave Stieb

18 285 Capella SP Dave McNally

18 286 lastresort C Javy Lopez

18 287 Spock RP Terry Forster

18 288 pumpnick OF Edd Roush

19 289 pumpnick OF Chick Hafey

19 290 Spock 2B Joe Gordon

19 291 lastresort RP Mike Marshall

19 292 Capella OF Dom DiMaggio

19 293 Nipsey OF Andre Dawson

19 294 Sammy3469 SP Billy Pierce

19 295 Pickles OF Dave Parker

19 296 Harrier C Mike Scioscia

19 297 Doug B 1B Ted Kluszewski

19 298 bogart RP Joe Wood

19 299 Koya on the clock

19 300 funkley on deck

19 301 Kraft in the hole

19 302 UCONN

19 303 Spartans

19 304 Larryboy

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The D rankings on the sim from what I see are not exactly great. Mize a better fielder than Richie Ashburn?Um.... no.
To be fair, I've looked through their ratings, and every single one is based directly on fielding percentage. Sometimes our memories of guys' athleticism as fielders is not an accurate measure of their consistency. If Mize's was better, his rating should be better. It's your memory that's wrong. The statistics aren't wrong. And all the ratings are is a direct correlation to the statistics.
Statistics do not tell you if you are able to make 10 plays no one else could make, but because of that additional range, extra jump, etc, you may have a few more errors. More errors does not by itself mean worse defense. Like any stat, on its own, in a vacuum, it is worth very little.If you want to believe that Mize was a better defensive 1B than Richie Ashburn was an OF, you are entitled to your opinion. It isnt my memory that is wrong - but the memory of COUNTLESS baseball experts.Numbers can and do lie. They are only pieces of the puzzle.
 
19.09 1B Ted Kluszewski
Nice pick, just proves how deep 1B was
He'll be super-handy when my team travels to Bogart, mrharrier, and Kraft's stadiums. Klu will actually press Murray for time. A shame neither Murray nor Klu ever qualified at another position ... but to have those bats, I'll live with it.
 
Ok, I will do a write up later. This will be my first non HoF position player, but for what he does, he is as good as just about anyone.

I have offense and defense, I have two pinch hitters with .320+ averages and power, and have great flexibility for late game switches with Arod able to play third and Schmidt First.

What I could use is someone who has lightning speed and great defense.. perfect to run for my catcher, or for Mize, when I have a man on second, down one, late innings.

For my pinch runner/late game speed and defense pick:

Kenny Lofton. OF

That gives me 10 steal titles in my lineup and adds some defense and speed to create some havoc on the base paths. Might have Lofton start in very large stadiums, as a leadoff hitter.

 
The D rankings on the sim from what I see are not exactly great.  Mize a better fielder than Richie Ashburn?Um.... no.
To be fair, I've looked through their ratings, and every single one is based directly on fielding percentage. Sometimes our memories of guys' athleticism as fielders is not an accurate measure of their consistency. If Mize's was better, his rating should be better. It's your memory that's wrong. The statistics aren't wrong. And all the ratings are is a direct correlation to the statistics.
Statistics do not tell you if you are able to make 10 plays no one else could make, but because of that additional range, extra jump, etc, you may have a few more errors. More errors does not by itself mean worse defense. Like any stat, on its own, in a vacuum, it is worth very little.If you want to believe that Mize was a better defensive 1B than Richie Ashburn was an OF, you are entitled to your opinion. It isnt my memory that is wrong - but the memory of COUNTLESS baseball experts.Numbers can and do lie. They are only pieces of the puzzle.
Koya they don't compare one position to another, but within postons for that given year...You won't compare Griffey to Jeter defensively and the sim doesn't either. It compares Jeter to Tejada.
 
The D rankings on the sim from what I see are not exactly great.  Mize a better fielder than Richie Ashburn?Um.... no.
To be fair, I've looked through their ratings, and every single one is based directly on fielding percentage. Sometimes our memories of guys' athleticism as fielders is not an accurate measure of their consistency. If Mize's was better, his rating should be better. It's your memory that's wrong. The statistics aren't wrong. And all the ratings are is a direct correlation to the statistics.
Statistics do not tell you if you are able to make 10 plays no one else could make, but because of that additional range, extra jump, etc, you may have a few more errors. More errors does not by itself mean worse defense. Like any stat, on its own, in a vacuum, it is worth very little.If you want to believe that Mize was a better defensive 1B than Richie Ashburn was an OF, you are entitled to your opinion. It isnt my memory that is wrong - but the memory of COUNTLESS baseball experts.Numbers can and do lie. They are only pieces of the puzzle.
Ashburn is B+/A+ in his 3rd year on the sim...B+ fielding (which I assume means how many errors he'll make) A+ range (which I assume means how many balls he'll get to). :confused:
 
The D rankings on the sim from what I see are not exactly great. Mize a better fielder than Richie Ashburn?Um.... no.
To be fair, I've looked through their ratings, and every single one is based directly on fielding percentage. Sometimes our memories of guys' athleticism as fielders is not an accurate measure of their consistency. If Mize's was better, his rating should be better. It's your memory that's wrong. The statistics aren't wrong. And all the ratings are is a direct correlation to the statistics.
Statistics do not tell you if you are able to make 10 plays no one else could make, but because of that additional range, extra jump, etc, you may have a few more errors. More errors does not by itself mean worse defense. Like any stat, on its own, in a vacuum, it is worth very little.If you want to believe that Mize was a better defensive 1B than Richie Ashburn was an OF, you are entitled to your opinion. It isnt my memory that is wrong - but the memory of COUNTLESS baseball experts.Numbers can and do lie. They are only pieces of the puzzle.
I don't know about Mize and Ashburn. What I do know is that countless EXPERTS like to point to the invalidity of statistics in order to prop up better-known players and better offensive players, though offensive ability rarely correlates with defense, and very often the better defensive players in the league are relatively unknown. Riche didn't have a 10 ft. greater range than Mzie, and if he had to dive across the park for a ball, I doubt he was charged for an error. Errors are generally charged only on plays that one *should* have made.When you look at who gets the Gold Gloves every year, it's very difficult to make the argument that popular opinion is a good measure of defensive ability. Moreover, I will take defensive consistency (and a higher fielding percentage) over one or two spectacular plays and less consistency every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
 
C Mike Scioscia
No props for this great pick? Maybe not a great batter (though certainly serviceable), but there are few catchers that managed a game so well, and I needed a great defensive replacement just in case I get up 4-5 runs and need to pull Piazza for the 7-9th innings.
When teams are down 4-5 runs in the late innings they usually don't risk stealing bases. Replacing Piazza in such a situation flies in the face of your previous argument that other than his weak arm Piazza's defense is great.
 
Wilbur Wood - SP

164 career wins.

Won at least 20 games a year from 1971-74.

3 time All star.

Top 10 MVP twice.

Top 10 CY three times.

Lefthander.
You suck. I was going to go Joe Wood and then Wilbur on the way back to start my own Wood Run. Actually thought about going Wilbur first, but only took Joe because I could fit him in my last RP spot.
 
Wilbur Wood - SP

164 career wins.

Won at least 20 games a year from 1971-74.

3 time All star.

Top 10 MVP twice.

Top 10 CY three times.

Lefthander.
You suck. I was going to go Joe Wood and then Wilbur on the way back to start my own Wood Run. Actually thought about going Wilbur first, but only took Joe because I could fit him in my last RP spot.
:pickle:
 
C Mike Scioscia
No props for this great pick? Maybe not a great batter (though certainly serviceable), but there are few catchers that managed a game so well, and I needed a great defensive replacement just in case I get up 4-5 runs and need to pull Piazza for the 7-9th innings.
When teams are down 4-5 runs in the late innings they usually don't risk stealing bases. Replacing Piazza in such a situation flies in the face of your previous argument that other than his weak arm Piazza's defense is great.
Good point. I should have said 1-2 runs. And aside from his arm, Piazza's defense is truly great. It's the poor arm that influences people's uninformed opinion about his D.
 
With pick #13 in round 19 the Curse Reversing Idiots select. . .

Vic Willis - RHP

Forgot to mention - Hall Of Famer

#19 Career Shoutouts(50)

#19 Career Complete Games(388)

#39 Career innings pitched

#58 Career ERA

Eight 20+ win seasons

Ten seasons ERA < 3

Can use him in long relief and spot start him if necessary.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
With proxy from UCONN, i select...

19.14 Roger Bresnahan - C

Fortunate to get a HOF catcher this late. Redefined the position. Glowing write-up to come later tonight.

edit to correct mis-spell of name.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
With proxy from UCONN, i select...

19.14 Roger Breshanan - C

Fortunate to get a HOF catcher this late. Redefined the position. Glowing write-up to come later tonight.
That's spelled "Bresnahan" for anyone searching. Excellent fielder for his era.
 
Quick OOTP update:

While entering the rosters that I DO HAVE (Ahem, slackers...) I noticed that OOTP doesn't apply ratings to the really old guys very well when using the Lahman db. Guys that played in the Dead Ball Era get screwed for power ratings.

So, I found a better alternative. There's this guy named Ankit that created several variations of the Lahman db and one of them is a Normalize version of it. Basically, he took the Lahman db and normalized the stats for the historical players to match up with today's game.

I took a look at a few of them and they look pretty good. For example, in 1901 Sam Crawford had 16 HR. That was a ton for that era (props to Koya). Ankit's normalized db has Crawford with 49 HR for that year. Seems pretty good to me. :thumbup:

Two caveats:

1) It only goes to the 2002 season. This isn't that big of a deal since we can use Lahman for 2003 or 2004 since they won't need to be normalized.

2) He's apparently working on a newer version with a different methodology for calculating the normalized stats.

I'm going to email him and see if I can get an update on the new version.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quick OOTP update:

While entering the rosters that I DO HAVE (Ahem, slackers...) I noticed that OOTP doesn't apply ratings to the really old guys very well when using the Lahman db. Guys that played in the Dead Ball Era get screwed for power ratings.

So, I found a better alternative. There's this guy named Ankit that created several variations of the Lahman db and one of them is a Normalize version of it. Basically, he took the Lahman db and normalized the stats for the historical players to match up with today's game.

I took a look at a few of them and they look pretty good. For example, in 1901 Sam Crawford had 16 HR. That was a ton for that era (props to Koya). Ankit's normalized db has Crawford with 49 HR for that year. Seems pretty good to me. :thumbup:

Two caveats:

1) It only goes to the 2002 season. This isn't that big of a deal since we can use Lahman for 2003 or 2004 since they won't need to be normalized.

2) He's apparently working on a newer version with a different methodology for calculating the normalized stats.

I'm going to email him and see if I can get an update on the new version.
Sounds awesome; makes a lot of good sense.
 
Quick OOTP update:

While entering the rosters that I DO HAVE (Ahem, slackers...) I noticed that OOTP doesn't apply ratings to the really old guys very well when using the Lahman db. Guys that played in the Dead Ball Era get screwed for power ratings.

So, I found a better alternative. There's this guy named Ankit that created several variations of the Lahman db and one of them is a Normalize version of it. Basically, he took the Lahman db and normalized the stats for the historical players to match up with today's game.

I took a look at a few of them and they look pretty good. For example, in 1901 Sam Crawford had 16 HR. That was a ton for that era (props to Koya). Ankit's normalized db has Crawford with 49 HR for that year. Seems pretty good to me. :thumbup:

Two caveats:

1) It only goes to the 2002 season. This isn't that big of a deal since we can use Lahman for 2003 or 2004 since they won't need to be normalized.

2) He's apparently working on a newer version with a different methodology for calculating the normalized stats.

I'm going to email him and see if I can get an update on the new version.
Sounds awesome; makes a lot of good sense.
Agreed.Also, I forgot to mention that current pitchers don't rate as well as they should either for the same reason.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top