Zucchini Boy wants to know if Starlin Castro is worth giving a long-term contract.
Keeper question: I've got Starlin Castro at $10 in my NL-only league, and saw that he earned close to $30 last year. His contract is up this year, and I can extend him for $5 a year. I know SS is a little thin, so I was wondering your thoughts--do I maximize profit for this year and just keep him at $10, or do some extending?At the heart of Zucchini Boy's question is what we all ask ourselves when it's time to dole out long-term contracts: Is it worth sacrificing current auction value in order to keep a player for multiple seasons?
On the surface, it would seem that the obvious answer should be no. Handing out a contract doesn't increase a player's value. Socking an extra $5 or $10 of salary into a good keep is a slight hedge against auction inflation, but simply keeping the player at the cheaper salary is a far better value proposition.
However, dump trades change the landscape in a hurry. A $10 option year Starlin Castro isn't going to generate any interest in terms going for it in 2013, but a $15 L2 (two-year deal) Castro definitely will, and a $20 L3 (three-year deal) Castro might. Tactically, your decision should rest on how likely it is that a second division owner in your league would trade you superior value this year for one or two discounted years of Castro.
The fundamental question you have to ask yourself when giving out a contract is will giving a player a long-term deal improve my chances of winning via a dump trade? From this standpoint, there are four criteria I always keep in mind:
1) Keep the contract at least $5 under the player's perceived value.
If you think Castro is a $25 player, it is OK to give him a $20 L3. It isn't a slam dunk, though, so you might want to play it safe with the $15 L2. The idea is that when it comes time to trade Castro your trade partner should think he's getting a bargain for next year and a guy he's building his 2013 core around. If you think Castro is only a slight bargain at $20 and just a good keep, $15 is the way to go.
2) Don't give contracts to players that are past their prime or are role players.
Omar Infante is at $1 in my N.L. home league. He earned $19 in 2010 and $14 in 2011. It would seem like he's a no-brainer to give a $6 L2 to, right? Wrong. Yes, a $6 L2 Infante will probably be a $5+ bargain in 2012. But if you were out of the running, would you make a strong trade offer for Infante in June? I hope not. It's not out of the realm of possibility that Infante could wind up back in a utility role if he started off poorly. Infante's a solid citizen, and the kind of undervalued player who will help you win. But he shouldn't be part of anyone's core.
3) Don't give out contracts that carry into a player's Major League free agency.
You've got Miguel Montero at $7 heading into a contract year this spring. $12 L2 seems reasonable, right? Sure...except Montero's a free agent at the end of 2012 (as I write this). Maybe you'll get two years out of Montero...but then maybe you won't. Don't get burned.
4) Be more generous with hitters than with pitchers.
Pitcher earnings are more erratic than hitter earnings so: a) you're more likely to find a pitching bargain simply by getting lucky at the auction and b) last year's Next Big Thing can often turn into This Year's Big Bust. This doesn't mean that you should never dole out pitcher contracts, but you should be even more careful than you would be with hitters.
All this being said, Castro is an obvious $15 L2 candidate to me. He's eminently dumpable at that price and would give his new owner a severely undervalued middle infielder to build around. I could see giving him a $20 L3, though in my gut I'm on the fence about that price and - when in doubt on a contract - take the more conservative approach.
3 comments:
Great post. My NL-only league setup is a bit different: before a players third year, you can keep him at his current price for a final year, put him on an L2 for +$10, or put him on an L3 for +$15. This really seems to disincentivize the L2 contract and makes L3 contracts attractive only for younger players you're holding at steeply discounted salaries.
I currently have to decide on two players: Ian Kennedy at $2, and Corey Hart at $1. I'm leaning toward riding out Kennedy for a final year (because, a) he's a SP, and b) I don't believe he's as good as his 2011), but Hart is a tougher call. Would he be worth an L3 at $16? Or, because he's at a position that's not terribly scarce, should I hold at $1 for a third year and wa(i)ve bye-bye? My inclination is not to long-term Hart either, but OF seems thinner than in past years.
I disagree. Shortstop is so thin, that when you have the #2 guy in all of baseball, at 25$ below what he produced, its silly not to extend him at least 2 yrs. 15$ is still 1/2 of what hes worth, and you have locked up the 2nd best ss in all of baseball.
I have him projecting .304/.456. 17 hr, 301 total bases and 25 sb's. For a ss, thats money.
Sopme chump in your league will pay 20-25$ for jeter and get .268/.377 (avg/slg%) 197 total bases and 15 sb's. Add to that he'll miss 20-30 games.
And your course of action becomes much clearer. If one truism exists in fantasy baseball, its each position creates its own separate challanges. ss, catcher and starting pitchers, are at a premium.
USCMD...as with all fantasy baseball issues, and as with all keeper leagues, the true issue is value. The larger/longer the contract, the more value you eat up on your team. I tend to look at contracts in that context, rather than in terms of positional need. Moreover, pitchers are actually easier to come by than you might think in my experience, and their earnings tend to be erratic...I rarely if ever extend a pitcher to an L3.
Post a Comment