Page 1 of 2

OF is deep

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 2:22 am
by jfg
Despite what everyone said in the preseason OF is extremely deep. Will that stay the same? I think so to some extent. There are a lot of guys who were supposed to be fading that are producing and a lot of guys who were projected to start producing that are doing just that. 1/4 of the top 100 on Baseball Monster are outfielders and while some of those guys will drop there are just as many if not more that will jump up.

Re: OF is deep

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 2:25 am
by OneLoveBoomer
jfg wrote:Despite what everyone said in the preseason OF is extremely deep. Will that stay the same? I think so to some extent. There are a lot of guys who were supposed to be fading that are producing and a lot of guys who were projected to start producing that are doing just that. 1/4 of the top 100 on Baseball Monster are outfielders and while some of those guys will drop there are just as many if not more that will jump up.


I was one of the guys in early preseason that thought OF was deep. It wasn't until I really got into auction drafts this season -- in deep 5 OF leagues even -- that I realized how deep it was. There are so many quality $10-$15 dollar players with great potential in the OF. It is certainly one of the deepest positions.

Re: OF is deep

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 2:31 am
by J.C.Fighter
OF is way too deep if you ask me...

Re: OF is deep

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 2:40 am
by jfg
I was too Boomer. Way too many up and coming players and too many guys that regressed last year. But, yet I still drafted Chris Young and Corey Hart back to back along with my sleeper OF's and am left with a bench full of production in a weekly league.

Re: OF is deep

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 3:07 am
by Spartans Rule
I just realized how deep OF is the other day... I want to trade an OF with Soriano coming off the DL, so I check my 12-team, start 5 OF league to see who needs help there and really every team looks pretty solid.

Re: OF is deep

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 3:29 am
by AllDay
I think it is always fairly deep by nature of the position. Every team generally starts 3 OF - and 1 IF at each position.

Which is why I generally target IF early in the draft, and fill in my OF later. There is a larger player pool to choose from to fill in those OF spots than filling a weak spot at 2B. I could easily find 1 or 2 OF in the FA pool to start - but if I'm looking for a 2B or SS I might be looking all year long.

Additionally, there is a variety of stats available in the OF. If you need SB (or HR) and a 3rd OF - you can probably find them later in the draft or in the FA pool.

Re: OF is deep

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 4:07 am
by FantasyFreak
AllDay wrote:Which is why I generally target IF early in the draft, and fill in my OF later. There is a larger player pool to choose from to fill in those OF spots than filling a weak spot at 2B. I could easily find 1 or 2 OF in the FA pool to start - but if I'm looking for a 2B or SS I might be looking all year long.


This isnt always the best idea. You should take into account position scarcity...but I think the most important factor is the actual production you expect a player to have.

Re: OF is deep

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 9:47 am
by Havok1517
It might be deep but there isn't much elite talent. Its top heavy.

Re: OF is deep

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 11:55 am
by YerInUrine
Havok1517 wrote:It might be deep but there isn't much elite talent. Its top heavy.


I cant get rid of my elite guys... Its ridiculous.

Re: OF is deep

PostPosted: Thu May 01, 2008 12:12 pm
by The Artful Dodger
Havok1517 wrote:It might be deep but there isn't much elite talent. Its top heavy.


Agreed. Odds are you'll be in good shape with two top 20-25 OF, but say if you only had one, the quality of your OF runs the greater chance of running feast-or-famine. The OF replacement level is just greater because you have a deeper lot to work with as opposed to say replacing a Jimmy Rollins or an A-Rod.