Unique strategies

nnoy · Post by **nnoy** » Tue Mar 23, 2004 1:05 pm

There is a team in Chicago #2 with the following staff:

Ayala, Luis P MON

Baez, Danys P TB

Donnelly, Brendan P ANA

Herges, Matt P SF

Marte, Damaso P CHW

Mateo, Julio P SEA

Otsuka, Akinori P SD

Reitsma, Chris P CIN

Rodriguez, Francisco P ANA

Urbina, Ugueth P FLA

That’s right, NO Sp’s. Interesting…………….

Hoosier Hick · Post by **Hoosier Hick** » Tue Mar 23, 2004 1:09 pm

A team in the WCOFB applied this strategy last year and won his league. However he only finished 6th overall out of 45. A couple of teams in his league passed him in the overall. I think it is a good strategy to win your league but no chance at winning the overall with this strategy. I chose to try for the grand prize and draft a well balanced team. Giving up 200 points in wins and strike outs is to much to overcome in the hunt for 100,000.

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Tue Mar 23, 2004 2:34 pm

Originally posted by nnoy:

There is a team in Chicago #2 with the following staff:

Ayala, Luis P MON

Baez, Danys P TB

Donnelly, Brendan P ANA

Herges, Matt P SF

Marte, Damaso P CHW

Mateo, Julio P SEA

Otsuka, Akinori P SD

Reitsma, Chris P CIN

Rodriguez, Francisco P ANA

Urbina, Ugueth P FLA

That?s right, NO Sp?s. Interesting?????. Not 100% sure of the pioneer, but it's called the 'LIMR' strategy after Low Inning MIddle Relievers.

He's assuming he'll win ERA and WHIP, scrounge up enough wins to finish 2nd from last, nail saves to a 3 or 4 with a few scattered surprises and punt wins and strikeouts altogether.

I once saw a mousetrap with 20 moving parts - amazing how complex it was when the simple traps work just the same.

Dyv

Jackstraw · Post by **Jackstraw** » Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:08 pm

Dyv,

I'm pretty sure that was an Alex Patton strategy from the mid 80's. Pretty interesting approach when there is no innings pitched limit. Also, it is very possible to win the whole ball of wax using the strategy. I won't get into all of the messy statistics part of it, but the importance of wins and saves to the total overall score is relatively low. I think the most important thing is to have a strategy... Which I saw people in Vegas come in with and some who didn't. What was everyone's strategy in the draft? Mine was a modified version of the LIMR in both the AL Auction and NFBC draft.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:21 pm

Originally posted by Jackstraw:

What was everyone's strategy in the draft? Simple, get the players I want. No punting. A punter has no chance of winning the top prize. Although the league prize is decent, it's really peanuts when you think about it. GP or bust baby! (2nd overall and 1st in league wouldn't be too bad )

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 3:22 am

Punt on nothing, but still put a premium on offense. I drafted to challenge for the lead in four of the five offensive categories (hoping to fall in the middle of the pack or higher in SB with two solid base stealers with 25-40 potential and a half dozen more that historically get around 10). Tried to draft no one who I think would hit for less than .270.

Pitching was tough. Gave up on several top picks and stuck with my fair share of closers (two though one I would consider risky). My starters are solid mostly from the 2-3-4, are all prime to pre-peak (ages 25-30). At least at 2-3-4 they will not be facing most other teams aces.

Now it is up to the luck and waivers.

Rey · Post by **Rey** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 3:42 am

One thing I noticed in the time leading up to draft day (on mockdraftcentral.com, in expert league drafts, etc.) was the growing and popular strategy of getting hitters early and waiting on pitchers. I liken this strategy to football, where more and more, the scarcity of running backs are leading teams to spend their first 2-3 picks on RBs. I have always used these strategies in my own teams, choosing to load up on hitters instead of taking more risky pitchers, then loading up on pitchers in the middle rounds. However, this year, I realized that practically everyone was doing the same thing. In football this past season, I noticed people were getting the Duce Staleys of the world in round 3, while guys like Torry Holt dropped. In my league, the guy who won took Randy Moss in round 2 and Holt in round 3.

My belief is that winning these leagues requires an open mind. Sure, we all know hitters are more valuable than pitchers because of the pitchers high risk factor...but if everyone is blindly doing the same thing, the advantage the strategy once gave you disappears. In my league, I was able to take Curt Schilling with the 24th pick of the draft. I took Barry Zito in the 8th round. You mean to tell me there are more than 100 other players you would rather have than Barry Zito?

Anyways, that was the one glaring strategy that I noticed in my league.

Team Herron · Post by **Team Herron** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 3:47 am

Interesting strategy, but if you read the rules - we have a minimum innings requirement. Not sure where he will find the innings?

Team Herron · Post by **Team Herron** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 3:49 am

Sorry - Minimum innings only in auction leagues

Harlem Hangover · Post by **Harlem Hangover** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 5:38 am

I thought it was "LIMA" Low Investment Mound Aces.. guess its same either way!.. usually when i see guys do this, they take at least 1 very good starting pitcher to anchor the staff and than a bunch of middle relivers/closers to fill in. i think its pretty effective.. not sure about if your going after overall prize, but for the league i think it works pretty well

xavier · Post by **xavier** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 5:50 am

going with the all closer/mid rel. staff will give you a good shot at winning the league, but absolutely no chance at the overall. there is no way someone can pull 1 point each in 2 categories out of a possible 195 pts. and have enough points to be near the top. also, if 1 of your top closers goes down, lights out. so it comes down to, do you want to try and win 5k or 100k. thats a pretty easy decision. baseball is too long a season to win only 3,750 after entry fee.

Jackstraw · Post by **Jackstraw** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 6:28 am

Harlem's concept is more of what you need to do to make the strategy work. You are going to need at least one ace starting pitcher and one ace closer. If you can get 40-50 saves and 17 wins, you can pull it off. But you are going to need to invest heavy in hitting. The part of the strategy that everyone misses is that it gives you the opportunity to stack up on power and speed guys, then pull in some solid pitchers. In the auction, bid early on a quality starter and closer then put all of the your money into strong hitters. At the end, grab the middle relievers and potential closers cheap. Just look at the WCOFB results from last year... LB Big Richards finished around 27th in two categories, low to mid 30's in three categories, and then really strong in 5 categories... But he didn't finish on top in any single category, close but not on the top. AND they still won the thing. The truth is you can't punt any single category, but you have to do really well in at least 7 of the 10. You pick the 7 at the beginning and stick with it through the season, and barring no serious setbacks, you can be a winner too. Anyway, it is just a strategy... There are a million others. Take Clark's AL auction league strategy for instance... That was quite interesting...

nnoy · Post by **nnoy** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 7:19 am

I think the No SP strategy is interesting, and it may actually produce a league winner, but I agree that finishing 190th in two stats will eliminate that team from the overall prize.

The other problem I have with this strategy is how much damage a middle reliever can really do to your team. Remember a few years back when Jesse Orosco went: 0IP 8ER? These guys are far from LOCKS, even if their WHIP was under 1.00 and ERA under 2.00 last season.

A team like this can REALLY help a team that is slightly better in the hitting categories. They can add a buffer between the top team and the next group, however they also set a floor in W’s and K’s that no other team in the league should fall below. It will be interesting to see how this team impacts the other 14 and other 194. (I assume there are at least a few other owners that tried this strategy?)

Jon_Ashton · Post by **Jon_Ashton** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 8:36 am

NNoy, I don't care about winning the league. I doubt I will because it's quite likely the league winner will score more than 80% of the possible points. I like this strategy in order to have a shot at the whole ball of wax because it's likely that the overall winner will be below 75% of the total possible points.

There's definitely very little margin for error in the other 8 categories, so to me, that makes this a challenging and fun strategy!

nnoy · Post by **nnoy** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 9:26 am

Originally posted by Jon_Ashton:

NNoy, I don't care about winning the league. I doubt I will because it's quite likely the league winner will score more than 80% of the possible points. I like this strategy in order to have a shot at the whole ball of wax because it's likely that the overall winner will be below 75% of the total possible points.

There's definitely very little margin for error in the other 8 categories, so to me, that makes this a challenging and fun strategy! Interesting counter argument Jon. I fully agree that the overall champ needs between 70-75% of the total points to win this thing. If this strategy takes say 190 in both ERA and WHIP, then say 10 in W’s and K’s, with maybe 170 in Saves then a total of about 800 hitting points is required. That’s 35th place in every hitting category. Possible, but very difficult given how many inverse correlations there are between so many of the stats (HR’s and SB’s) (RBI’s and SB’s) (Ave and HR’s) to name a few. It is a strategy that took a lot of guts and clearly does not leave room for injuries, but one that could be worth 100K.

xavier · Post by **xavier** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 11:16 am

nnoy/ashton- can one of you post the hitters on that team that went with no s.p.'s. thanks

nnoy · Post by **nnoy** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 12:18 pm

Originally posted by xavier:

nnoy/ashton- can one of you post the hitters on that team that went with no s.p.'s. thanks Meshuggana Lolligaggers J. LaRue

M. Olivo

C. Delgado

J. Thome

D. Relaford

B. Mueller

B. Larkin

D. Eckstein

J. Lugo

T. Sledge

R. Freel

B. Grieve

P. Burrell

C. Wilson

A. Kearns

S. Podsednik

R. Baldelli

A. Huff

J. Pierre

xavier · Post by **xavier** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 12:25 pm

thanks nnoy.

hankstr · Post by **hankstr** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 1:25 pm

I used the closer only strategy as well (league 2 in Las Vegas). I tried it last year in the WCOFB and won my division, albeit on the last day of the regular season. I figured I would try it again but wait even longer for my first pitcher (round 5, pick 7). Well, that was a mistake. I missed a run on closers and got stuck with some very questionable ones. Now I'm hoping for some guys to get the job later in the year (e.g. C. Cordero, R. Wagner, J. Valverde). My hitters are good but not good enough to dominate all 5 hitting categories and that is what is needed for this strategy to be successful. I got too much speed and not enough power. I tried the closer stratgey again in the WCOFB afternoon draft and did much better - but was in a league where starting pitching was at a premium during the early round of the draft (much to my delight). My OF in that league is Magglio Ordonez, V. Wells, L. Berkman, J. Pierre, and Chipper Jones. Anyway, I think what makes fantasy baseball a lot of fun is the various strategies employed, successful or not. If we all went by the book it would be pretty boring.

Hankerchiefs

hankstr · Post by **hankstr** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 1:31 pm

By the way, a whopping 5 out of 45 teams last year used the closer only strategy in the WCOFB, including THREE teams in league 2. One out of the 5 was successful. Of course, there is a big difference between a 45 team field and a 195 team field. The closer only strategy may be like using the wishbone lineup in college football. May become a thing of the past.

Dyv · Post by **Dyv** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 2:05 pm

Originally posted by hankstr:

By the way, a whopping 5 out of 45 teams last year used the closer only strategy in the WCOFB, including THREE teams in league 2. One out of the 5 was successful. Of course, there is a big difference between a 45 team field and a 195 team field. The closer only strategy may be like using the wishbone lineup in college football. May become a thing of the past. lol, that's an interesting comparison Hank - I was in the WCOFB league with you in the afternoon (I was pick #9) and thought long and hard about the strategy before we decided to take value for 4-5 rounds and see where we stood. As you mention, the pitching was so highly desired that it left batters fall and we couldn't pass on things like Vlad Guerrero with #9 pick, etc. I think our one sliver of luck/brilliance was netting Randy Johnson on the comeback pick in the 2nd round. If he stays healthy we're in good shape. If he's injured or half-Randy, we need some pitching help.

That's the game, though, isn't it? What risks do you want and what risks do you want no part of?

Gonna be fun in there.

Dave

heisman · Post by **heisman** » Wed Mar 24, 2004 2:16 pm

That team basically donated $1200 to the pot. Way too many teams for any type of punting strategies to work.

hankstr · Post by **hankstr** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:38 am

Maybe so but I've got 6k from last year's WCOFB league to play with. Used the closer only strategy then. Which strategy did you use in last year's WCOFB and what were your winnings? I guess you don't have a lot worth to say now do you?

heisman · Post by **heisman** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 3:48 am

A closer strategy would not be a bad one to win an individual league, but a middle reliever strategy is fruitless.

hankstr · Post by **hankstr** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 4:22 am

I agree with you about middle reliever strategy. You can't sacrifice 3 categories.