Fantasy league: Would you trade Greinke for B. Anderson and G. Beckham?
by Rotofan on Mar 22, 2010 1:07 AM EDT
Email
PrintI'm in a 12-team A.L. only roto league with keepers. Two years ago I traded for Greinke (and Gil Meche for Grant Balfour when Balfour looked like he might close for Tampa). Greinke has been unreal since and I expect him to be among the dominant few starters in baseball.
But in my league, with keepers and long-term contracts, Greinke is entering the final year of a contract and will go back to the auction next year. Brett Anderson and Gordon Beckham can be had for this year AND next year, with Anderson at the same salary as Greinke ($10 in a $260 league) and Beckham at $8. So the trade is essentially one year of Greinke for two of Anderson and Beckham.
My starting pitchers behind Greinke (just keepers -- auction in a couple of weeks) are Scherzer $2; Matusz $1 and Hughes $3. I have a strong, cheap group of hitters to which Beckham would add - Wieters, Morales, Andrus, Scutaro, Lind, Choo and Borbon, and all but Andrus I have for this year and next. (all the pitchers too but Greinke).
Would you make the trade? Why or why not?
16 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
More information
I would actually get three years of Beckham – the first at $3 and the last two at $8 each. (plus two years of Anderson at $10)
You are getting surplus value out of Greinke's $10 contract this year.
Let’s say he provides with $30 of value this year, and your other guys merely provide what you pay for. Greinke’s $30 is less than the total of $39, but Greinke’s value is for 1 year, vs. using 2 roster positions for roughly the same production over 2 years (if you throw out the third year of Beckham). I’d keep Greinke.
Surely Gordon Beckham and Brett Anderson provide surplus value too.
Greinke would cost about $40 at auction (since we have a deep keeper league, inflation runs about 20% over standard non-keeper AL-only roto leagues) That’s a surplus value of $30.
Brett Anderson in my league would go for about $20 or a surplus of $10 this year and next year or a total of $20 of value.
Gordan Beckham would go for between $20 and $25 in my league, and for sake of mathematical simplicity, say $23, which would give him a surplus value of $20 this year and $15 in years two and three when his salary is bumped up $5. That’s $50 of surplus value spread of three years.
So in terms of surplus value as a measure against auction prices, the trade is a wash for this year, with Greinke and Anderson/Beckham each producing $30. But then Anderson/Beckham produce $25 in surplus next year and $15 the year after.
So the issue for me isn’t so much surplus value but reliability. Greinke is a more certain commodity — I think most would be surprised if he isn’t among the top echelon this year in everything but wins. Anderson had a great second half and Beckham a very promising rookie year but both are at greater risk of falling short of projections than is Greinke.
risk assessment depends on league conditions
for example, if it’s a winner-takes-all league, then you have to look at every move in that light. if you’re already at the top of the league, you shouldn’t add risk, but if you’re in the middle of the pack, a good break on a nice risk/reward play could put you into contention. if it’s too early to assess where you are on the risk spectrum, then just ignore it and go with optimizing expected return. in this case, if GB and BA are expected to have greater surplus value, it seems like it should be a go for you with risk out of the way.
Good points
It’s not winner-take-all; top four finish in the money, though I won’t be content with anything but first. I am already at or near the top of the pack with my keeper list so I wouldn’t make the move to get into contention; I would do it to boost my chances next year without hurting my chances this year. I agree it’s an easier call if I were middle-of-the-pack.
I think you can get more.
Sometimes the best way to convince someone he is wrong is to let him have his way. --- Red O'Donnell
now, if it was Brian Anderson, that would be different
keep Greinke
"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell
Do it
It may be risky, since we don’t know if Anderson will have a sophomore slump or not (same but not so much for Gordan to me), but I think the reward could be higher, now and in the long run. I also think you may be undervaluing Anderson a bit. I bought high on Anderson this year, and Im lukewarm on Beckham (plus I have Longoria).
I also assume that Gordan will gain 2B eligability soon, so that he can be switched from 3b to 2b. This is key since I think that the 2b pool is very thin, especially in AL only and 12 teams. This would also allow you to focus more on pitching as you would have most of your positions covered by starters.
Overall, I think that it’s better to have two good players than one great player over time. You always want to play to win this year IMO, so don’t just play for the long run, but I dont know that this deal isnt better this year.
You know your league better than me though, perhaps people value pitching more as they do in my league. I just think you would like having more money to spend elsewhere.
I'm thinking that way too
Beckham’s position flexibility would be very helpful, especially if I land Morenau in the auction — those two players would allow me to back up every position player but catchers with a single outfielder or corner; if someone goes down, the backup gets activated and everyone gets shuffled. I have outfielders who also qualify for DH; Morneau wualifies for DH and corner in my league and Beckham wil qualify for corner and MI after a single game at second).
My league does value starting pitchers more than I do, but that cuts both ways, as they would value Anderson as well as Greinke.
Here's the biggest factor you are missing when talking about surplus value
Greinke = 1 roster spot
Anderson & Beckham = 2 roster spots
There is a 4th player involved here somewhere because Beckham will push a position player out of a roster spot. It depends on who your other 2B/3B is.
The fourth player being pushed out is either
(a) A player of the same worth as Beckham but who will cost me at the auction $25 rather than the $3 I would pay for Beckham OR
(b) A $3 middle infielder which in our league would buy a weak backup with almost no chance of producing anything of value.
That why Beckham creates a surplus of surplus of value. I could use that surplus to buy an extra $20 of value I wouldn’t otherwise have. I have no third baseman or second basemen on my keepers’ roster so no player of value is pushed out of a position.
A surplus of surplus?
And another way to think of this is that it gives you the same ammount of money to spread out over fewer players, meaning you can spend a dollar or two more on each player, allowing you to outspend on a key player that you want.
You are excatly right
In auctions you run out of money before you run out of roster spots where you can afford quality players. Any savings/surplus is applied to the roster spots that remain and you spend that surplus over many spots or use it to add one more high quality player.
I think you're missing a big point here.
If you have Greinke on your team, you get to root for Zack Greinke. If you have Anderson and Beckham, you have to root for them.
Keep Greinke.
by Trey Hillman's Chin on Mar 24, 2010 9:18 AM EDT reply actions
That's true
But I’ll always root for Greinke – I have so much respect for the guy as a player and a person.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
