And Victorino is an OF. OFs are a dime a dozen. There are a million of them. It cannot be overstated how much of a difference the SS eligibility makes when arguing the relative value of Rollins vs Victorino. Victorino was still a sixth round pick or better in most leagues.
Geek wrote: He wasn't a second round talent before 2006. I would bet money that he won't be considered one going into 2010. He's a 4th-6th round talent who had a couple of 1-2 round years.
I love how you base your definition of a players talent off of where the masses choose to draft them.
.280 105 runs 65 rbi 36 sb 14 hr from your ss is probably no worse than third round in most player valuation systems.
That's almost exactly what Shane Victorino did last year, and he was #51 according to Yahoo. And Victorino batted .293
How many SS do you see with that line? Not to mention that line is easily beatable by Rollins if healthy.That 51 is the yahoo o-rank for this year, did you not see your favorite Rollins previous year numbers would have got him 14? I think you are not understanding that SB are really valuable in standard settings.
walkoffblast wrote: I love how you base your definition of a players talent off of where the masses choose to draft them.
.280 105 runs 65 rbi 36 sb 14 hr from your ss is probably no worse than third round in most player valuation systems.
That's almost exactly what Shane Victorino did last year, and he was #51 according to Yahoo. And Victorino batted .293
How many SS do you see with that line? Not to mention that line is easily beatable by Rollins if healthy.That 51 is the yahoo o-rank for this year, did you not see your favorite Rollins previous year numbers would have got him 14? I think you are not understanding that SB are really valuable in standard settings.
Rollins fantasy ranking by year (according to Yahoo!):
2007: 7 2008: 88 2009: 735
Anyone think he'll finish in the top 40 for 2009? Bueller? Bueller?
Geek wrote:That's almost exactly what Shane Victorino did last year, and he was #51 according to Yahoo. And Victorino batted .293
How many SS do you see with that line? Not to mention that line is easily beatable by Rollins if healthy.That 51 is the yahoo o-rank for this year, did you not see your favorite Rollins previous year numbers would have got him 14? I think you are not understanding that SB are really valuable in standard settings.
Rollins fantasy ranking by year (according to Yahoo!):
2007: 7 2008: 88 2009: 735
Anyone think he'll finish in the top 40 for 2009? Bueller? Bueller?
God I hate the start of a season. It's been three weeks. Three, freaking, weeks. Pena has 9 homers, does that means hes going to hit 70 this year? No. People slump and streak. Gambler's fallacy may be just that, but in baseball it tends to carry some weight. Things usually balance out in the end.
How many SS do you see with that line? Not to mention that line is easily beatable by Rollins if healthy.That 51 is the yahoo o-rank for this year, did you not see your favorite Rollins previous year numbers would have got him 14? I think you are not understanding that SB are really valuable in standard settings.
Rollins fantasy ranking by year (according to Yahoo!):
2007: 7 2008: 88 2009: 735
Anyone think he'll finish in the top 40 for 2009? Bueller? Bueller?
God I hate the start of a season. It's been three weeks. Three, freaking, weeks. Pena has 9 homers, does that means hes going to hit 70 this year? No. People slump and streak. Gambler's fallacy may be just that, but in baseball it tends to carry some weight. Things usually balance out in the end.
Thank you! but at the same time, let people like those you corrected believe what they believe...makes it easier on me to buy low on slow-startin studs and dominate the world!
Geek wrote:That's almost exactly what Shane Victorino did last year, and he was #51 according to Yahoo. And Victorino batted .293
How many SS do you see with that line? Not to mention that line is easily beatable by Rollins if healthy.That 51 is the yahoo o-rank for this year, did you not see your favorite Rollins previous year numbers would have got him 14? I think you are not understanding that SB are really valuable in standard settings.
Rollins fantasy ranking by year (according to Yahoo!):
2007: 7 2008: 88 2009: 735
Anyone think he'll finish in the top 40 for 2009? Bueller? Bueller?
Whenever Yahoo ranks is the best way you can make your argument it is never a good thing.
poo holes wrote:I want to kick this guy square in the nutz! Everytime I see him on one of his dumb A$$ commercials I want to launch my tv off the balcony!
Clearly all those baseballs fired into his chest for that Dick's Sporting Goods commercial have taken their toll! Kind of like when Eric Gagne did that commercial a few years back - when he threw pitch after pitch into a garbage bag, failed to break it. Shortly after, he blew his arm out. Makes you wonder
Rollins is a big ol' bust. Yahoo sucked me into drafting him again after suffering through a miserable year with him last year. Should have drafted BRAUN in the first!!!!!!!
imphishy wrote:Rollins is a big ol' bust. Yahoo sucked me into drafting him again after suffering through a miserable year with him last year. Should have drafted BRAUN in the first!!!!!!!
I only drafted him because he fell all the way to 12. Now I am starting to think there are 11 smarter owners than me in my league! Braun would have been a no brainer at 12 but that didnt even come close to happening!
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by CBMGreatOne » Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:45 pm 
