|
||
December 10th 2002 |
Your Daily Fantasy Rx |
|||||||||
|
by Tim Polko American League Third Basemen without Positive Draft Value
Quick Key to the tables: Average league worst BA, ERA, and WHIP provided for 2002 leagues courtesy of Rototimes, based on data compiled from TQ Stats. Players are ranked in order from the highest draft value in a 4x4 league to the lowest. As the majority of fantasy leagues allow you to keep anyone traded to the other league, all players are listed in the league where they began the season.
Please take a look at our Fantasy Review of Cleveland Prospects for comments on LaRocca.
Smith couldn't even manage to qualify at shortstop, and given his historically horrendous skills, I see no reason to acquire him under almost any circumstances. His .277/.312/.408 line in 206 at-bats at AAA Durham in 2002 illustrates his repeatedly empty batting average, and since Smith lacks power potential and plate discipline, his marginal speed isn't worth risking potential BA damage.
Please take a look at our Fantasy Review of Kansas City Prospects for comments on Pellow.
Selby started a surprising number of games for Cleveland after injuries decimated their starting lineup, however he failed to display the skills we'd like to see if he's to earn a more significant role in the future. He's already re-signed with Cleveland, so he could break camp with the team, but he's more likely to open the year in Buffalo again. Given his lack of speed, limited power potential, and unimpressive plate discipline, I wouldn't risk drafting Selby until he compiles a solid BA over a few months in the majors.
A succession of injuries led Fryman to retire after the 2002 season. While he was never a great player, he made five All-Star teams as one of the better AL players on the left side of the infield throughout the '90s. His departure leaves Cleveland with a significant hole at third base, but considering his health problems limited him to a sub-.670 OPS in each of the last two years, the Indians probably aren't overly upset with the amicable parting.
Blake posted an impressive array of stats at AAA Edmonton, including a .309/.383/.492 in 482 at-bats with 19 HR, 58 RBI, 87 R, 24/33 SB%, and 54:78 BB:K. He's quite capable of holding down at least a platoon job at one of the corner positions, and his combination of patience, speed, and decent power potential makes him a solid pick when he's in the majors. There's probably no reason to draft him in most leagues since no team has shown great interest in rostering him, although since he's still in his peak and can contribute in several categories, he's an excellent mid-season addition if he finds a regular role.
Arias hasn't earned positive value since 1998, and although he's still making decent contact at AAA, I don't expect him to spend much more time in the majors. Look elsewhere for infield help since Arias offers negligible upside.
I never should have bought into the Blalock hype since his 2001 numbers clearly indicated he needed time at AAA. So for our purposes in looking towards 2003, let's treat 2002 strictly as a development season for Blalock. While at AAA Oklahoma, he compiled a .309/.363/.457 line in 387 at-bats, along with 8 HR, 62 RBI, 63 R, 2/3 SB%, and 34:61 BB:K. However he also hit 32 doubles to keep his SLG at a decent level, so the only concern here is a .84 contact rate, and he only posted a .86 contact at AA in 2001. A .14 walk rate, 3.79 #P/PA and .95 G-F while in the majors in 2002 indicate definite future promise, so while I don't expect he'll reach $20 in 2003, I'll be quite shocked if he doesn't break double-digits while starting all year. Trading Blalock would be a significant and likely very damaging mistake for Texas, so hopefully he'll remain a Ranger and reap the benefits of eventually batting in front of ARod and Teixeira.
Andrews earned another promotion after posting a .256/.346/.479 line in 390 at-bats at AAA Pawtucket, and he still offers a skill set worthy of a major league job. While he isn't a capable everyday starter, he can still hit left-handers, and a smart team would employ him as a platoon partner for a left-handed first or third baseman who struggles against southpaws. If he finds a regular role, Andrews is a decent gamble for a buck or two, however considering the dozens of players that offer similar skills, don't expect to see much more of him in the majors.
A terrible start at the plate earned Smith his release in early May, and he spent the last few months of the season compiling a very unimpressive .239/.307/.382 in 293 at-bats at AAA Indianapolis for Milwaukee. Smith still offers a little power potential, but his plate discipline remains awful, leaving him unownable thanks to his BA downside.
Wilson gained two years in agegate and therefore saw his upside pretty much vanish. His plate discipline has eroded to the point where his limited power potential isn't worth the BA risk, so even if Wilson holds onto his backup job with the Yankees in 2003, he's not draftworthy in even the deepest of leagues.
One of the worst signings of last off-season, Paquette's roto value only exceeded that of Greg Vaughn and Einar Diaz among AL position players. He's lost the multi-position qualification that made him an attractive pick-up when he played for St. Louis, and even though he should take advantage of the shorter left-center fence in Comerica, Paquette's terrible plate discipline makes him far too risky to own. Don't draft him in the spring, and avoid adding him during the year unless you see noticeable improvement in his skills.
Click
here to read the previous article.
Please e-mail your comments to
tim@rotohelp.com. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rotohelp |
||||||||||||
All content ©2001-18
Rotohelp, Inc.
All rights reserved. PO Box 72054 Roselle, IL 60172. Please send your comments, suggestions, and complaints to: admin@rotohelp.com. |
||||||||||||