Roto Think Tank

Dustin Ackley vs. Jason Kipnis

2012-01-29T19:10:00.003-05:00

So who would you rather have this year...Dustin Ackley or Jason Kipnis?

In keeper leagues, this is almost definitely a moot point. In most leagues, Ackley and Kipnis will be held over from $10 last year, and are solid keeps. Maybe you can trade for one of them, but these are the kind of players that owners hold on to for dear life in freeze leagues in the hopes that they either become players they can build around or players they can dump.

In one-and-done leagues, though, these are the kind of guys that make our stomachs turn and cause us to lose sleep. The projections like Kipnis better.

2012 Bill James Projections:
Dustin Ackley: 11 HR, 60 RBI, 14 SB, 82 R, .270 BA, $15
Jason Kipnis: 18 HR,69 RBI, 18 SB, 88 R, .272 BA, $23

In a start-over league, I'd be comfortable with a $15 bid limit on Ackley.

But I wouldn't dream of bidding $23 on Kipnis. Only three American League second basemen earned more than that in 2011: Robinson Cano, Ian Kinsler, and Dustin Pedroia. While I think Kipnis could eventually become a low-to-mid $20s earner, it's dangerous to simply extrapolate his 150 plate appearances last year and assume Kipnis is immediately going to morph into a 20/20 player. His BB/AB rate was poor, and his G/F rate makes me think that Kipnis is more likely to fit the profile of a 10-15 HR player...at least in the short-term. This isn't to say that I don't like Kipnis...I like him quite a bit. However, I don't see him immediately becoming a superstar, and 2012 could be a consolidation season.

Ackley might have the higher ceiling of the two...from a real life perspective. It wouldn't surprise me to see Ackley eventually be a consistent .300 hitter; I'm just not sure where the power will eventually track. Despite his poor September, I see Ackley as more likely to maintain or improve in 2012 than Kipnis.

My bid limits for Kipnis and Ackley are close. I do have Kipnis ahead of Ackley but only by the most narrow of margins. If you play in a draft format, I do agree with the conventional wisdom that Ackley is slightly overrated and probably shouldn't be slotting ahead of Kipnis. If you're playing for 2012 only, I lean Kipnis.

(More Expensive) Long Term Contracts

2012-01-28T23:43:00.000-05:00

As a follow up to my post on long-term contracts, Jon's in a league where the rules are a little bit different.

...before a player's 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 waive bye-bye? My inclination is not to long-term Hart either, but OF seems thinner than in past years.

While I do agree that this rule offers a disincentive for doling out long-term deals, it shouldn't really change your analysis regarding whether or not to give out a long-term contract. Using yesterday's example, in Jon's league you could either: a) option Castro out at $10, b) make Castro a $20 L2 or c) make Castro a $25 L3. As I noted yesterday, I'd be on the fence about giving Castro a $20 contract; I wouldn't give him a $25 contract.

As far as Hart goes, I'd be OK with giving him an $11 L2. I wouldn't give him a $16 L3. Yes, he's "worth" the contract in terms of his earnings the last two seasons ($28 in 2010; $24 in 2011), but I tend to be wary of giving L3s to non-elite players. I also worry that Hart might suffer somewhat from what I'll call Jayson Werth Syndrome. Werth was great in Philadelphia as one of many good or great hitters on a championship-caliber ball club, but struggled in Washington when he was supposed to be the best player on the team. Without Prince Fielder and possibly 50 games of Ryan Braun, Hart's numbers could similarly suffer. His RBI and/or runs totals almost definitely will.

Hart's also a free agent after 2013. Will he be a Brewer in 2014? It's likely but - again - don't assume that he will be.

Could or should Jon option Hart out? I revert to the question I asked yesterday: what's the dump market for Hart at $11? In my home leagues, Hart at $11 would definitely be a target...but he wouldn't be a primary target for the teams in the second divison. Younger players like Castro and Mike Stanton - as well as several players still in the pre-long-term contract phase - are considered better traditional dump targets than Hart, who is older, moving into his 30s, and could be a trade risk if the Brewers are out of contention in 2013.

The most important reason to give out a contract is to try and create bait for owners playing for the future. While Hart qualifies as bait, there are better ways to catch a fish come dumping season.

Long-Term Contracts

2012-01-28T00:31:00.000-05:00

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.

David Wright 2012

2012-01-26T18:03:00.002-05:00

With the fences moving in at Citi Field next year, everyone wants to know if David Wright is going to return to his days as a 30+ HR hitter in 2012 and beyond.

Last October, Eno Saris posted this spray chart at Amazing Avenue. This overlay of Wright's 2011 batted balls with the proposed new dimensions of Citi Field wasn't conclusive (as Saris pointed out), but if I had to guess, I'd say that Wright is somewhat likely to see a moderate power boost at home. Predicting exactly how many home runs this will translate into is a fool's errand, but I could see a 3-5 home run increase if all other things were equal.

However, it's somewhat misleading to call last year the result of a power outage. If Wright had put up the same number of plate appearances in 2011 that he did in 2008, he would have hit 23 home runs. Wright's career high was 33 in 2008. A 10 home run dip isn't a desirable outcome, but it's not what I would describe as an erosion of Wright's power rate.

It is also important to know that Wright isn't a masher on the road and a Punch and Judy at home. Wright's home/road HR splits over the last three years are relatively close, and his slugging percentages are even closer. While Citi Field may have been hurting Wright somewhat, a .027 SLG differential isn't what I'd call significant.

In addition to his health, my greater concern with Wright's potential future as an elite player is his decline in his line drive rates the last two seasons.

David Wright's Line Drive Rates: 2007-2001

2007: 23.2%

2008: 25.6%

2009: 25.7%

2010: 18.9%

2011: 18.0%

Wright put up a .349 BABIP between 2005-2009. Since 2010, he has put up a .322 BABIP. That might not sound like much of a difference, but the 2010 BABIP of .335 is less in line with the line drive rate than 2011's .302 rate. Wright might improve over that .254 batting average from last year, but I also suspect the .300 batting averages from days past might be gone.

To me, "will Citi Field's new dimensions increase Wright's power?" is the wrong question to ask. A more appropriate question is "will David Wright ever be an elite player again?" While it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility, the trend lines the last three years are pointing down, and most of it can't be blamed on the park. Wright is still going to be one of the top fantasy third basemen in the National League in 2012, but I'm not going past $30 for him this year.

The Impact of Fielder and Pujols Leaving

2012-01-25T12:37:00.000-05:00

The baseball world was shocked yesterday when Prince Fielder signed not with the Nationals (as expected) or with the Rangers or Mariners (less likely, but not out of the realm of possibility) but with the Tigers. With the loss of Victor Martinez, the Tigers had been linked to Johnny Damon and to a few other low level DH-types, but no one thought that the Tigers would jump into the pool and grab Fielder.

Within the fantasy community, there was a rapid flurry of speculation and questions regarding how Fielder's migration to the American League would impact the value of first basemen - as well as other elite players - in the National League. If you rolled all of this into one, broad comment, it sounded something like this:

Holy crap! Albert Pujols is gone! Fielder is gone! Who knows when Ryan Howard's coming back? It's Joey Votto and a bunch of mediocrities. Is Ike Davis the second best first baseman in the National League? What should I pay for Votto? $40? $45? $50?

Knee jerk reactions like this are fairly common when a top-tier player enters or leaves the N.L.-only or A.L.-only player pool. However, the actual impact of losing Pujols AND Fielder will turn out to be marginal.

Average N.L. Draft Hitter 2011: 348.6 AB, 91.8 H, 44.9 R, 10.5 HR, 43 RBI, 6.9 SB .2634 BA

Average N.L. Draft Hitter 2011 without Pujols/Fielder: 342.3 AB, 89.9 H, 43.8 R, 10.1 HR, 41.8 RBI, 6.9 SB, .2627 BA.

Pujols ($36) and Fielder ($35) earned a combined $71 in 2011. That sounds like a lot of stats to replace. But adjusting the formulas for life without Albert and Prince doesn't change what the top players earned all that much...if at all.

Top 10 N.L. Hitters in 2011 with and without Pujols/Fielder

	Player	$	Adj $
1	Matt Kemp	$52.5	$53.7
2	Ryan Braun	$47.5	$48.5
3	Michael Bourn	$36.3	$36.9
4	Jose Reyes	$35.8	$36.4
5	Justin Upton	$35.1	$36.1
6	Joey Votto	$34.4	$35.3
7	Carlos Gonzalez	$32.8	$33.6
8	Troy Tulowitzki	$32.0	$32.9
9	Hunter Pence	$31.3	$32.0
10	Starlin Castro	$29.8	$30.4

If I didn't include decimals, it would appear that players like Reyes, Gonzalez, and Castro hadn't moved at all.

This chart assumes that Pujols and Fielder's replacements will put up goose eggs in the way of stats. This is obviously a fallacy...but an analytical mistake that even some experts tend to make. Even if Mat Gamel only puts up 30% of the numbers that Fielder did, this will push the numbers in the Adj $ column slightly lower.

As my longtime readers know, I'm an advocate of paying elite players what they're worth and perhaps even a little more. However, don't make the mistake of assuming that the absence of Pujols and Fielder is going to change the context that much. Pay Votto $1-2 more because he's the best first baseman on the board. But don't pay him $45-50. I guarantee you he won't earn it.

Is xFIP useful to predict future performance?

2012-01-23T23:12:00.000-05:00

One of the sabermetricians favorite metrics is xFIP. By now, most of you should have at least a rough idea of what xFIP is, but if you don't here is the definition:

Expected Fielding Independent Pitching (xFIP) is a regressed version of FIP, developed by Dave Studeman from The Hardball Times. It’s calculated exactly the same as FIP, except it replaces a pitcher’s homerun rate with the league-average rate (10.6% HR/FB) since pitcher homerun rates have been shown to be very unstable over time. A pitcher may allow a homeruns on 12% of their fly balls one year, yet then turn around and only allow 7% the next year. Homerun rates can be very difficult to predict, so xFIP attempts to correct for that. Along with FIP, xFIP is one of the best metrics at predicting a pitcher’s future performance.

Sounds great! I'm always looking for an edge in my Rotisserie League. Sign me up!

Ten Most Favorable ERA/xFIP Differentials 2010 (min 100 IP)

Pitcher	2010 ERA	2010 xFIP	2011 ERA	Predictor?
Josh Beckett	5.78	4.54	2.89	xFIP
James Shields	5.18	4.24	2.82	xFIP
Kevin Correia	5.40	4.71	4.79	xFIP
Jeff Francis	5.00	3.88	4.82	ERA
Jason Hammel	4.81	3.7	4.76	ERA
Ricky Nolasco	4.51	3.86	4.67	ERA
Brandon Morrow	4.49	3.16	4.72	ERA
Bud Norris	4.92	4.17	3.77	xFIP
Nick Blackburn	5.42	5.07	4.49	xFIP
Aaron Harang	5.32	4.6	3.64	xFIP

The chart above lists the 10 pitchers who pitched at least 100 innings in both 2010 and 2011 and had the most favorable xFIP differentials compared to their ERA. The expectation would be that – generally speaking – these pitchers’ ERAs would have almost all improved in 2011. At a glance, then, xFIP looks like a rousing success. Eight out of 10 of the pitchers on this list saw their ERAs improve; only Nolasco and Morrow took a step back.

However, a closer look indicates that it isn't quite this simple. Despite the fact that Francis and Hammel’s ERAs improved, the improvement was marginal. As a predictive tool, you would have been better off using ERA and simply ignoring xFIP in four out of the 10 cases in the chart above. Looking at it through this lens, six pitchers out of 10 had a 2011 ERA closer to their 2010 xFIP than their 2010 ERA.

But 10 pitchers is an admittedly paltry sample size. What happens if you expand this to include all 100+ inning pitchers in 2010 and 2011?

It doesn't help.

One hundred and three pitchers pitched at least 100 innings in 2010 and 2011. Of these pitchers, 2010 xFIP was a better predictor of future ERA for 53 pitchers, 2010 ERA was a better predictor for 49 pitchers, and Tommy Hanson "tied" using this model. Expressed as a percentage, xFIP was better than ERA at predicting future ERA 52% of the time.

However, there are some seasons in here that are statistically close. Doug Fister posted a 4.11 ERA and a 4.10 xFIP in 2010. While saying xFIP is a better predictor in this case is technically correct, you could have used ERA or xFIP to predict future success and come up with more or less the same result.

In order to compensate for this, I took out all of the pitchers whose 2010 xFIP and ERA came within 0.3 of each other. Eliminating these seasons, xFIP was a better predictor of future ERA in 38 cases and prior ERA was better in 31 cases. This helps xFIP's cause somewhat, but it is still only a better predictor of future ERA 55% of the time.

Does this mean that xFIP is worthless? Certainly not. However, there wasn’t a strong corollary last year between prior xFIP and future performance. At the very least, analysts should use caution when simply trotting out xFIP and saying that it's certain that a pitcher is going to get better because his xFIP says so.

I don't exclude myself from this conclusion. Last year, I used xFIP a lot without performing a simple test like the one above. I sometimes take others to task for drawing broad conclusions on the strength of metrics without backing them up, so I have to offer my own mea culpa here and say I'll be more vigilant in the future.

Do Values Stay The Same?

2012-01-20T21:31:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, I analyzed the potential shift in Michael Pineda's value based on his transition from Seattle to New York. DD wanted to know if the value shift took into account last year's lower ERA/WHIP relative to prior seasons.

The year of the pitcher wasn't 2011, though; it was 2010.

A.L. 2011: 4.08 ERA, 1.325 WHIP
A.L. 2010: 4.14 ERA, 1.346 WHIP
A.L. 2009: 4.45 ERA, 1.403 WHIP

2010 was the year that the pitchers rallied to post the lowest league ERA for the American League since way back in 1992, when league wide they posted a 3.94.

Yes, this means that the average pitcher's ERA/WHIP in 2011 wasn't worth quite as much as it would have been in 2009.

Zack Greinke 2009 16 W, 229 1/3 IP, 2.16 ERA, 1.073 WHIP, 242 K, 2011$ $37, 2009$ $44
Justin Verlander 2011 24 W, 251 IP, 2.40 ERA, 0.920 WHIP, 250 K, 2011$ $46, 2009$ $53

Stick Verlander into 2009's context and he's a $53 pitcher; he blows away the next best A.L. pitcher - Greinke - by a good $9. Put 2009 Greinke into last year's context and he would have been worth only $1 more than Jered Weaver...the second best pitcher in the A.L. last year.

So, yes, context is everything when it comes to figuring out pitcher earnings. Pitchers are not measured by using a generic baseline to generate a value, but rather against their peers in each individual season.

Wins vs. ERA/WHIP

2012-01-19T21:13:00.000-05:00

Last Friday, it was reported that the Mariners had traded Michael Pineda (along with Jose Campos) to the Yankees for Jesus Montero (along with Hector Noesi).

There has already been a great deal of well done analysis on what may happen to Pineda and Montero's numbers on their new teams and (perhaps more importantly) in their new venues. One common thread in the Pineda analysis is that he is likely to win more games with the Yankees but his ERA is likely to rise as well.

Whether this will or will not actually happen I'll leave to the prognosticators. My focus is on what would happen to Pineda's Rotisserie value assuming more wins and a worse ERA/WHIP.

Below are what Pineda's numbers were in 2011 and a hypothetical possibility - based on the assumption that Pineda will improve in his second full season but suffer due to the move from Safeco Field to Yankee Stadium - of what Pineda could do in 2012.

2011: 9 W, 171 IP, 3.74 ERA, 1.099 WHIP,173 K
2012: 14 W 190 IP, 4.12 ERA, 1.258 WHIP, 192 K

Before I calculate what each of these seasons is worth, would you guess that Pineda's value will go up or go down?

2011: W $5, ERA $1, WHIP $4, K $9 Total $19
2012: W $7, ERA ($1), WHIP $0, K $10 Total $17

Even with five additional projected wins and 19 additional strikeouts, Pineda loses $2 in value in 2012 using these numbers.

That's not a big drop. However, the point of this exercise wasn't to malign Pineda but rather display how difficult it is for a pitcher to gain value in wins. Take all of Pineda's other stats from 2011, plug in five wins, and you have a $21 pitcher. For all of the talk of Pineda gaining value from his wins with the move to Yankee Stadium, even a five-win bump would only have a marginal impact.

In Rotisserie baseball, it has been said time and time again that you shouldn't chase wins. This adage holds up even under the lens of valuation analysis.

Bargains and Busts: 2011 N.L. Pitchers

2012-01-16T17:23:00.003-05:00

After a few years of pussyfooting around the issue, N.L. owners finally did it.

Ten Most Expensive N.L. Pitchers 2011

#	Name	$	SAL	+/-	CBS	LABR	TW	PK	2010
1	Roy Halladay	$34	31	2	32	30	32	34	$38
2	Tim Lincecum	$23	28	-6	30	27	28	31	$22
3	Cliff Lee	$33	26	7	29	23	26	29	$27
4	Clayton Kershaw	$38	24	14	25	25	23	25	$24
	Zack Greinke	$18	24	-6	26	28	19	20	$14
6	Cole Hamels	$28	23	6	25	21	22	24	$23
7	Josh Johnson	$10	22	-12	25	20	22	27	$26
8	Tommy Hanson	$14	22	-8	20	24	22	21	$19
	Mat Latos	$16	22	-6	25	22	19	17	$25
10	Yovani Gallardo	$20	22	-2	21	21	23	19	$15
	Average	$23	25	-1	26	24	24	25	$23

They had come close in the past, but 2011 was the first time that the 10 most expensive pitchers in the National League were all starting pitchers (You can read my recap of these pitchers here).

As I documented when I wrote about the N.L. starting pitchers, this is a reliable group. Getting back a $23 return on pitchers you spent $25 on is solid. While it's true that six out of the 10 pitchers here lost money, you at least knew you were going to get double-digit earnings on a top flight starter...something you wouldn't have been guaranteed of in 2009 or 2010.

It figures that in a year when owners finally stopped spending money on closers that a few closers would finally earn big bucks.

Top 10 N.L. Pitchers 2011

#	Name	$	SAL	+/-	CBS	LABR	TW	PK	2010
1	Clayton Kershaw	$38	24	14	25	25	23	25	$24
2	Roy Halladay	$34	31	2	32	30	32	34	$38
3	Cliff Lee	$33	26	7	29	23	26	29	$27
4	Ian Kennedy	$29	10	19	9	11	9	11	$15
5	Cole Hamels	$28	23	6	25	21	22	24	$23
6	Craig Kimbrel	$26	11	15	12	14	8	6	$6
7	Matt Cain	$24	20	4	20	19	20	25	$25
8	Tim Lincecum	$23	28	-6	30	27	28	31	$22
9	Drew Storen	$23	11	11	9	14	11	9	$6
10	John Axford	$22	15	7	14	16	16	15	$17
	Average	$28	20	8	21	20	20	21	$20

Kimbrel, Storen and Axford mark the first time since 2009 (the year I started using 5x5 values instead of 4x4) that three closers crack this list. Billy Wagner and Heath Bell made it in 2010, and Jonathan Broxton stood alone like the cheese in 2009. This year's batch of closers was cheaper than any of the 2009-10 options that cracked the Top 10. There's a reason N.L. owners don't spend big bucks on closers; the ones that cost the most never earn the most...as least in recent memory.

Five pitchers crack both of these lists. This is the best showing by far for the most expensive pitchers; only three appeared on both lists in 2009-2010. Rotoman was out in front on these guys in the A.L., but it is CBS that is slightly more aggressive here. However, despite being out in front on average salaries, they only outbid everyone on Hamels and Latos. LABR wins on Greinke, Hanson, Kimbrel and Storen. Tout Wars gets Gallardo and Rotoman grabs Halladay, Lincecum, Johnson and Cain. As is frequently the case, there are many, many ties.

Not only was there a lot of duplication, but this was the first year where you had to at least go to double-digits to get a big time earner. In the A.L., there were profits to be had in the crapshoot. Is this also true in the N.L?

Top 10 Profits, N.L. Pitchers 2011

#	Name	$	SAL	+/-	CBS	LABR	TW	PK	2010
1	Ian Kennedy	$29	10	19	9	11	9	11	$15
2	Fernando Salas	$19	0	18		1			$1
3	Kyle Lohse	$16	1	15	1		1		-$9
4	Craig Kimbrel	$26	11	15	12	14	8	6	$6
5	Clayton Kershaw	$38	24	14	25	25	23	25	$24
6	Mark Melancon	$15	1	14		2	1	2	$3
7	Tyler Clippard	$16	3	13	1	4	3	4	$14
8	Ryan Madson	$17	4	13	3	4	4	2	$11
9	Cory Luebke	$15	2	13	1	5	1	3	$1
10	Sean Marshall	$13	1	12		2	1	2	$12
	Average	$20	6	15	5	7	5	6	$8

Seven of the 10 best bargains in the National League cost $4 or less. So, yes, you didn't have to spend big to win big.

But unlike in the A.L., the majority of pitchers on this list are relievers. Six of the top 10 bargains, in fact, were relievers. Things have been trending in this direction for the last two years. Two relievers made the bargain list in 2009 and four made it in 2010.

But these guys are cheap because they're volatile. The two bargain relievers in 2009 were Ryan Franklin and Rafael Soriano. In 2010, they were Hong-Chih Kuo, Tyler Clippard, Evan Meek, and Sean Marshall. Clippard and Marshall owners won in 2011; owners of these other four pitchers lost. We don't know which relievers are going to flame out in 2012, but we know that some will so we don't pay full sticker price for any of these arms.

The other side of this coin is that the bargain starting pitchers just aren't there. Mike Leake and Brandon Beachy were the only other N.L. starters not on the list above to turn a $10+ profit. Relievers who turned a $10+ profit who failed to make the cut above were Storen, Edward Mujica, Jason Motte, Rafael Betancourt, and David Hernandez. Overall, there were four starting pitchers and nine relievers who cost $4 or less who turned a $10+ profit. As I said earlier this winter, you can't win in 5x5 with three starters and six relievers, but you're far better off filling in your last one or two spots with a quality middle reliever as opposed to a shaky fifth starter.

Enough love for relief pitching. Not all of these guys helped us out last year.

Top 10 Losses, N.L. Pitchers 2011

#	Name	$	SAL	+/-	CBS	LABR	TW	PK	2010
1	Ryan Franklin	-$5	12	-17	11	13	13	12	$16
2	Ubaldo Jimenez	$4	20	-17	20	19	22	23	$29
3	Edinson Volquez	-$4	13	-17	9	18	12	10	$2
4	Chad Billingsley	$5	18	-13	15	19	20	19	$16
5	Josh Johnson	$10	22	-12	25	20	22	27	$26
6	Jonathan Sanchez	$2	14	-12	11	16	16	15	$21
7	Brandon Lyon	-$2	10	-12	9	10	10	10	$13
8	Jonathan Broxton	$1	12	-11	11	14	12	12	$10
9	Roy Oswalt	$7	18	-11	16	20	19	22	$29
10	Brad Lidge	$2	12	-11	11	12	14	8	$12
	Average	$2	15	-13	14	16	16	16	$17

Four relievers crack the bust list...despite the falling prices for closers across the board. The problem with closers has never been more evident than it is with these guys. Lidge and Broxton return almost nothing in value and Franklin and Lyon return less than nothing. Even if you were one of the poor saps that bought Jimenez or Billingsley, at least you got something back for your investment.

No wonder people dump saves. One fourth of the anticipated N.L. closers were on this list last year. If you told me going into 2011 that I had a one in four chance of grabbing a big-time bust if I spent on a closer, I would have passed - even if it meant I might lose out on someone like Kimbrel.

Perhaps the story buried in all of this, though, is the relative predictability of starting pitching in 2011. Ricky Nolasco was the only other double-digit loser last year. This means that six starting pitchers turned a $10+ profit while seven lost $10 or more. Everyone else fell within the $0-9 range one way or the other.

We always expect that there are going to be a lot of crazy pitching seasons in one direction or the other. But this didn't happen last year. Missing from the losses list were the 2011 versions Aaron Harang, Lohse, or Charlie Morton in 2010: pitchers who went for single digits but still managed to lose big money for their owners. If you threw down a small time investment for a starting pitcher, the worst you did last year was Travis Wood ($8 salary, $0 earnings). This obviously isn't a love letter for Wood, but rather an observation that - at least last year - that the end game wasn't a place where you were going to get burned.