As I wrote last week, now is the time where deals are going to start to be available in all leagues due to owners assessing team needs and player value fluctuations early in the season. Sure enough, we have a blockbuster to report from one of my two keeper leagues, and it has been a bit controversial.
Team A received: Mike Stanton (14), Rafael Soriano (21), filler
Team B received: Carl Crawford (NK), Joakim Soria (2), Aramis Ramirez (UK), Stephen Drew (1), Simon Castro (26)
I should explain that this league is a draft league, and players move up four rounds from where they were drafted. The rounds that they can be kept in next year are in parenthesis. Players drafted in the first four rounds cannot be kept, and have a (NK) designation next to thier name.
As you can probably guess, the controversy begins with the question of the volume of value returned to Team A for giving up on four potential difference making players. The second, and more relevant question for this space, is that of the timing of waiving the white flag on a fantasy season.
For question one, no, it isn't enough value. But, all it takes is one guy to think Stanton is Babe Ruth (and he's acting like him in AA) to make a deal, so he went after the player with the highest impact who was available with the quality over quantity theory. I would argue that Stanton is certainly no guarantee to even ever reach the status of a top 10 keeper player in the league, especially when his round is already accelerated to 14. Having said that, if no one is going to make keepers 1-10 available, isn't it prudent to get the best guy you can?
For question number two, knowing when to say uncle is always a hugely important call outside of your family reunion. Player A had a good team, we aren't talking a squad destined to finish in the bottom half of the 12 team league. He had good keepers and a shot to contend this year if everything broke right. What he didn't have is one of the top two teams in the league. On paper, he couldn't beat either of the top two squads out...but, leagues aren't played on paper, so he did have a chance. Would you mortgage your future and go for it every year even if you don;t have a great chance or would you backpedal on year to be more competitive for a longer timeframe?
I get both sides. It certainly didn't help the league that a lopsided deal was made. And, now that Team A is out, how many will follow that lead? Are we just going to end up with 4-5 teams trying to win and 7-8 trading all their stars for pennies on the dollar? If that does happen, Team A probably got a good deal. You think good deals are going to be available for dumping teams in July when the market is flooded with non keepable stars and only a few teams are buying? Me either.
Which leads me to say that, in my opinion, the minute you think you can't win a keeper league you have to get out. You want to be the first to get into the market to get the deals you won't be able to make later when there is too much selling and not enough buying. Really, it's simple supply and demand in play here. Two years ago, my team was the first to sell off players (and we had ZERO chance of winning due to previous ownerships depletion of the system in a championship effort the year before), we restocked very well, and are now viable for years to come.
So, the point? It's never too early to waive the flag if you know you can't win. You have to move if you can't compete. If you make a mistake by selling off all your prospects to go for it and come up short, you are in a much worse position in the future. Sell early, and get the best deal you possibly can. Team A did both.
Cheers,
TFAM
No comments:
Post a Comment