Fantasy Baseball Today - Rankings Debates! How to Buy-Low, Sell-High (05/27 Fantasy Baseball Podcast)

Episode Date: May 27, 2020

We've got rankings debates but first, which batting stances did you imitate most growing up? If your answer isn't Gary Sheffield, you're wrong. Alright, why the discrepancy in Bryce Harper ranking (4:07)? Frank is buying into the adjustments Harper made the final four months last season. Who should be drafted higher between Harper or Springer? ... Next up we have Hyun-Jin Ryu, whom Scott is higher on than Frank (13:50). How much should we worry about the change of scenery and Ryu's injury history? ... Why does Scott hate Raisel Iglesias (22:33)? Was Iglesias really as bad as his 2019? ... On Wednesdays we like to do some strategy discussion so is the buy-low/sell-high dead in Fantasy Baseball (30:34)? It's much easier said than done nowadays. Why is Adam starting to "buy-high" (34:40)? Should you be doing the same thing? Should we try and sell prospects as soon as they're called up (44:18)? Frank thinks it's a risky proposition. ... Email us at [e-mail]. 'Fantasy Baseball Today' is available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, Google Podcasts, Castbox and wherever else you listen to podcasts.  Follow our FBT team on Twitter: @CBSFantasyBB, @AdamAizer, @CTowersCBS, @CBSScottWhite, @Roto_Frank Join our Facebook group at https://www.facebook.com/groups/fantasybaseballtoday For more fantasy baseball coverage from CBS Sports, visit https://www.cbssports.com/fantasy/baseball/ To hear more from the CBS Sports Podcast Network, visit https://www.cbssports.com/podcasts/ Download our printable Draft Kit from CBSSports.com/draftkit! To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Welcome to the Fantasy Baseball Today podcast from CBS Sports. I drive, center field, at the wall, grand slam. This is magnificent. Got a fantasy question? Email Fantasy Baseball at CBSI.com. Get ready to win your league. Well, fantasy becomes reality. Now here's Frank, Scott, Chris, and Adam.

Happy Hump Day, everybody. Welcome to Fantasy Baseball today. It is Wednesday, May 27th. Frank Stamphle here alongside Pocket Aces, Adam Azer, Scotty Dubbs, Scott White. What's going on, fellas? How are you doing? Good? Chilling. Chilling. Chilling. I sent out a tweet last night regarding, there was a question that was asked on Twitter was, what was your batting stance that you imitated most growing up? And I got a lot of interesting responses. And originally I said, if your answer wasn't

Gary Sheffield, it's probably the wrong answer. Ooh. That's a good call. Yeah, Gary Sheffield. Easy. I mean, he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame just for that stance, right? Oh, for sure. If there's a separate wing for stances, yes. I mean, some might argue he should be in just based on production.

But again. Sheffield, I mean, I saw some of the answers to this. Jeff Bagwell was a common one, and that's for sure. Something that was attempted pretty often. Andros Gala Raga was one I did a lot. How about Craig Counsel? Craig I don't remember actually doing Craig counsel that much I don't know Griffey Griffey was a popular one like the whole Braves lineup from the mid 90s

like I had that down you know Harvey Lopez Jeff Blouser Ryan Klesko with the back bend before he stepped into the box David Justice David Justice I feel like is a good one Fred McGriff sticking the butt way out yeah those were all those were all attempted yeah I thought I used to do a mattingly because I thought he had this kind of shoulder shimmy but I'm trying to find it and I can't seem to find the shoulder shimmy but there was something fun about Don Mattingly

of course I had to do it lefty he had a cool he had a really cool batting stance nice crouch that was something I didn't do like if it was a left-handed batter I wouldn't attempt to do it left-handed I would just do it from the right-handed side that doesn't really work Scott I'm sorry Yeah, I always felt like I couldn't do Griffey from the right side.

Even though I was a right-handed batter, you can't do Griffey as a righty. It just felt weird. Scott. Yeah, did Scott, did you do Griffey from the right side? Well, you have to end it with a swing, right? I wasn't coordinated enough to swing for the lefty side. No righty has the uppercut swing like Griffey has. That's a purely lefty thing. That's why lefties like the ball low and in.

Come on. Listen, I'm not Gar Rhinis. All right. I'm not batting stance guy. I just did this for my own personal amusement. Thank you. I think I did a fine job. I was amused. That was because you were playing to an audience of one.

If you had Twitter existed back then, you would have gotten killed. Today on the show, we're going to debate some rankings. How to buy low and sell high. Is it a lost art? Can you still buy low and sell high? We'll talk about that. We have a prospect evaluation for starting pitcher. of the Seattle Mariners, Logan Gilbert.

Your emails a little bit later on. Fantasy Baseball at CBSI.com. But let's start off with some of these rankings, debates. And I probably should have got your feedback first, Scott, to ask if there was anyone you specifically wanted to debate. So I apologize, but mainly just the biggest... I am down for a debate anywhere, anytime. I like to be surprised.

It's fine. It's fine. Scott hates rankings debates. I chose four players. Two that I have ranked higher, two that you have ranked higher. So I wanted to make it even, you know, guys that you're a little bit higher on, maybe a little bit lower on than I am. And I wanted to start off with Bryce Harper,

who I have as my seventh outfielder in the head-to-head points format. You have them as your 12th outfielder. Not a huge discrepancy. Maybe the biggest discrepancy comes in the auction values that we have. I have them at $36. You have him at $24. So Bryce Harper last year, finished as the eighth best outfielder in,

head-to-head points. He averaged 3.5 fantasy points per game. So on a points per game basis, he was the 13th best outfielder, but a cumulative points, he was the eighth best. Got off to a slow start, mega-contract with the Phillies, first two months, hit 248 with a 30% strikeout rate. From June 1st on, hit 267 with a 23.6% strikeout rate, 25 homers with a 903 OPS. Well, what does that mean? From June 1st on, Cody Bellinger hit 262 with a 933 OPS. They really were not that dissimilar from June 1st on last season. He walks a ton over a 14% walk rate for his career helps in the points format. He finished with a 260 batting average.

His expected batting average was 279. He makes truly elite contact a 14.8% barrel rate last year, 94th percentile. And basically just some of the players you have ranked ahead of him, George Springer almost guaranteed to miss time. I mean, he misses about 28 games per season. Is that going to be amplified in a shorter season? Wait a second. Wait a second. You're saying Harper is a better health bet than George Springer.

Like, you're just assuming that? I would say it's played 147 or more games in four of the last five seasons, Bryce Harper. It's a little underrated. It was really just 2017. Staying healthy lately. Okay. All right. What about, and George, let me see George Springer. It was definitely a thing early in his career, like 2013, 2014 missed time.

But the past couple of years, specifically the past two, 157 or more games each of the past two seasons. So I think Springer's probably going to miss some time. As I like Ketel Marte, but as much as I like him, I can't take him over Bryce Harper in a points format. Charlie Blackman, I see the case, but Rockies are kind of frustrating to own in a head-to-head points league because they're really great at home, not so much on the road. So you need that kind of weekly consistency out of your hitters in a head-to-head points league. So for all those reasons, I have Bryce Harper ranked about five spots higher than you in my outfield ranking, Scott. Okay. All right.

So you threw me for a little loop with that injury thing. To be honest, I had never thought of George Springer as a guy who consistently misses time with injuries. I guess it's always just such a minor thing. It was a strained hamstring last year. He doesn't have that moment where, oh, my goodness, he's down and he's grabbing his elbow. Like it hasn't been those kind of instances with George Springer to really stick out in my mind that way. But it is true over the past three seasons he has missed more time than Bryce Harper. So putting that aside.

I guess the place to start is just how much better George Springer was than Bryce Harper in this format last year. So 4.1-1 points per game for George Springer versus 3.48 for Bryce Harper. So basically Springer was between Bellinger and Betts in per game production, and Harper was between Max Kepler and Austin Meadows. I'm not, I mean, he recovered so well in the second half, Harper did, that I'm not really sure the final season line is one I would expect him to improve on. The, you know, he hit 260 and he's done better than that before, but he's been consistently a liability in batting. It's been consistent enough that I no longer really expect him to do much better in batting average. Now, you could certainly make the case George Springer overachieved last year.

It was his best season and, you know, maybe so. But I think just because it was more recent, I'm more confident in George Springer putting up that MVP-type production than I am in Harper right now. So that would be how far apart do I rank them? Two spots in my outfield rankings. Yeah, I feel good. about that. I'm fine with that. What is the specific issue, I guess, is what I'm curious about.

I'm just trying to figure out why we have this discrepancy and was paying attention more so to the players that we have between you and I. Like, you have Harper at 12, so I was looking at the players. Chris Bryant, I mean, we've talked enough about Chris Bryant. You haven't one spot ahead of Bryce Harper, but I mean, he's another one. The argument I would make is the one that you mentioned is that last year was a career year for Springer on a per game basis. So is that something we can rely on? In 2018, he averaged three fantasy points per game,

whereas Harper was 3.5 again. So Harper has been consistent the past two years. And I think if you take what he did over the course of the final four months of the season where he did get off to a slow start, I mean, if Harper is closer to, you know, that 900 OPS player, we're probably looking at a very solid top 10 outfielder with the potential to be even better. Yes. I think, I mean, they're in the same tier. I think in this format specifically because you know, Harper steals potential. He had 15 last year, 13 the year before. It isn't rewarded the

same way as it is in five by five leagues. So he kind of loses that advantage. And, And George Springer strikes out at a much lower rate, so he gets an advantage there. George Springer bats very high in a deep Astros lineup, so you know he's going to score a crap load of runs. I think maybe batting average-wise, they're going to be similar. Of course, that doesn't have a direct impact in terms of head-to-head points value

because you don't get points for batting average, but the hits that feed the batting average you do. It's pretty close. you know, I just I just think Springer yeah, like I said, the upside Springer showed last year means more to me than the upside Harper showed

a couple years before that. 2017, that was Harper's possible MVP season. He was so good. He averaged 4.12 points per game. Charlie Blackman was the number one hitter that year. He averaged 4.11. Blackman wasn't the number one hitter per game, but he was amazing. You know, Mike Trout averaged 4.5 that year.

But since 2017, that's what he only played 111 games, I think, Bryce Harper. But he's still been a top 10 outfielder, top eight outfielder both years. In fact, in points leagues, you know, so just to sum up, Bryce Harper. He has been, in his last four, healthy seasons, a top eight outfielder in points leagues all four times, and a top nine outfielder in Roto leagues, five by, five with batting average three or four times. If you're going with an OBP league, he's even better because he is a batting average liability. The thing that concerns me with Harper is the strikeout rate keeps climbing.

It's 24.3% in 2018, 26.1% last year. He's got to get that under control. I'd take Springer in a points league, and I didn't know that I would until we just had this discussion now, but I'd do it just because of the plate appearances. he is such a he's probably going to lead the league going to lead baseball and played appearances or be like top three and that's so important in points leagues in a road and points in points and played appearances per game if we're if we're apparently factoring in this injury risk for springer i guess so yeah um in a roto league i don't know who i take i know i would take harper

in a rhodo league that was o bp i expect him to steal more i expect him the homer probably a little bit more. Counting stats will be pretty similar, but I'd probably give a slight edge to Harper. I mean, the guy just, he drives in a ton of runs. They'll score 100 runs. He's a little underrated because he's so streaky, I think. You do have to keep that in mind in a short season. He often gets off to like blistering starts and then he's terrible. Last year, he got off to a bad start and was really good. Yeah, he's frustrating because he's so streaky. But at the end of the day, it's hard to argue with the top eight outfield or in points leagues in each of his last four healthy seasons. And by the way, the one year where he wasn't healthy, he was one of the best

players in baseball. I had a thousand OPS that year. So the strikeout, if he can keep the strikeouts under control, he could really be a steal. Even in the third round, he could be a steal. But he's got, he's got some risk in his profile because he c's so much now. Yeah, Harper's ADP 22.8. So teetering on a late second, early third round pick, I like the fact that he improved those strikeouts as the season went on. So hopefully that's something that he can carry over. And hopefully, I've convinced Scott to move him slightly up his head to head points. Rankings. No.

No. Sorry. All right. Well, I have to try on the next player. Hyun Jin Ryu. Scott has 33 at SP, starting pitcher in Roto. I have him 41st. So I have him about eight spots lower in Roto.

And the three things that I'm focusing on with Riu is, obviously the change of scenery means he'll face tougher opponents in the American League East. and frankly has a below average Blue Jays defense behind him. The Dodgers last year were plus 126 in defensive runs saved. That was the best in baseball. The Blue Jays, however, had exactly zero defensive runs saved, which ranked 19th.

And before last season, we know that the injuries have been prevalent for Ryu, just 82.1 innings in 2018, 126.2 in 2017. can he stay healthy and then just natural regression right i mean 82% strand rate you know how much is that going to drop year over year for riu so i i've seen him be kind of a polarizing player in both you know adp and in rankings but scott i'm a little bit lower than than you on riu yeah yeah i'd be interested in knowing i mean 44 sounds so low i have him toward the back end of the 35 i keep referring to. And look, he was a Sy Young contender last year.

And, you know, he was even better in 2018. It was injury shortened. You mentioned there's an injury history there, and that's fine. But as good as he was last year, he was even better for the 15th starts in 2018. Actually, has a 221 ERA in 44 starts

over the past two years. Riu does. I think, you know, statistically, the supporting stats suggest he, probably won't be quite that good again, but you're talking about an ERA right around three in terms of what we can expect it to be.

He is one of the very best in baseball at inducing ground balls and at avoiding walks, which helps him survive with a subpar strikeout rate, which helps to dominate with a subparth strikeout rate. And I just think the ERA is so safe. Again, I'm not saying it'll be quite as good. good as it was last year, but low threes. And you're just not going to find that kind of safety from any of the pitchers you're going to get in the round 40 range, in the 40 range of the

rankings that you're talking about. So, Adam, this is an interesting one for you because you have mentioned you rely on the eye test. You don't necessarily put as much stock into things like ex-fip or Sierra where last year re-use Sierra was 377 compared to his 232 ERA. The projection systems on fan graphs hate Ryu. They have him for anywhere from a

378 ERA to a 4-28. So do you stand closer to those projections or do you look at the ERA that he's provided the past couple of seasons and you're like, I can trust? Yeah. Okay, so you're not talking about like X-FIP or you're not talking about the ERA

estimators. You're talking about No, from like ATC. I know you guys have had Ariel Cohen on before. The bat projections from Derek Hardy, steamer projections, they all have him for, you know, between a 378 and a 428 ERA. Because just for, okay, so just to put it out there since I brought it up and since, you know,

to contrast there, last year, reuse FIPP was 310. His XFIP was 32. His XERA was, which is the new stat. That stat cast put out there is 343. Sierra is actually pretty high. Sierra's closer to those projections. It's 377.

All right. Sorry, Adam. Go ahead. What a world we live in. Four different projections, four different estimators, all different. I think 340,

if I were, if the AERA, the Adam ERA, he is 340 for this upcoming year. That's my projection. Look, you can't deny he's been a much better pitcher at home than on the road with the Dodgers.

262 ERA at home, 330. on the road. His ground ball rate was almost 2 to 1. Ground ball to fly ball ratio last year. Very, very high for him. He's usually very good, but not that good. So he'll be worse than he was last year.

He had a 232 ERA. There's no question. I think the competition is going to get so much harder for him, not just facing the ALEs, but also the NLE is going to have some good hitters, too. And the ballpark sucks. I can't imagine the bullpen's going to be as good as the Dodgers, but I don't know that off top of my head. So I don't love him.

I look at where he is in Scott's rankings, Jun Ryu, and I wonder who you have ahead of him. I don't think I could put Julio O'Reyes ahead of him. I think Otani will be better per inning, per start, but I don't know how many starts he makes. Bumgarner, no, Max Fried. Yeah, it's a leap of faith.

I could see it. Matt Boyd, Eduardo Rodriguez, Denal on the Met. Yeah. I mean, it seems like he's going, more for the upside plays there ahead of Ryu when I'm kind of, particularly at starting pitcher where there's so much downside and where it's such a steep drop off. He's kind of like the safety valve in my rankings where, okay, I don't, I don't want to take a chance on those upside guys when I know I have somebody really good

already. And if I'm drafting a pitcher at that, at the point where Ryu's going off the board, it's because my pitching staff needs help. I probably haven't. supplied it as well as I need to. So yeah, that's why I put Ryu where I have him. But if he has a 340 ERA for the Blue Jays, I don't know he's going to get a ton of wins with that. And if he was only striking out, say, 8.2 batters per 9, it's probably not that big of a fantasy asset.

Well, I'm thinking, you know, if you're pegging him for a 340 ERA, I'd probably agree with you. I'm thinking more like what he had in the second half, which was 318, after a 173 ERA in the first half. I'm thinking more low threes than mid-threes. And I think that would be enough to make a difference there.

But, you know, maybe not. It's hard to predict how exactly that transition from NL.S to A.L. East is going to go. Yeah. I just think, like, the skills are so, the skills that he does have with the ground balls and the walks, the control. It's so apparent and has demonstrated it, you know, beyond everybody's expectations for in back-to-back years now, the effect that it's had for him. That I feel really confident in how Ria is going to perform. Yeah, he's going to be like Kyle Hendrix for me, where every year I'm just like, nope, and every year I'm wrong. But I want to

know, Frank, who you have ahead of him that Scott doesn't. So this was particularly for Roto. I have Max Freed ahead of him. I have Max Fried at SP 25, which is very high, and then I have Ryu at 41. So I think what it might come down to is just a difference in what we're looking for at that point in the draft, because normally I'll have two

or three starting pitchers by then and for the middle of my I guess fantasy rotation, I want to take some swings for upside there. And I think someone like, you know, maybe look, they're not going to do what Ryu did last year, but we also don't think Ryu is going to do what he did

last year. So I like the chances of someone like Max Fried. I've talked a lot about Matthew Boyd, who I have ranked higher. Julio Arias in a shortened season, even if he's only going, you know, five in a Roto league. I think he could be better. James Paxton, I have higher. They're basically back-to-back in ADP. Denelson Lamette. Lamett's a risky one, but the strikeouts could be massive for someone like Denelson-Lamette on a, on a per-start, on a per-ending basis. Even like David Price and Kent and Maida, I think have a lot more strikeout upside in a Roto league. So those are some of the names that I have hired than Riu, Adam. Okay. Well, that's very nice. Yeah. I would say the biggest thing is ERA downside by comparison to Riu for those guys. That scares

me away. Fair enough. Yeah, I think the ERA will be a little bit higher. And I just worry a lot about the injury concerns when it comes to Ryu. But let's move on to a closer. One that you mentioned last week, Scott, and I've been wanting to talk about this one for a while here. Reisel Eglacius of the Cincinnati Reds, I have him as my 13th rank relief pitcher in Roto, a $9 auction value. You have them as your 26th rank relief pitcher, $2 auction value. And last year for me really stands out as the outlier for Rice Liglasis. Did give up more home runs, but was dealing with the juice ball. The ERA up over four, the whip over 1.2.

It was not a great year for Iglesias. There's no doubting that. But the previous three seasons before that, you're dealing with a 253 ERA or less, a 114 whip or less, 28 or more saves in each of the past three seasons, 15 and a half percent swinging strike rate last year. That was top 25 for a reliever,

career high K per 9, 11.96. He is the closer for his team. I understand there might be some competition there. if he were to falter. But I think you could say that for a lot of the relief pitchers that are kind of those mid-tier guys. The Reds are expected to be competitive. I'm just not sure how you can have someone like Gallegos ranked ahead of him.

You don't even know if Gallegos is definitely the closer. Hansel Robles has only really done it for, what, four months of his career where he was the closer for a team. Archie Bradley, we have concerns the walk rate versus the strikeout rate for him. So, I mean, those are some names that stood out to me. even Sean Doolittle is an injury risk. So I just frankly trust Ryssela Liglasis more than you. Why do you not trust Ryssalie Glacius?

Yeah, it's a two-year trend that he's become home run prone. The home run rate actually spiked in 2018, and he managed to salvage a 238 ERA in spite of it, but the FIPP was 423. The FIP was actually worse in 2018 than in 2019. So with that home-run spike, I kind of feel like he got lucky in 2018, but because it continued down the same ERA trend,

a lot of people didn't notice. Iglesias seems pretty vulnerable to me. He came pretty close to losing his job a couple times last year, and Michael Lorenzen got seven saves. They're kind of weird, the Reds and how they use Iglesias. They don't always use him like a traditional closer, so it seems like his saves upside suffers because of that. And Lorenzi got seven saves last year.

Jared Hughes got seven saves in 2018. That's a high number for the backup closer there in back-to-back years. And then because he's become home run prone in the last couple years, he's kind of on the verge of losing his job constantly. And he had, geez, he lost 12 games last year, Ryssela Glacios, a 12 record. That's amazing. Three and 12.

That is a massive number of. losses for a really good. Yeah. I actually see him as vulnerable. And I know this is kind of, it's one of the few really statement rankings I have where I, you know, I try not to get that far off from the consensus usually because, you know, I don't want, I don't want my rankings to be the cause of somebody reaching for somebody in a draft when, you know, they could, they could wait to get him. But I purposely buried Eglacius because I'm just scared of him. I want no part of him. I could maybe be convinced to move him ahead of Archie Bradley and Sean Doolittle.

Those are the two guys I have directly ahead of Eglacius, but not Robles, who doesn't, like Joe Madden's pretty much said he's going to stick with Robles. Robles is the closer and he was fine last year in the role. Nakayegos, who I think has too much upside. I understand it could, they could just go with somebody else. And it ends up being a waste of pick, but we're so far down in the relief pitcher rankings that in most standard formats,

I think you could recover from a guy like Geyegos not ending up getting saved. It's worth the gamble for the upside. Let's not forget about Pedro Strope, who's now on the Reds, who's coming off a bad year with the Cubs, but also he was hurt most of the year. So I don't know how healthy he was.

Before that, Pedro Strope was one of the, most consistent, really good relievers in baseball. I mean, you're talking probably four or five years in a row with an ERA under three. And he could take over that role if Eglacy's struggles. I do agree that it just seems like Eglaceous was so consistent three years in a row in terms of ERA, in terms of WIP, in terms of strikeouts. Then last year is a bad year. And most of that was in non-save situations.

He was pretty good in save situations. He wasn't as good as he typically is, but he was still pretty good. His September was brilliant. there's a lot to like about Iglesisius. I mean, you could look at, say, Ken Giles and say, well, two years ago, I think it was Ken Giles was, did not give up.

I don't think he blew one save, but he had a terrible year, because every time they used him in a non-save situation, he was dreadful. Well, the Blue Jays then started using him the right way, and he had a really good year.

So maybe the Reds just need to commit to him in save situations. Maybe last year was just an outlier. That makes sense, Frank. I don't like that Lorenzen could get saves. I don't like that. They don't use Iglesias as a typical closer. I don't like that Pedro Strop is there.

And as Scott mentioned, the home runs, I don't like the home runs. So there's definitely some risk. I would take him over Hansel Robles. Robles needs to keep the walks under control. He finally did last year. If he does that, he might be good. But I'd like to see him do that another year. His walk rate had been over four every year since 2015 before last season.

I like Archie Bradley more than everyone, but, you know, that's just me. I don't remember some of the other names you said. I'd probably take Doolittle over Iglesias. I don't find myself drafting a lot of Eglacius, but I do think there's a real chance that he ends up being a steal because there's a lot of ways things could go very right for him. Yeah, I usually wind up with him as my second closer whenever I'm doing a roto draft just based on where some of these guys go.

It's just a fair range that you can get him in. But yeah, look, I understand there's competition there, but I think he's actually performed quite well the past three seasons the command got better last year as well so yeah, Reisel Iglesias, one that looks like we're going to differ on here, Scott.

I don't see you moving them anywhere up the rankings at least nowhere close to where I've got him, so. No, no. No, I think you're closer to the consensus. I don't know that I've convinced Scott of anything. I'm good at that, Frank. You have work to do. You have work to do.

I've got to step it up. All right, we're going to take a quick break here. We come back. We're going to talk to you about how to buy low and sell high. Is it still a real thing? We'll talk about that next here on fantasy baseball today. All righty, we're back. How to buy low, how to sell high.

Easier said than done. Guys, I like to do a little general strategy discussion every Wednesday here on the show. And I just wanted to get your thoughts because it seems like it's so easy to say. in the fantasy industry, oh, this player is a buy low, this player is a sell high, but something we also say about specifically people who play fantasy baseball is that the industry has become smarter. So people realize what you're trying to do

when you're trying to buy low or sell high on a player. I looked at two specific players from last season. Jack Flaherty at the All-Star break had a 464 ERA, a 474-FIP, and a 4-1-X-FIP. There really wasn't much there that said he was going to get better outside of just watching him and seeing that

he had better stuff than the numbers indicated. And on the flip side of that, someone like Domingo Santana, Scott, I know that you talked about this in your Dynasty League, that you tried your hardest to sell off Domingo Santana last year. His first 90 games, the guy had a triple slash 286, 354, 496 with 18 home runs.

He was great. But nobody wanted to buy Domingo Santana because they knew what you were. trying to do. And again, with Flaherty, it's like, was it just a blind faith thing of trying to buy him because he has better stuff than the numbers actually indicated? So I kind of wanted to present both cases and ask, you know, is the, is the buy low, sell high dead in fantasy baseball? I'm not even confident I was selling low on Domingo Santana. Maybe it was interpreted that way. But that kind of gets to what you're saying is that you start playing these mind games with people

who know what they're doing. I mean, I don't play. Of course, I play in a lot of industry leagues and people who write about fantasy baseball for a living. You can trust they know what they're doing. At least I think you can. But, you know, even in leagues that I play with friends, I mean, they've done it for long enough that I don't feel like, I don't feel like there's the level of difficulty changes playing between the fantasy civilians that I play with

and then the fantasy warriors that are in the industry, you know? So what I often say on this podcast when it comes to buying low and selling high is that it's really hard to do. And particularly labeling somebody a sell high, I'm reluctant to do it because I feel like the way that gets interpreted sometimes is sell at all costs. like, oh my goodness, this guy's going to collapse and leave me high and dry if I don't move him right now. So somebody ends up taking less than they deserve to get for a guy because, you know, they just hear that they're supposed to sell him. But, you know, I'm talking about that's somebody who listens to the podcast versus the kind of leagues I play in, which I guess, you know, that's kind of an incongruous idea I presented. it there. But I just, I have a difficult time with the buy, low, sell high concept because I find it's difficult to pull off in the kind of leagues I, I, I, uh, I traffic in. And I find it's hard

to give advice for because people don't necessarily understand what they're supposed to be getting back when they are buying high, buying low or selling high. Adam, is it just so easy? that it's easier to pull off in, you know, a random home league versus an industry league? Is it just that we've played in too many leagues together where, you know, we all kind of know the value of players, whereas, you know, in someone's home league, not to sound elitist or anything, it might be easier to pull off like a buy low versus sell high scenario? Probably, but I also think that maybe we're wrong and maybe we're doubting guys and they end up being good. I actually think that what's more fun and productive these days is buy high.

When a guy gets off to a good start and everybody wants to dismiss that player, I agree. Yeah, you buy that player. You try to find the underlying stats that make you feel like the breakout is legit. Now, that's even harder to give advice for because if people don't interpret what exact, If people have a hard time interpreting exactly what you should be getting back in a sell high scenario, a buy high scenario, that's even more dangerous to advise somebody about. But just my own activity and my own leagues, I find myself proposing those kinds of trades more often because I know I'm not going to pull off a sell high against a bunch of other people who are telling people to sell high on this player as well. What I'm more likely to do is a player who's having a hot start, like you said, Adam, appears to be breaking out.

I get the sense that maybe I'm out ahead of the industry on believing in it. And maybe I can convince them they're pulling off a cell high by, you know, trading him to me, the sucker who is willing to buy into him already. but based on my perception of the player, I obviously don't feel like I'm giving up too much. So that ends up being the kind of trades I propose more often nowadays. Yeah, if you're going to sell someone too, if you're trying to sell high on someone, you know, sell high on someone that you still think is going to be good,

but not this good. I remember a few years ago I called Dexter Fowler, a great sell high. And I got some pushback because it wasn't one of those situations were like, oh, okay, well, he's Aaron Harang, where he sucks. And even though he's off to a great start, you know, I didn't mean for it that Dexter Fowler is going to be terrible. Dexter Fowler is going to be useful.

And whoever I trade him to is going to have a fine player. But I'm going to get back a great player. Also, we talk about this a lot, two for one. You put a sell high guy and another player in there and you get one player back, and that one player is by far the best player in the deal. You do that. You just have to get a little bit more creative these days in a lot of leagues because people, people know what they're doing.

I mean, Shon Jin Ryu has been one of the best pitchers in baseball two years in a row, and he's like the 30-something, 30-something of the pitcher off the board on draft day. You know, people know what they're doing. It is harder to pull off. But buy high is a fun one. And if you just want to talk about how to make a buy-low,

how to find a buy-low, you look at track record. A sell high, you look at plate discipline for hitters. If a guy, like Austin Riley, was striking out way too much. There was no way it was going to keep up. And actually, people were making a lot of trades for awesome rally. That was really interesting stuff.

We talked about him almost every day because he was homering almost every day. So it's not completely dead. Play discipline is a good indicator of what might happen in the future, which is why Domingo Santana was someone that Scott was trying to unload. There are things. There are signs that not everybody's going to be a two and two, I guess. So it could still happen, but it's obviously harder. And you might have to throw in a little bit more than he used to.

I guess I'd say that. I just looked at the ERA leaders from March and April last year. Zach Davies was number one by the end of April with a 138 ERA. I don't think you were getting... You couldn't have sold it for anything. I can't imagine a league in 2020. I mean, people would have to be so tuned out of fantasy baseball that they're not going to be responding to trade offers anyway.

To not, like to just not hear from somewhere that... okay, Zach Davies isn't really this good. I don't know. Do leagues exist where somebody is able to trade high on Zach Davies still when he gets off to that kind of start? Even though there's obviously no low strikeouts and everything else, I remember last year, Austin Riley, when he got called up and remember Homer nine times in his first 18 games. I just brought him up. Okay. Sorry.

But do you agree with me? Scott, what I said was that people were actually giving you a decent return for Austin Riley. I think you might be able to sell high on prospects because everybody gets giddy over prospect. I feel like you could, I feel like we knew because he was striking out so much. We knew that eventually he was going to crater. Right. But I wrote it would have gotten better return than you would have expected for him. I wrote an article right towards the tail end of that hot streak, probably right at the very end of it. nine home runs and 18 games saying

Austin Riley is the ultimate sell high candidate and here's why. But, you know, I left room for him still being an asset and, you know, explained in there you need to be careful what you get in return. I wasn't expecting him to totally

crater, but I acknowledged that was the possibility as well. We just don't know where he's going to go from here, but it's a pretty safe bet he's not going to be, you know, one of the league leaders the league leader in home runs from this point forward. And I got a lot of flack for it.

So I guess just the amount of flack I got for it would suggest you would have been able to sell high on him. I just feel like it's so easy as a player playing fantasy to just wait and see. You know, 18 games into a guy's career, even though he has nine home runs, what does it hurt you to wait a couple more? more weeks and see how things go. If somebody's already demanding the moon and the stars for him,

how is the price tag going to go up from there? It could only go down. So I don't, I don't, I have a hard time putting myself in the mindset of somebody who would fall for buying for buying high on Austin Riley. But it, it of course comes down to, in the end it comes down to the actual players being exchanged, which is why I find this to be a difficult conversation to talk about because buying high on Riley might look different for one person than for another and it really just comes down to what specific players being given up. Yeah. And Frank, I wonder if the new era of selling high on a guy like Zach Davies,

if you have a guy is off to a good start and you think that realistically he's going to be on waivers in the next few weeks. You just know his track record. Do you just try to sell him for a two-star pitcher that could win you a week? Do you try to sell him for a backup player, somebody that's on somebody's bench that got drafted in like the 15th round? You know, if you just know that this guy, that the Zach Davies or whoever, there's going to be guys that are just not that good and we know it. Do you just sell him for anything? Because eventually you're going to have to drop him.

I guess you could just wait it out. But he might be, in your opinion, he might be the worst player on your roster, but you can't justify dropping him right now because he's playing too well. I hate that. You know it in your heart. You know that it's okay to drop him,

but you just can't do it in case you're wrong based on what's happened in the first month or so of the season. Maybe you just go with your gut and you say, I'm just trying to get whatever I can for this guy before I have to put him on waivers. The problem is, Adam, as much as you think, you know, you never really know because you might have said that about Gileto last year, based on the season he had the year before. You know, the first couple of months, you might

have said, all right, well, I'm not completely buying it. Let me just sell this guy off for anything. Same thing with someone like Frankie Montas. We've never seen him do it before, right? He's been so bad in his career. It's just so hard to say for certain, which I know what you're saying. It's like, it seems like, all right, well, it's Zach Davies. He's got a 5.7K per nine and a three and a half walks per nine through the first month of the season. with an ERA under two. It seems so easy, but I don't think it is, man. And that's why I wanted to have.

I mean, I think it is with Davies, but I would say I would never have dropped Gialito if he had gotten off the hot start. But Montas, I may have thought of in the same way. I thought of Davies, but at least we knew he had the splitter. And I probably would have seen where that went. There wasn't a lot peripherally suggesting

Davies would be able to keep it out. But I would have been hesitant to trade him for somebody else who I had. I, you know, someone else who I'd be just as likely to put on waivers, like you were talking about, like a two-star streamer or whatever. I'd have to trade him for somebody who I thought had, who I was convinced I wouldn't be dropping, you know? Yeah, I mean, you want to keep an open mind with everybody, and that includes Zach Davies, even when the peripherals don't, don't really back it up. And so you can't just give him away. But you can, if it's somebody like that who you're, who it's, the odds are so long of him actually

maintaining anything close to that level of production, just getting somebody back who you know is going to be consistently useful for you. I think that's a win. I think that's a, that's a successful sell high in a situation like that. The last point that I'll make, and originally when you said this, Adam, I agreed with you because for the most part, when a prospect first gets called up and you try and sell them, that's when it seems like their value is going to be at its peak. You can get a player that can consistently contribute for you. You can usually trade those prospects away for a decent amount.

The problem is one out of ten of those prospects is going to be a league winner. And if you trade that player away, you're going to feel terrible. Like, Yuron Alvarez, for example, last year was a league winner. A couple of years ago, Gary Sanchez. got called up and was a league winner. So it's, again, it's just a risky proposition where originally in my mind I was like, yeah, you're right. Like you should try and sell,

but there's always going to be one or two of those prospects specifically who are going to come up and do something we've never seen before because it's a young man's game. These guys are just coming up more and more of them and they're dominating. Scott said something a few years ago that has always stuck with me. I'm not even sure if he still believes it or if he even remembers saying it. But I'm pretty sure he said he only accepts trades when he feels like it's like a slam dunk.

That's pretty much true. And I've sort of taken to that. And I think I can't say every time I've accepted a trade I felt that way. But that's usually like I have to have pretty much no doubt that I'm making the right decision. It's gotten to be because the industry has gotten so much sharper. And the introduction of new analytics has kind of made things more difficult to dispute, made it hard to have divergent takes from other people. It's gotten harder to make trades in general.

And so I probably relaxed how confident I have to be to make a trade, just to make a trade. But I think the biggest thing that happens is I just trade a lot less because it's a lot harder to do. And I want to be totally confident. I am winning a trade in order to make the trade. That's why everybody gets mad at me for making azer trade offers. but I can't make fair trade offers

because that's not the point. The point of a trade is to win. You know, like, then I don't want to lose a trade just to make a trade. It's not fun. Remember how confident I was in U. Darvish,

or at least how confident I expressed to be in U. Darvish for the first half when he was struggling? I mean, I thought there was sound reasoning behind a major turnaround coming for U.S. So I wasn't being intellectually dishonest there when I argued for. But of course, I had doubts deep down. I was worried about it.

One of my best trades I pulled off last year was actually in Tout Wars. And I gave up Clint Frazier when he was during a stretch where he was starting for the Yankees and performing pretty well. This was probably some point in May, like late May. I gave him Clint Frazier and a big wad of fab bucks. for you Darvish, who at the time was terrible. And I wasn't totally confident in it. That might have been a trade where, you know, in past years or in a year where it wasn't so obvious that high-end starting pitcher was going to be that impactful, like clearly the most impactful

thing and impossible to buy outright. So you had to kind of hunt for the underachieving high-end pitcher. I don't think I would have made that trade. Obviously, it ended up being a huge trade for me because Clint Frazier faded and lost his job, and Darvish obviously had this monster second half. But it was a trade I was not totally confident in at the time I made it. All righty, before we get to our questions, there you go.

Round of applause for Scott. I get it, man. That's cool. That's a smart trade. Before we get to our questions, just want to remind everybody to listen to the Cover 3 podcast. College football is inching closer, which means it's the perfect time to unveil off-season rankings.

All throughout May, the Cover 3 podcast team has been counting down their preseason top 25 in separate episodes, and this week they'll focus on the top 5. And don't worry about a huge time commitment. Chip Patterson and Company have been breaking down each team in their hurry-up hot seat series in under 15 minutes. Where will Clemson and Ohio State rank, bringing back the top two quarterbacks in the country? Will Alabama crack the top three after losing Tua? Each day this week, the cover three podcast has all your answers about the very best teams in the nation.

Download and subscribe on Apple Podcast, Spotify, Stitcher, and wherever else podcasts are found. We're going to get to the Logan Gilbert, prospect evaluation tomorrow. Continue to send those in. Give us your five-star Apple podcast rating and review. Drop a prospect in there that you want us to talk. about and we will evaluate said prospect here on the show. Logan Gilbert, coming soon. Someone I drafted in my most recent dynasty draft, so kind of interested to talk about. But questions, let's get to it. Fantasy Baseball at CBSI.com. This one comes from Wes from Oakland. Hi, Nate, Spencer,

Wander, Joe, Dylan, and Gore. That's a lot of names. Six names. A lot of prospects. What do these prospects have in common? You're about to find out. In Yahoo leagues, players aren't in the Yahoo player pool until they are added to a team's 40-man roster. Yuck. Thus, hot prospects and unsigned free agents like Yassiel Pueig aren't available to be drafted or picked up after the draft until they are called up or signed. Look, I'm not going to sit here and just rag on Yahoo! But this is a terrible rule.

That is true? I didn't realize that. If this is true, it might just be a setting in this specific league. If that's the case, please shut it off. If this is something that's in all Yahoo leagues, Man, that is not good. This leads to a highly competitive and strategic fab game when these players are called up slash signed.

My Yahoo Keeper League allows us to keep two to five players from year to year at their draft cost. Waiverwire pickups are round 12. Thus, if these players are as studly as we hope they are, they become huge keeper values, i.e., Ronald Le Cunia, Juan Soto, P. Alonzo, Yerdon Alvarez, Vlad Guerrero, Jr., etc. Some owners, including myself,

save all $100 of our fab budget to win one of these players. I, quote, struck out last year targeting Nixon Zell. So which of these most likely to be called up rookies should I target with my $100, also taking into consideration how long they'll be able to contribute to my team this year? The ones I'm most interested in are the names I've listed 14 teams six by six head-to-head categories league. So basically, the six names that he listed are all available. in his league, but it sounds like he can't spend his fab on said players until they are added to the 40-man roster. I see. I see. There's no guarantee Wander Franco is. I mean,

he's obviously the top prospect in baseball right now, but there's no guarantee he's up this year. There was some talk of it back in February, but even then it was theoretical and it was in a very different season. I don't know if his chances are higher now of making the roster or lower. I would think lower, but you know, you could make the case for hire with expanded rosters and whatnot. Well, Scott, are there any of the prospects that he listed? Uh-huh. Nate, Spencer, Wander, Joe, Dylan Gore.

Are any of them like break the bank, fab budget guys? And he's saying that he would spend almost all of his money on one of these guys instead of using it to stream two-star pitchers and stuff. Right. That I don't get at all. That's a terrible strategy. You can't spend all your money on prospects. Like you got to manage your roster.

When the keeper rewards are that great, sure you can. I mean, are zero dollar bids not allowed? Especially when you're a dollar bids are allowed. There are two to five keepers year to year. There are other owners in the league who do the same exact thing. So he's not the only person. It sounds like there's multiple people who save all their fat. One guy last year, one owner last year spent most of his money on Nick Senzel.

Okay. All right. So what I was getting to before I was so rudely interrupted, Adam. Sorry. No, Wander Franco would be worth breaking the bank for, but I'm not sure you can wait around confident that he is going to get called up and just stockpiling those dollars passing up other opportunities. I think I would do it for Wander Franco.

I would do it for McKinsey Gore, who I'm more confident will be called up this year. And I would probably do it for Joe Adele too. I agree. But like the first of, of those three that gets called up, probably Gore is who it would be, I would go for it. And just, you know, take your chance with him. You can't take the chance that those other two actually get called up. Yeah, I would, how about Dylan Carlson? He's not in that mix for you,

Scott? No, he's not. I'm not as confident in the ceiling. I'm not as confident that Dylan Carlson gets called up and based on his performance, we'll want to take him as early as round 12 next year, especially as prevalent as offense is. He's not in that category for me, though I wouldn't be opposed if he was for you. Fair enough. No, I agree on the upside. I think Mackenzie Gore and Joe Adele were definitely two names that were on my list. Real quick, part two of this question, which I guess had him kind of answered already. Are any of you not on board with spending all of my fab on one rookie? And would rather... instead spend it on streaming

the week's top two-star pitchers are saving it for a later season call-up. So that sounds like you, Adam. Oh, I think it's a terrible idea. It depends. Look, if there's nothing on waivers, then fine. But you're talking about a 14-team league and you've got to get yourself,

you've got to navigate through the season. And one minor leaguer is just as likely to have no impact on your team as a great impact on your team. So I don't... Look, this email, Wes knows his league. If this works in your league, then fine. I've never played in this format.

Never played in this, with these specifications. Just top of mind reading it, I don't see how you'd be able to really get through the year, spending all your money on a minor leaguer. If I can add one thing, does it have to be this way? Are you the commissioner? Do you have any influence on the commissioner?

It seems like a way around this kind of silly game happening. with the call-ups and everybody having to blow their entire fab budget on them to secure them for next year is make the round that they're kept in proportional to the amount of fab dollars paid for them. So that if somebody's paying $100 of their fat, $100 for them in fab dollars, they have to keep them with a first round pig versus somebody pays $1 and $5 for him. they keep them for their last round pick and obviously make it proportional.

That way you get kind of this tension of, okay, I want to get this guy and keep him, but if I pay too much for him, it'll be more than I want to keep him for. So I got to keep the bid down so that it's an appropriate keeper cost, and yet I want high enough that I actually win him. I think that's a way to prevent this from happening

if you're able to do it. or come play at CBS where you can draft prospects. Exactly. This next one's from Sean in a city in Canada that's not Toronto or Vancouver. Isn't this a bit that you do with Dave Richard on the football show, Adam? He's the geography guy. How about you? Do you know any cities in Canada? The only cities I know are Toronto and Vancouver.

I do not know any other Canadian cities. I don't believe you. I don't even remember where the Canadians play, that Hockey Town. What about the Expos? Do you remember where they play? No, I don't. They're in Washington, D.C. What about the flames?

Oh, yeah. But cities, provinces, I don't know. Sometimes I get those mixed up. What about the capital? Oh, you mentioned this. Never mind. Dear Alfred, Miles, Nigel, and Cutter. Those are, what's that actor's name?

Michael Cain characters. What's that actor's name? I'm in a 10-te-to-head points league with six keepers. Due to the pandemic, we have delayed our drafts. and our keeper selection deadline. I planned on keeping Snell, Carrasco, Gallen, Flaherty, and Sunny Gray. Some great starting pitchers.

I am also a Chris Sale owner, but given the injury, I didn't want to waste a keeper spot for an IL guy. Given the question marks around how the season will look if it happens at all, and the small sample sizes causing some potentially wacky results for pitchers, would it make sense to now maybe keep sale and prepare for the 2021 season

with the thought that nothing that happens in 2020 will be useful in projecting 2021. We don't know how early sale will be back in 2021. He might end up missing half that season. I don't think we can be totally confident how good he'll be when he gets back. And I feel like the pitchers you're keeping instead all have enough ceiling that you're not definitively better off

even in 2021 by keeping sale instead. So no, I'd stick with what you have. Adam agree I could see keeping sailover gray but I think I mostly agree the last email we'll get to today from Matthew Zettel remember a few weeks ago

a commiss traded Tim Anderson and John Gray for Jose Ramirez and Josh James we have a follow-up this is in response to what Mr. Nick Edgar wrote below regarding the trade the commissioner aka me made some drama

made with the new owner of the league. Yes, he is a novice owner, and yes, the trade was a total rip job. However, he only gave you a small portion of the overall story. Oh, man. After feeling really bad and realizing it was a bad look as commish, I offered Jose Altuve as

further compensation to balance out the trade. The owner refused the Altuve offer, stating he was a huge Yankee fan and that he did not want cheating Astros on his team. He said he wanted Edwin and Carnaccion instead, and then he would be happy with that as compensation.

I obliged, even though he really should have taken Altuvae. Also, I think we can all say we have made terrible offers in any of our leagues. Most of the time, you don't actually think they will get accepted. It's just to start negotiations. Sounds like an Azer offer. That's exactly what it is. It's just to start negotiations. That's exactly what it is.

Thank you. So in the end, my punishment was Edwin, and it should have been Altuve. This is one of the weirder stories I've heard of in a fantasy leak. It's very weird. It was actually Tim Anderson, Edwin Incarnacion, and John Gray for Jose Ramirez and Josh James. Still terrible. Yeah, it is not that terrible if Tim Anderson is good again. Right.

It's still not a trade I would take at all, but it's, you know, I don't think it's vetoable. I don't think it's... I agree. It's not vetoable. Something to consider kicking a guy out of the league for. So it does change things. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, shoot, the commissioner didn't have to do that.

He didn't have to offer him anything as compensation. He just put an offer out there. The guy accepted it. I mean, what are you supposed to do? He's policing himself, I think, above and beyond what is required. I don't know. I honestly don't remember the original email we got, and I don't remember what I said then,

and maybe I totally lambasted the commissioner. But hearing his side of it, I don't have a problem at all with the way things went down here. The problem was initially, the commission had talked the owner out of trading Jose Ramirez for a better package. Oh, and then he offered him junk for Jose Ramirez? Yeah.

Oh, yeah. Oh, is that part of it? Very, very sneaky. You know what? The commissioner should be forced to take Jose Altuva. have a cheating astro on his team. Well, the commissioner has the Astro.

Yeah. The commissioner has L-Too. Oh, whatever. Dude, I can't keep up with this crap. Just end the show, Frank. All right,

you heard it there. Adam's making me end the show. We came up with a new word, vetoable. I'm going to add that to the dictionary. For Scott and Adam. I am Frank. Thank you all for listening.

We'll be back again on Thursday. Bye-bye.