I dot know how you can be down on someone who you still admit should be taken in the first round. That doesn't seem to me what two up two down should be about. If you think a guy is still going to post first round numbers than you cant put him in the down section. Pick someone who's production you believe will be significantly lower than where they will be drafted, like you did with Renteria.
SignGuy wrote:I dot know how you can be down on someone who you still admit should be taken in the first round. That doesn't seem to me what two up two down should be about. If you think a guy is still going to post first round numbers than you cant put him in the down section. Pick someone who's production you believe will be significantly lower than where they will be drafted, like you did with Renteria.
Well the difference between a top 3 pick and someone's who's drafted with like the 9th pick is pretty significant I think. So if he believes he won't post top-10 #s, then I think its pretty fair.
Phew, that's some bold up and downs. I agree that Furcal will return back in form and be in the 7-12 range of fantasy shortstops this coming season. I too noticed that spike in SB he had at the end of the year. If healthy, Furcal will hold a lot of value in later (much later) rounds. As far as Young goes, yeah he's a hit machine, but you can do better. I would be more inclined to put Julio Lugo ahead of Young, as Lugo will score more runs, have more RBIs, and more SB. Lugo, like many, many players there first year in Boston, suffered through a bit of "Fenway fright" during the '07 season, but I predict Boston will get out of him this year what they predicted from him last year. I would say .280 BA 10 HR 95 RBI 120 R 25 SB, which puts Micheal Young to shame, in fantasy terms. Don't go along like a squaking parrot about how Hanley's production will be down without Miggy. We all know Cabrera's gone from the Marlin line-up. The thing is, with a talent like Hanley, it doesn't matter a whole lot about who he is surrounded with. I see Hanley's numbers staying the same, with an increase in power added and maybe a dip in SB. He's that good. The real question surrounding Hanley is whether or not he can stay healthy all year, as his owners last year remember the hammy and back-problems. Trust me, a healthy Hanley is a dangerous Hanley. This kid is the next big thing. Which brings me to Edgar "I'm gonna try this AL thing again" Renteria. Not so sure I agree with your logic. If I'm Jim Leyland, my batting order 1-5 looks like this: Granderson, Renteria, Cabrera, Ordonez, Sheffeild. That's if Sheff is healthy. I see Renteria batting 2nd or fifth in this line-up, not towards the bottom. Even if I'm 100% wrong about where he bats, this is an AL line-up, where he could bat 7, 8, or 9 and the numbers are still going to follow. The only red flag I see with Renteria is his past AL stint, which was one of his worst years, fantasy wise.
Fenway Punk wrote:The real question surrounding Hanley is whether or not he can stay healthy all year, as his owners last year remember the hammy and back-problems. Trust me, a healthy Hanley is a dangerous Hanley. This kid is the next big thing.
While he may be that good, and I'm not going to say I disagree, a lack of protection in the lineup will have him seeing fewer fat pitches. Take those away from anyone and their production falls. Pitchers will pitch around him if he's got no one to protect him, and while that's nothing but a compliment to his ability/game, it hurts at the fantasy level in standard scoring leagues. Walks and OBP don't fall into the traditional 5x5. Making him less valuable, which means he's going too early. Not to mention that what will happen when he realizes what's happening? Will he try to do too much, or will he be able to have awesome numbers anyway? Tough to say. If I find myself with the third or fourth pick in the first round, I'll be looking elsewhere. If he's still there at the tail end of the first round, then I'd most likely gamble. Doesn't seem like a big deal when we're only talking about 6 spots later, but first round anchors aren't something to take too lightly.
Yes doctor, I am sick. Sick of those who are spineless. Sick of those who feel self-entitled. Sick of those who are hypocrites. Yes doctor, an army is forming. Yes doctor, there will be a war. Yes doctor, there will be blood.....
i swear y'all are just following in suit with the whole "lack of protection" theory about Hanley. Pitchers don't know where to throw to this kid yet, and the majority of pitchers in the entire league aren't good enough to "pitch-around" everybody, save from an intentional walk. Cripes, the way a lot of you are making it sound is that Hanley is going to be treated like '04 Bonds. He's too good, and the NL is too bad to exploit the fact that Miggy isn't behind him. With this logic, why didn't teams just walk the pair of them each time they were at the plate last year? Hanley should be no less than 4th off any board, and no less than 2nd in a first year keeper draft. Period.