NFBC Message Boards

An added perk to live drafting the Main Event is getting to see the other live draft boards at the completion of the draft. Drafting online this year, I have only my own draft board to look at and the twitter-posted team of Chris Liss, which interests me because he was drafting from the #2 spot like me.

From this mountain of data, there is one very clear 'trend' developing this year with Clayton Kershaw that holds true in all (both) ME Drafts available to me at this point. Both drafters of Kershaw did not take another starting pitcher until they selected Rich Hill on the rounds 8-9 turn.

Laying aside concerns about relying on Hill's 110 IP last year, or his 105 COMBINED IP the previous 6 years, this strategy of taking Kershaw because you don't have to take another ace, and can ignore starting pitching for a considerable portion of the draft is more dangerous than taking Billy Hamilton to avoid needing other high-round SB guys. If Hamilton gets hurt, you drop to the bottom of 1 category. If Kershaw gets hurt, you sink in four categories.

The benefit of this strategy would be that a team taking only Kershaw for starting pitching in the first 8 rounds should be able to get a leg up on hitting across the board. It's a viable strategy to win the overall, but it is a singular path that can absorb little disruption to Kershaw's health or execution.

knuckleheads wrote:An added perk to live drafting the Main Event is getting to see the other live draft boards at the completion of the draft. Drafting online this year, I have only my own draft board to look at and the twitter-posted team of Chris Liss, which interests me because he was drafting from the #2 spot like me.

From this mountain of data, there is one very clear 'trend' developing this year with Clayton Kershaw that holds true in all (both) ME Drafts available to me at this point. Both drafters of Kershaw did not take another starting pitcher until they selected Rich Hill on the rounds 8-9 turn.

Laying aside concerns about relying on Hill's 110 IP last year, or his 105 COMBINED IP the previous 6 years, this strategy of taking Kershaw because you don't have to take another ace, and can ignore starting pitching for a considerable portion of the draft is more dangerous than taking Billy Hamilton to avoid needing other high-round SB guys. If Hamilton gets hurt, you drop to the bottom of 1 category. If Kershaw gets hurt, you sink in four categories.

The benefit of this strategy would be that a team taking only Kershaw for starting pitching in the first 8 rounds should be able to get a leg up on hitting across the board. It's a viable strategy to win the overall, but it is a singular path that can absorb little disruption to Kershaw's health or execution.

Well said.
It is hard to start a team with Kershaw.
I did so in a couple of DC leagues. There is that trap of wanting to load up on hitting for the next few draft slots.
Kershaw now has an injury history. It is something that his drafters just have to take into consideration.
And worse, it is a back condition and nobody comes back from back injuries quickly during the season.
When drafting Kershaw in the second draft, I wrote down Jake Arrieta's name.
In this way, for the rest of the draft, I still knew I had an ace, but not a pitcher that I was going to wholely (made up word) rely upon.
That helped a lot.

I'd take Kershaw 1 overall. I frequently own Andrew Miller and Dallas Keuchel as my next pitchers just because of when it is next worth it to take a pitcher. If I take a SP in first round I wouldn't again until at least round 5 but wouldn't purposely wait until those Rich Hill folks do, I don't really get that.

Meh, if your first round busts, you have a problem no matter what. I had that last year but had it good with Mookie Betts, et al. Whether you put one category in one basket or several, you still have to make up a ton. In a sense it's easier to lose Hamilton (as I also did last year) because you know you need to find one thing instead of everything.

But I think you draft to your strengths. Kershaw is the most valuable player if he's healthy and himself. Yes, more so than Trout. However, my hitting list is similar to everyone else's. My pitching is very different, though; come season's end, in testing my projections are about as accurate as those publicly available. That means I can find treasure in pitching but less so in hitting so I'm never going Kershaw first round. I can find pitching but *need* hitting.

bjoak wrote: That means I can find treasure in pitching but less so in hitting so I'm never going Kershaw first round. I can find pitching but *need* hitting.

I'm not against all first-round Kershaw scenarios, just the one where the pitching staff falls apart if he falls apart. I considered Kershaw with the 2nd pick in my ME Event, and if I had taken him, would have likely gone with Archer in the 3rd round anyway (as I did).

My Kershaw strategy would have been to make pitching the absolute strength of my team. On ERA alone, Kershaw is worth about 1/3 of a run off team ERA and .075 off team Whip. Adding Kerhaw to an otherwise average pitching staff does not create an Overall-competitive team. It might create league-competitive team. Adding Kershaw to a less-than-average pitching staff eliminates that team from Overall prizes.

So for those teams that went Kershaw/Hill/Junk...Dead In Water.

knuckleheads wrote:

bjoak wrote: That means I can find treasure in pitching but less so in hitting so I'm never going Kershaw first round. I can find pitching but *need* hitting.

I'm not against all first-round Kershaw scenarios, just the one where the pitching staff falls apart if he falls apart. I considered Kershaw with the 2nd pick in my ME Event, and if I had taken him, would have likely gone with Archer in the 3rd round anyway (as I did).

My Kershaw strategy would have been to make pitching the absolute strength of my team. On ERA alone, Kershaw is worth about 1/3 of a run off team ERA and .075 off team Whip. Adding Kerhaw to an otherwise average pitching staff does not create an Overall-competitive team. It might create league-competitive team. Adding Kershaw to a less-than-average pitching staff eliminates that team from Overall prizes.

So for those teams that went Kershaw/Hill/Junk...Dead In Water.

Except, one man's junk...

Just thinking on this more... I don't get the hate for Kershaw/Hill. That's maybe 320 innings of amazing pitching. If you draft SPs in two of your first three picks, your offense is very likely dead in the water. In fact, if you draft three with your first ten, same. You need to build some equity on offense because your later picks will tear it down. So, take Kershaw out of the equation and tell me two pitchers who will give you a better start than Kershaw/Hill, one of whom you are not taking in your first five picks.

Baumgarner/Hendricks 2/6. My ME.

bjoak wrote:Just thinking on this more... I don't get the hate for Kershaw/Hill. That's maybe 320 innings of amazing pitching. If you draft SPs in two of your first three picks, your offense is very likely dead in the water. In fact, if you draft three with your first ten, same. You need to build some equity on offense because your later picks will tear it down. So, take Kershaw out of the equation and tell me two pitchers who will give you a better start than Kershaw/Hill, one of whom you are not taking in your first five picks.

I could be wrong, but I think the overall Main Event winner last year selected 2 SPs (Max and Kluber) with 2 of his first 3 picks.

knuckleheads wrote:Baumgarner/Hendricks 2/6. My ME.

Not better than Hill/Kershaw. Not even much better than Kershaw and a chump. No offense. Those are fine picks, but Kershaw is that good.

skmetz51 wrote:

bjoak wrote:Just thinking on this more... I don't get the hate for Kershaw/Hill. That's maybe 320 innings of amazing pitching. If you draft SPs in two of your first three picks, your offense is very likely dead in the water. In fact, if you draft three with your first ten, same. You need to build some equity on offense because your later picks will tear it down. So, take Kershaw out of the equation and tell me two pitchers who will give you a better start than Kershaw/Hill, one of whom you are not taking in your first five picks.

I could be wrong, but I think the overall Main Event winner last year selected 2 SPs (Max and Kluber) with 2 of his first 3 picks.

Maybe I was too firm. If you get Trout it's like a first and second round hitter right there. If you happen into Mookie Betts' Troutian season, there's that too. I'm still thinking he didn't go back to the well for a while, though.

bjoak wrote:

skmetz51 wrote:

bjoak wrote:Just thinking on this more... I don't get the hate for Kershaw/Hill. That's maybe 320 innings of amazing pitching. If you draft SPs in two of your first three picks, your offense is very likely dead in the water. In fact, if you draft three with your first ten, same. You need to build some equity on offense because your later picks will tear it down. So, take Kershaw out of the equation and tell me two pitchers who will give you a better start than Kershaw/Hill, one of whom you are not taking in your first five picks.

I could be wrong, but I think the overall Main Event winner last year selected 2 SPs (Max and Kluber) with 2 of his first 3 picks.

Maybe I was too firm. If you get Trout it's like a first and second round hitter right there. If you happen into Mookie Betts' Troutian season, there's that too. I'm still thinking he didn't go back to the well for a while, though.

Also took two closers in the first ten rounds (well one closer and Glen Perkins). Third starter was in round 13.

But there's no magic formula.

I took Kershaw Monday and didn't follow up with another starter for a long time. But I would have taken another starter much earlier if there had been a starter I liked on the board when I picked. There wasn't so I waited. Could work, I could regret it. Who knows in March.

UT O. kershaw velocity loss of 2 mph in today's game. where there's smoke, there's usually fire.

So easy to think of Kershaw as being the past Kershaw. Like the back thing never happened.

Edit- But it didn't stop me from taking him at 1-5

DOUGHBOYS wrote:So easy to think of Kershaw as being the past Kershaw. Like the back thing never happened.

Edit- But it didn't stop me from taking him at 1-5

A game or two before Kershaw went down last year, ESPN's Sunday Night Baseball spent 10 minutes with cameras tracking Kershaw's pregame routine, fawning over his health and preparation.

Given that lessened certainty of Kershaw's health, there are still valid arguments that he should be the #1 pick.

Last year my 1st rd was realative bust (Harper) and then went Mad Bum Kluber and followed up with Heyward, yet still managed a second place lg finish. Personally I don't think there is a magic formula to win the overall. It really is more of a perfect storm aligning.