But that he hasn't had any wins so far isn't predictive of anything whatsoever, like ERA could be since a pitcher actually has some level of control over ERA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alloutwar
Printable View
But that he hasn't had any wins so far isn't predictive of anything whatsoever, like ERA could be since a pitcher actually has some level of control over ERA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alloutwar
Who said he was garbage? Maybe you missed the context where he was being judged by his value in relation to Cliff Lee and Albert Pujols. That's kind of a key factor.Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleWie
i don't think he's being judged in relation with those however based upon what he's done by many. kipnis is being judged based upon what he hasn't done. kipnis has outperformed them two this year pretty substantially at a key position no less. Pujols & Lee however have a track record and Pujols has been hitting great the past month. if kipnis performed at the same level all year long, which may be unlikely but not impossible, than kipnis would end up being more valuable at least for this year. Those are the type of gambles people make all the time in fantasy.Quote:
Originally Posted by haveacigar
and as for Lee and his wins HGM. his lack of wins could be predictive IF one believes that the Philly offense is going to be poor. i don't know why one would think that but if one was analyzing the phillies and felt they'd be in the bottom third in runs scored the rest of the way through than one could predict Lee might have trouble helping them in the wins category. Nobody drafts King Felix for wins.
I still think this was a terrible trade and worthy of a veto though not nearly as bad as I originally thought. in fact, i'd think the pujols owner would be stupid but if it were just pujols for kipnis i wouldn't veto it. if something else of value besides or in addition to morse were included i'd let it fly too. gotta let people run their teams and take gambles.
He's gotten a run less of support than the Phillies have overall runs per game - that's not predictive unless you think that the Phillies offense, for some reason, does worse with Lee on the mound than otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
But you wouldn't trade him for a much lesser player because good pitchers still get wins (he did lead the AL in wins in 2009 despite the Mariners scoring a quarter less runs per game than the next worse team).Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
I'm going to keep beating the Kipnis drum here. ESPN has him ranked as the 5th best player OVERALL in fantasy so far. Yahoo has him ranked 6th. Just checking out his stats, I see no reason why he can't continue preforming at this level. It's not like he is some journey man player. It's his 2nd year. His stats are pretty much in line with what he did last year & in the minors. He has cut down on the k's, his BABIP is inline with what he has always done. His HR/FB is actually way down, so the power is legit and maybe he's even been unlucky. He's running alot more. Maybe you can make an argument that CLE offense in whole is playing over it's head and his R's and RBI's might decline. But I think Kipnis is a legit fantasy star. I think the trade is BS. But I wouldn't have a problem with Lee or Pujols straight up for Kipnis. I'd be willing to bet that the Kipnis owner prolly wouldn't even make that deal becuase 2Nd basemen are so scarce. People focus too much on the names and stats that have no meaning in fantasy. New stars emerge and old stars age and become less productive, happens all the time.
The stolen bases are out of line with his minor league career and are a big part of his high fantasy ranking (though obviously not everything).
He's been very good, and he should continue to be very good, but his fantasy upside going forward, realistically, is Brandon Phillips - .280 avg, 20 HR, 20 SB, 80 RBI, 80 R (IF he's actually significantly improved his SB ability - otherwise its more like 10 SB). That's a very good player - top 50 fantasy player, but not Pujols (who was ranked 13th last year in a down year for him) or Lee (30th in 2010, 8th in 2011).
(Yahoo! rankings)
Yes and Pujols is having an even worse year this year & after 2+ plus months neither Lee or Pujols is in even the top 100. I like Lee alot, but I tend to value pitchers less than most people. Pujols I think is a declining player. I see Kipnis as a player on the rise. That's just my personal opinion on them but there are stats to support it.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
I don't place much weight, if any, into two months of stats. And yes, Pujols is declining and Kipnis is up and coming, but what Kipnis has done so far is a reasonable expectation for his peak performance. He's 25, which is no longer young for a prospect, and is unlikely to get better than he already is.Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleWie
And Lee's only not in the top 100 due to his 0 wins, which has nothing to do with how he has pitched - if he had even 4 or 5 wins, he'd rank in the 50-75 range.
Kipnis is good, like I said, but he just isn't Pujols or Lee, which is no slight at all - few players are.
You mean He isn't Pujols in Lee in their peak fantasy seasons. But this isn't Lee or Pujols peak fantasy seasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Kipnis has been better than both Pujols and Lee in fantasy so far this season, but that's not the question at hand, and two months of performance are not all you use to predict what will happen going forward (For example, during the last 30 days, Pujols has been #9 in fantasy, and Kipnis has been #14). Any reasonable projection of performance would rate both Pujols and Lee above Kipnis going forward.Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleWie
At the end of the year, I believe Kipnis will be higher ranked than Pujols and Lee. Meaning he gave more value to your team and therefore had a better fantasy season. But I get your point that if a trade was made it would be who would be better from that point forward which isn't so clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
It's certainly possible that Kipnis finishes the season with a higher rank, but that obviously includes the first two months of the season during which Kipnis likely has played over his head or at about what he will perform over the rest of the season, and Pujols has performed way worse than he will for the rest of the year, and Lee has had terrible luck and thus no wins. As you said, when making a trade, what has already happened is irrelevant to the trade beyond what it informs of you performance going forward (which is relatively little). All that matters is what you will get from here on out. It's possible Kipnis is better than one or both of Pujols and Lee over the course of the rest of the season, but it's highly unlikely given what we know about the players.Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleWie
Just as an exercise, take a look at their ZiPS rest of season projections:
Cliff Lee: 126 IP, 8 wins, 123 K, 2.93 ERA, 1.06 WHIP
Albert Pujols: .291 BA, 21 HR, 62 RBI, 59 R, 6 SB
Jason Kipnis: .265 BA, 12 HR, 48 RBI, 57 R, 12 SB
point is that pujols is likely to have a better remainder to the season than Kipnis but of course nobody knows for sure. For me though, as 2B is a much harder position to get quality offense out of, Pujols would have to be quite a bit better than Kipnis, which is also very possible. You have to factor in the production you can get from your 1B if its not pujols or from your 2B if its not kipnis and guestimate where you are better off.
if the deal was just kipnis for pujols, i'd think the guy dealing pujols is making a mistake though honestly i have to say i would be ok with it. With Lee included it really makes it lopsided though i have to be honest....i'm not certain after having a couple days to think about it that it is in fact collusive. You have to let people make mistakes, make their own moves, and nobody is always right. What seemed like a ludicrous deal initially still seems lopsided though i'm not certain it's egregiously collusive. Just a dummy...and if someone can sell ice to an eskimo more power to them.
Collusive or not, I still wouldn't let it go through if I was commish. It doesn't have to actually be collusive to still be detrimental and unfair to the league as a whole.Quote:
Originally Posted by dickay
couldn't disagree more with this. fantasy leagues should let teams operate freely providing it's not obvious collusion. too many times i've seen the league veto a trade claiming it unfair and it turned out it was opposite how the league felt. People should be allowed to take chances, it's their team.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM