I think all of us hate drafting closers, it's really just a tedious task we're forced to do because who has the confidence to punt a whole category in a roto league from the start? When you also consider at half of the guys being drafted as closers, even elite ones, won't hold their jobs all year long, it makes it even harder to draft them over a potential stud starter or bat.
Drafting for the stats is the key but those numbers become useless if they end up losing their jobs unless they put up numbers like Carlos Marmol as a setup guy, one guy being drafted pretty high for the numbers but doesn't have his role locked up.
To try and avoid getting burned, it seems like a solid strategy not to worry as much about their projected numbers but who are the guys behind him that can jump in and become closers and focus on getting the guys with absolutely no competition for saves. Guys like Brian Fuentes, K-Rod, and Jon Broxton have lights out setup guys who can definitely step in and potentially close. Guys like Francisco Cordero, Jose Valverde, and Mariano Rivera do not.
Since everyone has been burned on closers several times by drafting the guys who are expected to have better ratios (not saying reach on the Todd Jones and Joe Borowski types, just the closers who don't completely flush ratios down the toilet) and better strikeout numbers, do you make that secondary and focus on guys with zero competition for their jobs instead? Or would you prefer to draft the guys who will definitely put up better numbers and assume they will keep their jobs?
With someone like K-Rod I can't imagine him losing the job unless he was injured due to all the money he was just paid. I agree with your main point though about drafting closers with job security.
Grounded Polo wrote: Or would you prefer to draft the guys who will definitely put up better numbers and assume they will keep their jobs?
If "the" guy definately puts up better numbers he won't lose his job. I think alot of these guys are more secure than you would think...if they put up good numbers they will stay as closer...if they don't put up consistant good numbers, do you really want them anyway?
Grounded Polo wrote: Or would you prefer to draft the guys who will definitely put up better numbers and assume they will keep their jobs?
If "the" guy definately puts up better numbers he won't lose his job. I think alot of these guys are more secure than you would think...if they put up good numbers they will stay as closer...if they don't put up consistant good numbers, do you really want them anyway?
This is how it works. If the closer isn't putting up the numbers then he will most likely lose his job. There are exceptions like Todd Jones and Joe Borowskis of the world who put up terrible numbers while retaining the role but who really wants those guys anyway?
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." ~George Carlin
Grounded Polo wrote: Or would you prefer to draft the guys who will definitely put up better numbers and assume they will keep their jobs?
If "the" guy definately puts up better numbers he won't lose his job. I think alot of these guys are more secure than you would think...if they put up good numbers they will stay as closer...if they don't put up consistant good numbers, do you really want them anyway?
If you have a closer with a 3 ERA with very few BS, he will most likely keep the job even if the set-up man has a 2 ERA. Why change what isn't broken? I say try to draft whoever you think will put up the best numbers because like the other guys said, if they put up very good numbers, they will hold onto their job even if the set-up man is just as good.
by jake_twothousandfive » Sat Mar 14, 2009 2:23 pm
Yoda wrote:
OneLoveBoomer wrote:I've been drafting guys like Lindstrom, Hanrahan, Sherrill, etc. later one in the draft. Figure two of em will stick, for cheap.
I generally like to do this also. Get one from the top tier, one from middle and a couple of fliers.
Exactly what I do as well. I hate drafting pitchers early (as a general rule, 7 of my first 10 picks are hitters) but I'll usually grab someone like Nathan, Soria, Rivera, etc. so I know I have at least one reliable option. Then I'll forget about closers until the mid to late rounds.
"Don't take anything for granted, because tomorrow is not promised to any of us." ---Kirby Puckett
Grounded Polo wrote:Or would you prefer to draft the guys who will definitely put up better numbers and assume they will keep their jobs?
When I've played 5x5, this has been my strategy.
Although I also use the flip side of the other strategy which is that I'll draft ace set-up men which gives you three advantages. 1) They lower your ratios as long as you keep them. 2) If something does happen to the closer, they're likely to get the saves. 3) They're relatively cheap to get in a 5x5 league so you don't feel bad throwing them overboard if another set-up man becomes the closer for whatever reason and you find yourself trailing in saves.
In short: Start the season with ace closers and ace set-up men. If you find yourself needing more saves later in the season, pick up the replacement closers off of the WW and cut loose on your set-up guys.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
In H2H I usually just punt the category altogether. I like to draft fliers late and if they hit I will usually trade them for a prospect in my keeper league. Last year I trades Lidge for Kemp before Kemp got regular time. In a redraft i will keep them for the season. I hate closers in general. They cost too much and I would rather draft a SP.
In roto leagues I usually take Yoda's strategy. Try and get one from each tier since it is hard to win a league and punt a category.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by Grounded Polo » Sat Mar 14, 2009 12:36 pm 
