2000 AL LABR Draft

By John Coleman

Thursday, March 9, 2000

The Sandlot Shrink came away from the USA Today Baseball Weekly AL-LABR draft this year with a strong, balanced team with a starter at every position, a rare feat in any 12-team league.

Here is how John Coleman did it…

Friday, March 3, 2000 at the Grenelefe Resort, Orlando FL

My first player was Miguel Tejada, which elicited a round of applause. I had become a matter of concern after 4
rounds with an empty roster. I waited until the 54th pick to make a selection because I was determined to stay away from the big money, choosing to fill my roster with players in the 10- 20 dollar range.

What I learned from last year's expert drafts

This is only the second time I have tried the wait-it-out approach. It's audacious. I did it last year for the NL-Tout Wars expert league. It was actually kind of accidental, but I won the league going away by 20 points! I was quite lost in Long Island heading to the draft, and very upset. I was afraid I would be late but sheer luck led me to the draft site (Long Island is large).

When the draft started, I was hungry and very nervous. I was still embarrassed by my '98 LABR draft (all those defections and retirements). I couldn't pull the trigger on the star sluggers... and then they were gone. Boom! Mostly under market price, too. On the fly, I chose the players who were most likely, in my opinion, to exceed their draft values. I just guessed, actually. And then I simply overpaid for all of them. I had no choice, because draft inflation was going to catch up soon. I felt, if nothing else, a "theme" team would save face for me.

The "theme" was this: Young hitters without established ceilings, but with a very good shot at a job. Fernando Tatis was the ultimate "theme" player. I grabbed anyone under 27 years of age I could find. Youth was having its day, and Sandlot Shrink was the chaperone. I had almost all of them, you know. I missed out on Dimitri Young, which explained the inclusion of Ellis Burks. Upside potential…

Did you read that?
UPSIDE
do you get it?
UPSIDE
Reggie Sanders. Get it?

Most drafters, including the experts, are conservative and a guy like Sanders scares them. And Michael Barrett was someone they felt they could get in the reserve rounds. They just wouldn't take a chance on anyone who could disappoint. And here I was, paying more than "par" for those guys. So did I just get lucky? Can't be. Luck can allow for a close victory, not a run-away. I also got lucky with my in-season free agent pickups. For what it's worth, it was an outstanding crop of rookies. Best in 20 years. And I had them.

So all winter long I analyzed why I won, and by so much. I know that I turned the conservative style against itself. I was the only "feel" drafter in this group. (Except for Steve Moyer, who drafts without a cheat sheet!)

It's in the bid values

Everyone projects about the same values for the players, (I don't care who is doing it), and NO ONE will go past their values (in a non-keeper league). Why? Because EVERYONE knows that "bargains" are the way you win. (Bargains: Players purchased under market value. Draft the guys that are cheap as a result of the dynamics of the draft. End up with more quality as a result. Only idiots pay more than market price, right?) So I overpaid for everyone and won in a laugher. I had my share of disappointments, too! Curt Schilling, Greg Olson, J.D. Drew, Kevin Tapani, Steve Trachsel, Craig Counsel, Mitch Meluskey. Plus, I cut Phil Nevin right before he broke out. Just couldn't stand one more week of those O-fers.

Here's my conclusion: Pre-season projections are constantly, unavoidably conservative. And everyone sticks to them like glue. Bargains don't win. You need the right players. Does it really matter if you overpay by $2? Who could deny that Edgardo Alfonzo was right? Sean Casey? Tatis?

Strategy for this year's LABR draft

So… AL-LABR finally rolled around. My goal, of course, was winning in a big way. I had my projections, and I made sure I looked at several others, too. It was pretty close. But instead of playing the bargain game, I was picking my players for keeps.

Do you know how that Baseball Challenge game works? Everyone has a set salary at the beginning of the year. Your job is to decide who's underpaid and grab them. That's basically what I did. I simply used the par values that I had arrived at from looking at many, many ratings as my salary figures. Then I marked the guys I liked most. About 30 hitters. And I got half of them for slightly under or slightly over my price. I had no fear of overpaying. And nobody would go past the "par" values. Now I have a roster full of unproven talent. Just like Long Island.

Hitting:

Technically, the method requires a 70% minimum expenditure on hitters. You need starters at every spot, or at least probable starters. You need to average 13 bucks a slot for hitters. If you don't get 14 starters, you might have too many flops from your youngsters (you have to pay for steals, of course). That's why I ignored the stars. You can't have stars unless you have scrubs, too. They go hand in hand, like Yin and Yang. I WANT NO SCRUBS. The players I like are the players that everyone likes. No established ceiling. Mark Quinn, anyone? Gabe Kapler? Why should I let someone else get these guys cheap?

Pitching:

Mine is a larger budget than Ron Shandler's LIMA strategy (one stud starter and many "safe" middle relievers) allows for pitching, so I get one stud starter and one stud reliever or two really great prospects. Then I mix it up with sleepers who are always available among pitchers. Experts HATE paying for pitchers. Also: I won't draft young starters at all. Young closers can work, but not starters. Why? They just aren't smart enough. It really takes brains to win starts. Bartolo Colon is the exception that proves the rule, but he's too expensive now. Young guys are dumb. Would this method work in a keeper league? Maybe not. Values are significantly adjusted when the future is an issue (draft day inflation). The salaries would be too high; at least in my keeper league.

Anyway, that's what I did. And I snagged a few bargains late in the draft. Every one of my hitters is an upside pick, except for Lee Stevens ($6). I overpaid for half of them, at least. I went with my gut. And I saved at least $2 for every spot in my end game.

Is this an original strategy? No, because it is called the "Via Media" method in the 1984 Rotisserie Baseball handbook. My upside picks and pitcher budget are a slight deviation, though.

End game strategy is very important

Check out teams who bid on players to make sure that they have that position open. Lots of illegal bids occur, and that can cost you dollars. The DH slot is very important. Anyone who has filled their DH slot before the end game will be jealous of the bargains. Watch those teams! Positional eligibility is extremely important now. Allocating budget in the end game is an art. The wealthy teams have specific needs, and everyone else is a $1-2 player. The thing is to pinpoint the best players that the rich teams don't need. These are bargains. Constant monitoring of high bid is helpful.

So there's the inside story. I think that I have the winning strategy, as long as conservatism reigns. Next year it might be different. What do you guys think? Let's get the mojo working.

Official AL-LABR roster for the Sandlot Shrink -

.	HITTERS		PITCHERS		RESERVES
	Jorge Posada	12	Derek Lowe	25	Nick Johnson
	Ramon Hernandez	9	Jamie Moyer	21	Justin Baughman
	Mike Sweeney	20	Juan Guzman	11	Eric Munson
	Corey Koskie	17	Eddie Guardado	8	Jose Mercedes
	Lee Stevens	6	John Burkett	2	Luis Vizcaino
	Delino DeShields	14	Steve Trachsel	3	Terrance Long
	Miguel Tejada	14	James Baldwin	1
	Alex Gonzalez	11	Wilson Alvarez	3
	Carlos Beltran	27	Chad Harville	2
	Ben Grieve	21
	Mark Quinn	11		$76
	Gabe Kapler	18
	Jacque Jones	3
	David Ortiz	1
		$184
.

John Coleman is the statistical expert at the Sandlot Shrink and also the representative in all of the expert leagues including LABR and Tout Wars.

Subscription Info | About Sandlot Shrink | Testimonials
Home