UPL Baseball Draft : Ecclesiastes 3:1

It's interesting to see the different strategies that the various teams employed in the 2010 UPL Baseball Draft. Obviously, with the start of the UPL keeper era, the draft takes on different meaning. First of all, the first round of the draft is really the 19th round... but that's a little misleading. In theory, the top prospects (like Heyward or Strasburg this year, who are probably gone by the 10th round if we were drafting fresh) who are available make the top of the draft much more valuable. And there are probably a handful of players who weren't top 18 on deeper teams who would have been 15th or 16th rounders. So there's some additional value there. The result is that there is a bit of a break point at the top of the draft, much like in football, where there's a handful of picks at the top who are worth a lot more, and then the next bunch of picks are worth roughly the same. So you get this interesting dynamic where trades matter, and swapping spots in a round could be a major issue.

But the thing that really makes this draft interesting is that different teams have very different goals. The teams at the top of the draft are probably looking to re-load, an probably should have a very forward looking approach. This is evidenced by Pauly's approach to the draft. On the other hand, teams looking to win, such as the '90 Reds, are looking for ways to round out their team. And folks like OD just go with the Best Red Sox Player Available strategy. And Westy posted on Facebook that his top 7 was: 1. Reimold, 2. Beltre, 3. Buchholz, 4. Loney, 5. Escobar, 6. Fowler, 7. Heyward. So this is evidence that some people don't use a strategy, so much as just guess blindly :-)

What makes it interesting is that these teams with very different goals are thrown into the same game, and some of the choices, which may be perfectly rational to one team, may be entirely nuts to another. In that sense, there's a time and a place for any strategy. And so long as you have a broader goal in mind, there's probably not a "wrong" move.

So here's how the O.N. Thugs' draft looked. You'll notice the lack of a 3rd round pick, and that I had lower than expected spots in the 4th and 8th. That was courtesy of my Kerry Wood trade, which we will know the results of in late May or June.

Round	Pick (overall)	Player
1	10	Aroldis Chapman
2	17	Travis Hafner
4	49	Troy Glaus
5	62	Josh Willingham
6	69	Skip Schumaker
7	88	Joe Nathan
8	101	George Sherrill

So what was the strategy? Well, the original plan was to go find some power, and to go old school... really old school. Not just in terms of older, players, but also the return to the O.N. Thugs' historical strategy of going with veterans. The idea is this. You build a base that will last for a few years, and then it's winning time. So this year, the plan was to find some undervalued hitters. Travis Hafner, Troy Glaus, Josh Willingham, and Adam LaRoche were high on the list. I also needed to pick up a 2B, but the pickings were slim. Martin Prado, Casey McGehee, Skip Schumaker, and Akinori Iwamora were the four that I was looking at. I didn't really have a preference for any of them, since I don't see Prado as a potential top 13 player (which is the magic number if we have future expansion), and probably not even a top 18. My plan was to just wait it out there. Finally, I had my eye on some of the less-heralded closers or potential closers (Capps, Dotel, Rauch, Perez, Madson, Sherrill, Bard) and a couple starters that I had on my roster at some point last season (Sheets, Latos, Marcum).

Now in terms of execution, drafting in the UPL has become a little less predictable than in the past. First of all, there are fewer auto-drafting teams (save for the O.N. Thugs when we sleep in), and the teams that are auto-drafting have generally pre-ranked players. And the other thing is that our preferences vary greatly from the Yahoo! pre-ranks. Part of it is our league format (6x6, 13 teams, 26-man rosters), and of course that we're a keeper league. So, players that would be "off the radar" in a public league may not be quite as "off the radar" as you may think. So whereas in the past, I'd often let the guy I really wanted slide a round, knowing that he'd still be there when I drafted again, I now tend to just grab the guy that I want now, and let things sort out afterward.

I had assumed that the top of the draft would go Heyward, Strasburg, Chapman, particularly since '90 Reds was, well, a Reds fan. I was ready to just pick Hafner, then get Glaus on the way back, and hope that Willingham would still be there in the 4th. So the draft starts off, and things go off like this:

Pick	Player	Team
1	Jason Heyward	Hats for Bats
2	Stephen Strasburg	Black Sox
3	Octavio Dotel	'90 Reds
4	Kevin Correia	Benver Droncos
5	Marlon Byrd	TheJimmyDixLongballs
6	Nolan Reimold	Muddy Mush Heads
7	Martín Prado	Phatsnapper
8	Adrián Béltre	Cheeseheads
9	Kevin Slowey	SuckMyknucklballs
10	Aroldis Chapman	O.N. Thugs
11	Clay Buchholz	Westy's Sluggers
12	Alcides Escobar	IamJabrone
13	Alberto Callaspo	Milwaukee Whiffers

It starts off as I had figured with Heyward and Strasburg, but then before the draft started '90 Reds was joking (or so we thought) about picking Dotel with the 3rd pick... and I was thinking to myself that I hoped that he wasn't joking... which he wasn't.

Then Benver goes with a relatively safe pick in Correia, who was probably the highest pre-ranked player left at that point.

JimmyDix makes a strange pick with Marlon Byrd, especially given that he hates the Cubs, who's been OK the last few years in a platoon role in TEX (figure that a conservative projection is something like .350/.450, with about 17 HR).

Reimold's getting a lot of hype, but was a 26-year old rookie last year who put up alright numbers (.365/.466 with 15HR in about 400 plate appearances).

Phatsnapper takes Prado, which basically settles the question of me drafting for positional need.

Now Adrian Beltre is an interesting pick, to me. He's 31 this season, had one great season in 2004 (which looks awfully suspicious now), and has a career .325/.453, and probably projects out to 25 HR, 80 R, and 90 RBI over 162 games. You can make a case for his numbers going up with the change in scenery (which I'm not entirely sold on), but I don't know if I'd go down that path. And then Slowey gets picked in the spot in front of me.

Slowey's a 26-year old pitcher, with a career 4.39/1.28 with just under 7 K/9 (though he went 10-3).

Now with all of these players who were picked 3 through 9, I don't see the potential for a top 18 status. And frankly, I didn't see it with the players who I was targeting... so when Chapman falls into my lap at #10, I'm pretty happy. I had to do a double-take to make sure that it was actually the case. But sure enough. He was there. So, it takes the O.N. Thugs roughly 4 minutes to abandon the plan of getting some veteran power, and jumping on Chapman. Now, I certainly don't expect Chapman to be a major contributor for the O.N. Thugs this year (or even in the first part of 2011). But I get to have a free look at him, and will probably keep him on as a keeper, so that I'll really have a 2-year look at him as a potential cog in the machine. The expanded rosters make hanging on to these prospects a real possibility, which was precisely why we expanded to 26-man rosters.

So, my concern turned toward getting some potential power on the roster. The first order of business was to lock up Hafner with the 2nd round. After that, I had a bit of a wait on my hands. I was hoping that I could get either Glaus, Willingham, or LaRoche in the 4th. It turns out that all 3 were still available. I figured that Glaus would be last one picked by someone else, but he was the one that I thought had the biggest upside (career 162-game averages are .360/.500, 35HR, 96R, 101RBI), but was underpriced because of his age and his injury. So Glaus goes my way in the 4th. At that point, I was pretty happy because the odds were that Willingham or LaRoche would still be available when I picked in the 5th. And sure enough, when my turn comes back, both are available, so I go with Willingham, who I like quite a bit, and actually considered keeping in my top 18 (he's basically Brad Hawpe, only he plays in a pitcher's park and not Coors Field).

Now, at this point, I'm pondering my options. The pitchers that I had at the top of my list considered were basically gone. I still didn't have a 2B, and we were down to Schumaker and Iwamura at that point. So, I had to figure out whether I wanted to go after LaRoche and hope that one of my 2B would still be there next time I was picking. Now, I was somewhat lucky because I was going to have 2 picks before C-Lauff would pick again. I had joked about maybe just not playing a 2B, and C-Lauff may have messed with me by picking up extra 2B with his roster space (I did this to him a couple years ago in football, after his QB went down, I picked up the next 2 highest rated free agent QB's just to mess with him). But I also had '90 Reds messing around with his "Frankenstein" strategy for RP and 2B, where he was just drafting random players in the hopes of cutting off body parts and sewing them back together to make a reasonable player. So I was a bit worried that he may have just gone with Schumaker. It turns out that I probably panicked a bit, when I picked Schumaker in the 6th, rather than LaRoche, since Iwamura didn't get drafted at all. Oh well. Relatively small price to pay.

What was interesting was that as I was taking my time on this pick, I noticed that Joe Nathan was available. This was problematic. Jeff had actually wanted Nathan as one of his 2nd wave expansion picks, but I had messed it up. So, I was hoping that Nathan would fall to me, so I could grab him and offer him back to Jeff for the player that I had accidentally placed on his team. I didn't really want Nathan, but figured that it was the right thing to do. We'll see if Jeff wants him or not. Now what's funny is that since then, I've had some inquiries about Nathan. The plan is to just stash him on the DL and see how his rehab looks next spring. But I suppose that a trade wouldn't be a terrible option.

My last pick ended up being George Sherrill. This was a total guess. But, he was on my radar because he played really well for me last year, though his value plummeted after he got traded to LAD to be the set-up man. But, there's always the chance that he could be traded off to MIN or somewhere else where they need a closer.

Now, as you look at my list of picks, I think that it makes sense for my team, which looks to be good with pitching, but needed some bats to put me over the top. I don't have the luxury of waiting for prospects like LaPorta, Gamel, etc. Hafner, Glaus, and Willingham are going to be batting 4 or 5 for their teams. Typical numbers from that spot in the batting order project out to at least 90RBI, and they're are all pretty high OPS guys, so that should bode well, if they get playing time.

Of course, these players, save Chapman, probably don't make a lot of sense for a team that is looking to rebuild, like Hats for Bats, Benver Droncos, JimmyDix, etc. So that adds an interesting wrinkle. You're likely drafting against the teams that have the same goals as you, but even then, the specific needs are probably different enough so that you aren't really competing for the same players. Even with me and '90 Reds needing 2B, our drafts were probably like ships passing in the night, with the possible exception of Casey McGehee, who I had on my radar - even the closers were gone before I would started thinking about them.

So when you take a step back and see these wildly different takes on a draft, you really have to put it back into context and realize that "optimal" choices are based on a lot of assumption. I think that they key assumptions are whether or not your team is in contention or rebuilding, and how many of the keeper slots you have filled up. If you've only got like 12 firm keepers, then you can take more chances on players who may be keeper material. But if your team runs deep, and you're looking to win? Keeper status probably isn't your concern, unless something falls into your lap, like Chapman did in my case. In all honesty, most of the players that Pauly listed on his top 30 weren't even on my radar, simply because I'm needing stats now. For example, had my team been a great hitting, so-so pitching team, a player like Andy Pettite, who Pauly would absolutely never draft (and rightfully so) would absolutely be on my radar, and probably relatively high on my radar.

Now what's really interesting is when you see some teams that you'd figure to be looking to win, instead draft like they're rebuilding. As I look through the drafts, I'm a bit surprised at how much youth Westy and C-Lauff took on. That either means that they really think that their top 18 is golden, or they're looking to rebuild. Either way, I don't think that's an optimal way to go, if they're trying to win now. Obviously, Greg spent a lot of time filling holes, looking to win now. On the other hand, Rupert's draft (which I believe was auto-drafted) tells me that he either is trying to add veterans to win now, or that he just didn't pre-rank players and got stuck w/ the computer's picks. OD appears to be happy to continue his strategy of picking Red Sox players, along with a couple vets along the way.

On the flip side, some teams that were definitely in rebuilding mode, didn't really continue that path in the draft. JimmyDix is a prime example, though his team is quickly moving into contender territory, with his acquisitions of Adrian Gonzalez and (soon) BJ Upton. So maybe he's looking to get into the top 4 this year. But the Milwaukee Whiffers' draft didn't really do much to help him rebuild. Nor did the Cheeseheads' draft. But teams like Benver Droncos, Hats for Bats, and the Black Sox seem to have helped along their rebuilding processes in this draft. And in a vacuum, I'd like the Mush Heads' draft, though I'm not sure how good of a draft it was for a rebuilding team.

As for the O.N. Thugs? We're always convinced that we're going to win, even when we're in 10th place at the all-star break :-) But I think that between Hafner, Glaus, and Willingham, I'll get 2 good performances, which will go a long way into putting my offense back in the top half of the league. Though to be honest, much like last season, Wright/Markakis are going to be the major factors. If both are good, then I've got the inside track. If only one is good, then I'll need to get creative. And if neither is good, then it will be really, really hard to get back into the winner's circle.

-Chairman (aka O.N. Thugs)