I was recently involved in a discussion with another owner about a trade.
In this instance there was a back and forth over the value of each player.
I was seeking pitching depth to fill out my rotation. He was seeking to gain a player i had just given up alot of value for(some thought i had overpaid). To me the value of that need position as well as him being an elite player led me to turn the deal down(that and the offer was bad).
After my rejection of the trade and subsequent comments... I was asked as to why. I explained myself and his counter was that "Bottom line - you have to pay for pitching usually." I was particularly amused by this comment, especially considering my history and often times stated philosophy in that world.
My answer to his question or rather challenge is this: My philosophy is you pay for the player, not the position. i don't overpay for pitching just because it is.
Now in reality that philosophy goes against the grain of conventional wisdom. Pitching as well as pitching prospects in baseball much like Goalies in hockey, or even Quarterbacks in football. Their value is placed at a premium price.
The reason being that they are potentially a franchise fortune changing player. There is assuredly no doubt about the importance of pitching in HBD. You will likely do more damage in the playoffs with 2-3 elite pitchers than with 5 average guys. But from my vantage point the key is simply this.
Paying the premium rate of a franchise player for a player who is not on that level simply because he is a pitcher, in fact makes little sense.
Why would you pay the same price for a #2-#3 starter that you would for a elite hitting OF or 1B. Just because it is a need?
Even if you were to fill that need with a lesser player then the only thing you have accomplished is overpaying. You would lose value in this instance.
Personally I am unwilling to pay $5.24 for 93 octane gasoline at Shell if the BP down the street is $1.85. This is why I say. You pay for the player and his abilities. Not for the position he plays, nor for "name". You pay for what the player can do and what he can do for your team.
You pay a price for his "impact" and nothing more. Doing it for any other reason is foolish to say the least.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Just Thinking Out Loud
.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
in the spirit of spirited debate, I might disagree with not having to overpay for pitching. It appears this league is devoid of quality pitching. The first league I played in seemed to have a deeper group of quality arms. I was able to win based on the old pitching and defense theory. Although the team I currently have has a winning record, I long for the deep 5 rotation and quality bullpen. in scanning the league it looks like there is a plethera of offensive stars and a shorter pool of quality arms. Supply and demand may dictate that a better offensive player may not have or be equal in value to a somewhat lessor or equal pitcher.
the league nor are most leagues devoid of quality pitching. it just happens that it get culled together by 5-6 teams and then the price on them gets marked up. i see no reason to overpay for a position or pitcher just because it is so.
Post a Comment