My motivation for this is not to prove I'm right, just to find a more useful method of drafting. Here are my two findings:

1) A player who has shown substantial improvement one season over his previous is unlikely to better those numbers the next season or even to repeat them.

2) A player who has a substantial drop in numbers one season compared to his previous season is likely to improve on his numbers the next season over the one previous.

How can you dispute this? In fact, in common fantasy venacular players in group one are said to have had "career years" and in group two are primed for "bounce back years." Everyone here knows this and uses these terms all the time, but how many people draft and trade based on the concept as much as they probably should? Based on these mock drafts, not too many.

I'm just trying to show that maybe we shouldn't be so quick in burying players after bad years or rewarding them after great ones because it's all part of the natural swings of a player's career.

Here's a quick prediction based solely on what I posted earlier: Berkman will have a better season than Sheffield.

Sheffield's values for his last three seasons:

$32

$28

$43

Berkman's:

$37

$35

$25

Sheffied is a first round pick in the mock drafts and Berkman's a fourth all because Sheffield had a career year and Berkman had a sub-par one. Ridiculous.