May 21, 2012
Now Available for 2012 THT Essentials: Now Available The Hardball Times Baseball Annual 2012, an annual "must buy" for all baseball fans, is now shipping. Read this article to learn more about it.
THT's latest book 
Lucas Apostoleris
Rich Barbieri John Barten Brian Borawski Vince Caramela Chris Jaffe Brad Johnson Mat Kovach Kevin Lai Myron Logan Chris Lund Bruce Markusen Jeff Moore Troy Patterson Harry Pavlidis Dave Studeman Steve Treder David Wade And here's the full roster.
Or you can search by:
 All content on this site (including text, graphs, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Part of the USA Today Sports Media Group |
Dynasty rankings 2012 follow-upby Nick FlederJanuary 12, 2012 Nick Fleder has been a die-hard Yankee fan since birth and has played fantasy baseball obsessively since around the age of ten. He can be reached for all inquiries or comments at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). You can ask him any baseball or fantasy baseball related questions on Twitter: @fishfle Comments
Nick Fleder said...
On the Gordon point, can you elaborate? I know industry standard is to whine about his OBP, but the fact is, for fantasy purposes, someone who can get 14 infield hits and 7 bunt hits in a third-season’s worth of plate appearances can get on base enough to get his steals, and despite his somewhat weak fielding numbers at this point, Gordon is generally regarded as a good fielder; enough so that he’ll keep a job in the majors easily even if he annually hits .250 (unrealistic anyhow in my mind). As for the prospects/newly-arrived… are there specific people you could see switched/moved ahead? I’d like to argue against that if youd let me. They have a mix of pedigree, opportunity, status, and minor league returns; additionally, their small sample sizes may not give us concrete numbers to base our predictions, but they affirm their outworldly skill. Posted 01/12 at 08:12 AM
Jim Harris said...
Nick: Please tell us that you’re aware your Latos comments are irrelevant now that he will play in Great American Bandbox? Which, owing to your reasoning, shoves Latos back to his 29th spot, or deeper? Posted 01/12 at 09:00 AM
Ben Pritchett said...
I hate to bring more Jeremy Hellickson stuff back to the dynasty chat, but I found an interesting stat. ALL starting pitchers with a strand rate of 80 percent or higher have regression the next season. Typical ERA correction is +1.36 for a starter with a strand rate of 80 percent and jumps to +2.21 to a starter with strand rate >85 percent. Jeremy Hellickson had a strand rate of 82 percent. All this information is found in Ron Shandler’s 2012 Baseball Forecaster. Posted 01/12 at 10:00 AM
Nick Fleder said...
Ben, thanks for the stat. Strand rate was indeed one of the things that led to Hellickson’s exclusion, but perhaps more telling is the fact that it’s simply one of many peripherals that point to him being a fairly average to below average pitcher at this point. Jim, I admit Latos is a bit enigmatic, as his home run rate was higher at PETCO and his ERA was higher away from home still. I think with his Ks up, Latos may repeat a 2010 season with a slightly higher HR/FB, but if I have the stat correct off top, I think he still had a 3.2 xFIP or so in his 2010 campaign. Changes are he’s league average or below in his HR rate. Posted 01/12 at 10:14 AM
MH said...
I like the Stanton reranking, but otherwise I’m not sure I’m crazy about this list. I really have to believe you’re investing too much in upside in the upper ranking levels. Aside from statistical volatility, small sample sizes have another issue, at least in regard to the pitchers—they lack the manifestation of attrition. I have little doubt most of these guys could put up those numbers over 30 or 60 games, but there’s a level of wear-and-tear you get in the majors that you simply don’t see to nearly the same magnitude in the minors. One month of a 8.0 K/9 and 3.50 ERA for Strasburg could easily mean a full season ceiling that looks more like Kersrhaw’s current talent level than a simple extrapolation of the small-sample numbers to a full season workload, and the same could be said about Moore and Felix. This is also a bit of a nit-pick, especially because I was on the other side of the argument in the previous post, but I’m not sure you can put Dee Gordon AHEAD of Andrus. I agree its pretty much a toss-up, and Gordon is likely to steal more bases, but his job isn’t quite as secure as Andrus and Andrus’ ability to draw walks and get on base makes him a near lock for 90+ R, which is a more difficult category to predict with most players and therefore carries some hidden value when you have a guy like Andrus who can give you that certainty. I still think he’s way overvalued in redraft leagues, but at MDC they redid their rankings and now Dee looks overvalued to me too, and I’m pretty much resigned to reaching a bit on Erick Aybar in those formats if I miss on a top 3 guy and no one like Dee falls too far. He’s basically the same type of player too—he’ll have Andrus’ 40ish steals but instead of a 90+ run guarantee he’ll give you some high single digits to low teens HRs. Posted 01/12 at 11:26 AM
Behemoth said...
Nick - for example, I think that Harper & Trout are likely to do better than Jennings. If you want OF who are already in the bigs, I’d take McCutchen ahead of Jennings too. Felix is clearly ahead of Moore for me - better home park, major league proven over a number of years. I’d have Lawrie similarly lower as well. On Gordon, I don’t think he has the power to maintain a BABIP that high - yes, he’s fast, but he’s a singles hitter. As a rough comparison, Elvis Andrus has a career BABIP of .312. If Gordon hits .270, with an OBP south of .300, you have to question how valuable he is. My recollection was that his defence wasn’t elite enough to make up for that - he isn’t Jose Iglesias with the glove. Posted 01/12 at 12:28 PM
MH said...
@Behemoth The thing about Dee Gordon’s playing time is what better options do the Dodger’s really have? It reminds me a lot of the situation the Mets were in when Jose Reyes played his first full season—a big market team in a transitional phase with a potential exciting player who may not be ready to fully realize his potential. Jose Reyes also stole 60 bases that year despite an OBP of .300 even, so really, to me its just a question of Gordon’s leash, and I’m thinking it’ll likely be long, and he’ll be in the leadoff spot and in the Dodger’s lineup most of the year. If that’s the case, he’ll get 700ish PAs and steal 50+ bases pretty easily even with a poor OBP. Posted 01/12 at 01:29 PM
Raygu said...
Dee Gordon has always had his critics, and he has always proved them wrong. If you haven’t watched him play, please do. He is still learning the game, and is talented enough to be in the big leagues. I watch almost all of the Dodgers games, and he can turn many softly hit flyball to LF into doubles. Posted 01/13 at 12:13 AM
Behemoth said...
I’d agree the Dodgers don’t have anyone else who you would give too much consideration to as a starting short stop right now (and it’s a pretty thin area on their farm too, from memory), and that Gordon has the speed to steal a bunch of bases. I think the talk of 70 or whatever is overblown, but I’d accept 40-50 with some upside for more. So, what you are likely to get is good steals, pretty good runs (although except for Kent the lineup is not great), awful power numbers, and an average that will, at best, be very much BABIP driven, and should be lower than last year. For that to stick on a contending club, I think you need plus defence if not more. Yeah, if some power develops, then it becomes a more appealling packagae, but until then I wouldn’t consider him as being a contender to build a team round, which is what you are looking for in this sort of list. Posted 01/13 at 07:38 AM
James said...
Why the Bruce/Goldschmidt swap? Both same age, Bruce has done it in the majors, Goldschmidt plays a more packed position where 25/90 or even 30/100 is seen as “average”. Do you see more power upside in Goldschmidt? Posted 01/13 at 11:16 PM
Nick Fleder said...
@James I think Goldschmidt’s power potential is higher than Bruce’s, and I actually like OF more than 1B. This may be personal strategy only, but I prefer to pack my outfield with power/speed guys and look for power primarily in the infield. Goldschmidt is projected by Oliver to go: 34/100/82/5/.270/.346/.531 next year Bruce, on the other hand, is projected to top out at 28 in 2013 and never hit 30 (projects all the way to 2017). I don’t buy the batting average for Goldy nor the lack of power from Bruce (I think Bruce can hit 30 again), but judging from Goldschmidt’s minor league numbers, home park, and raw, eye-test power, I think he can hit 40 one day.
Posted 01/13 at 11:31 PM
Nick Fleder said...
@Behemon I know what you mean—it’s much more appealing to have a five category stud to build around, because you could mix and match specialized players and strike wonderful roster balance. At the same time, it shouldn’t be dismissed if someone is elite in a certain category. Michael Bourn, for example, has made a name for himself as a fantasy mainstay based on speed, runs, and sometimes average, a formula Dee Gordon may well copy at a more premium position. Per Baseball Monster, Michael Bourn was the 10th ranked outfielder (obviously a deeper fantasy postion than short) in a standard mixed league, garnering $29 of value with the following line: 2 HR/61 SB/.294 average/92 runs/50 rbi I think Gordon could find himself putting up similar seasons in a few years, and may well steal 60 bases next year. His SB and runs upside are immense. And sure, Bourn does know how to take a walk, which is certainly important, but he also proved that a high BABIP could get him on base a good amount in and of itself, and Gordon might find himself very similar (Bourn career BABIP = .341, as high as .369…. Gordon career (albeit in few PAs) BABIP = .345). So if Bourn can be the #27 guy in fantasy playing CF, I like, one day, Dee Gordon to have a similar ranking, if not higher, playing at the SS position. Is that not worth building a team around? Posted 01/13 at 11:38 PM
Behemoth said...
If Gordon hits .295 and steals 60 bases most years, then you have a point. I think he’s unlikely to do either of these in an average year. I’d say his upside is Elvis Andrus, and his downside is probably struggling to hold down a regular job because he doesn’t hit enough/get on base enough. The steals, while great for fantasy, are less important in the real world, and a guy who hits, say, .250, with an OBP under .300 would need absolutely stellar defence to keep a job, however many bases he steals. Posted 01/14 at 09:05 PM
AtomicDumpling said...
Thanks for the interesting list. I agree with most of your rankings. I think Felix Hernandez should be moved up near the top. Freddie Freeman should be added. Brett Lawrie, Desmond Jennings, Paul Goldschmidt and Dee Gordon are ranked way, way too high. I would move each of them down about 20 spots. Yes 20 spots. I feel maybe you are placing far too much value in their very brief stints in the majors last year. Those guys are not nearly as good as you have them ranked. Small sample sizes can make even bad players look good over short periods. Those guys are not bad but they have a long way to go to prove themselves as better players than the guys below them on this list. Brett Lawrie is a more valuable young player than Bryce Harper or Mike Trout or Matt Moore? No way. Dee Gordon should not be anywhere near this list. Your list is very solid from top to bottom with the glaring exception of Lawrie, Jennings, Goldschmidt and Gordon. Keep up the good work! Posted 01/15 at 03:36 AM
jeffrey gross said...
If I had the time to complain about this list, I would! Hanson is WAY too low, even with injury concern. Teheran, Goldschmidt, too high. I’d say the same of Lawrie too Posted 01/16 at 02:06 AM
Nick Fleder said...
@Behemoth I don’t think Gordon needs to hit .295 and steal 60 to justify his spot on this list ahead of Andrus. It’s a dynasty league, lest you forget—I think if he outperforms Elvis in three out of the next five years, you’ll agree that he deserves a higher ranking. I understand that Dee may be playing on a thin rope for the beginning of his career, but a lack of internal options and a trusting front-office gives him a longer leash than you’d think. I’d agree with his downside, but contend with his upside being Andrus. I simply don’t understand how his ceiling is 37 stolen bases—sure, he may never reach 4.5 WAR, but his upside in pure fantasy/counting stats is immensely higher. Elvis Andrus has a 6.6 Spd rating, Dee Gordon has a 7.7 and had a 9.0 in Triple-A. Dee Gordon has Davey Lopes teaching him the intricacies, Andrus does not. Dee Gordon was on pace for roughly 60 last year; Andrus has never been on pace—or even close—to 60 stolen bases. Andrus, I concede, will always have a higher walk rate. But Gordon, I’ll wager, will always have a higher stolen base total, and as long as he can keep his job, only the latter counts in my leagues. @Atomic Dumpling 2) Sure, I am ranking partly due to SSS, but also because of pedigree, upside, position scarcity, ballpark, coaching situation, hype, inclusion on top prospect lists, and Oliver projections (available in THT Forecasts—you should get them). I think you’ve seen enough of my arguing on behalf of Dee Gordon—if you don’t believe it now, you never will (until Spring Training 2013, at least)... But I’d like to address Lawrie and Jennings for you. Lawrie was on pace for 30/25+ last year, but before we get ahead of ourselves in terms of SSS, let’s just drool at this instant-upside. With a fair amount of RBI/R, and a batting average constant around .280, Lawrie would’ve contended with top 3 3B upside. I’d immediately put him ahead of all but a handful of guys—Longoria, Bautista, Young, Beltre, Sandoval—and the potential for dominance at a very thin position is something to consider. Secondly, he backs up his major league numbers with raves from scouts and excellent Triple-A numbers. All of the above condenses to form projections that we all use at one point or another. Oliver projections him fairly low—Bill James already has him at 22/92/75/30/.286, and RotoChamp has him at 26/80/85/25/.281. The only reason I could see him “ranked too high,” is personal preference of risk-aversion and trusting proven players over upside. The point of a dynasty rankings list, I’ll reiterate, is to balance upside with past performance and formulate an admittedly arbitrary rankings to try to figure who might be the most valuable fantasy commodities over the next five years or so. I think Lawrie will be more valuable than Upton—maybe you’ll disagree on the basis of past performance. That’s your right, but i don’t think someone should be ignored or dropped hugely on the list because he’s an unproven Major Leaguer. That would be silly, as it would be ignoring his upside completely—I simply *don’t* think Lawrie will be the 24th most valuable commodity over the next 5 years. Jennings has Crawford-esque upside (minus the batting average), is highly seasoned in the minors, put together an enormous rookie campaign in very few at-bats. I could see him being 5-10 spots lower, but I think he has the potential to be a bona-fide stud, and is closer to doing so than Trout/Harper, for example.
Teheran may indeed be too high at second look, but I’ll stand tough on Paul Goldschmidt. I think I explained it as well as I can above. See it if you have time. Posted 01/16 at 01:53 PM
AtomicDumpling said...
Nick, I understand your reasoning for ranking Lawrie and Jennings so highly. I just vehemently disagree. Those guys’ prospect status ranks far below the likes of some of the guys you have ranked behind them. I play in 3 dynasty leagues and I know for certain that Brett Lawrie and Desmond Jennings have far less trade value than Bryce Harper and Mike Trout and Matt Moore and Felix Hernandez and Justin Upton and Mike Stanton. I like your list in general. Most of the ranks are spot on. Lawrie, Jennings, Goldschmidt and Gordon are way too optimistic however. I guess if you and I were in the same league we could make some trades. Posted 01/16 at 07:12 PM
Behemoth said...
Not to continue the Gordon thing endlessly, but, although Gordon may steal more than Andrus, I suspect Andrus is ahead on the other 4 standard categories - better average hitter, better lineup to drive him in, doesn’t lead off for a NL club, so will have more RBIs, and is physically capable of hitting a ball out of a big league ballpark (not often, but occasionally). I do agree with you on Hanson and, largely, on Goldschmidt, although I would have him a little lower. Posted 01/17 at 06:22 AM
Brice said...
How do you not have Clayton Kershaw as your number one overall? Dude won a Cy Young. Stras is highly unpredictable given his injury. Posted 01/17 at 02:30 PM
Page 1 of 1
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry. | ||||
I think you are rating some prospects/newly arrived players significantly too highly based on very small samples at the big league level - thinking of Lawrie, Jennings and Moore especially. I think you have them all ranked as if they will inevitably reach their ceilings, and I would bet a lot of money that one or more of them will not.
Also disagree with your Dee Gordon ranking. I still think there’s a distinct possibility he never hits enough to hold down a big league job.