I would rank them...Payton, Kotsay, Rowand, and Broussard....but unless you are in and extremely deep league....none of them are worth having....
[b]Useless Trivia of the day[/b]
England's Worcester Canoe Club set the world record for paddling a hand-propelled bathtub. The 25 man team covered a distance of 55 miles, 425 yards in 24 hours on September 28 and 29, 1979.
Payton might be worth having in a 12-team or 14-team league, if you're desparate. Broussard has decent upside, so if you believe in him, he could be worthwhile as a bench-player even in a 10 or 12-team league (personally, I don't really believe in him, but I did *almost* pick him up for my 14-team league, and I have him on my watch list).. Rowand and Kotsay are probably not worth anything at all, except in something odd like a 12-team or bigger AL-only league.
EugeneStyles wrote:Payton might be worth having in a 12-team or 14-team league, if you're desparate. Broussard has decent upside, so if you believe in him, he could be worthwhile as a bench-player even in a 10 or 12-team league (personally, I don't really believe in him, but I did *almost* pick him up for my 14-team league, and I have him on my watch list).. Rowand and Kotsay are probably not worth anything at all, except in something odd like a 12-team or bigger AL-only league.
If you are just looking at power, I think your are right about Kotsay, but I thinkhe's being underestimated in most drafts as an overall player. He is an injury risk, but taking that into consideration, he played very well after recovering in the second half of last year. If he is reasonably healthy, he'llbe batting first on, IMO, an underrated A's offense and should be good for .300/100/10/60/10.
Well, if you consider the A's lineup underrated, then Kotsay could bounce back and have exaclty the kind of year you predict, maybe even a few more SB's and HR's. But if you're like me and think the Oakland lineup is just "not so good", then I think 100 R might be stretching it, and the lack of protection and #8/9 hitters getting on base could drag down his other stats too.
I dunno, I don't like Kotsay very much, but I've been in the minority on that, for the most part. I'm also the guy that doesn't like Schilling.
EugeneStyles wrote:Well, if you consider the A's lineup underrated, then Kotsay could bounce back and have exaclty the kind of year you predict, maybe even a few more SB's and HR's. But if you're like me and think the Oakland lineup is just "not so good", then I think 100 R might be stretching it, and the lack of protection and #8/9 hitters getting on base could drag down his other stats too.
I dunno, I don't like Kotsay very much, but I've been in the minority on that, for the most part. I'm also the guy that doesn't like Schilling.
You could be right, but here are a few things I think are being missed.
I think Melhuse's playing time will be increasing.
Kotsay, Byrnes, Kielty, and McMillon can be packaged into a very effective platoon.
I think Durazo will be better and that Dye will be much better than what they had last year.
Crosby is good.
Plus they have several good hitters in the minors, if they need to call on them.
Essentially, the A's OF was SO bad last year, that all they have to do to see major improvement is to be average.
In about 750 PA last year, Oakland lead-off hitters posted a .308 OBP and scored 102 runs.
Kotsay has generally had about a .350 OBP the last few years. If he does that in about 600-625 PAs and the A's simply get no worse at driving in runs, he should approach 100 runs.
It's a bit of a stretch (no injury, matching his career highs in PAs), but doable.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by Wenzac » Sat Mar 20, 2004 12:15 am 
