|
The Big Board as of Jan. 18, 2010: |
|
Rising = Δ, Falling = ∇ |
|
1. Ted Williams 2. Babe Ruth Δ 3. Mickey Mantle 4. Bill Joyce Δ 5. Frank Thomas 6. John McGraw ∇ 7. Joe Kelley Δ 8. Roy Cullenbine ∇ |
We’re four weeks away from the 2010 ASB Classic, which means that general managers across the ASB landscape are in full scout mode, trying to determine which players will be the perfect piece of the puzzle and lead them to ASB immortality. After a year of compiling stats, evaluating potential as well as progress, we’re finally ready to lay out the first Big Board of who we believe will go where in the 2010 Draft.
1. Ted Williams (Bamford Bears) – the Bamford franchise has made no secret about eyeing this selection for the past 12 months. However, with a recent marginal performance and a strong showing by Babe Ruth, don’t be shocked if we see a change in coming weeks.
2. Babe Ruth (Aginville Sketchers) – while Aginville has shown an affinity for Mickey Mantle in the past, we believe they will turn over a new leaf this year with a proven winner and 2008 ASB Classic MVP Babe Ruth. John McGraw’s name is also being thrown around with Aginville management, and he may turn out to be a brilliant contrast to lifetimer Dale Murphy.
3. Mickey Mantle (Boggstown Boilers) – the Boilers are looking for a way out of this selection, but we think they’ll end up here and “settle” with Mantle. McKeon would love to go after McGraw or Bill Joyce, but he is somewhat handcuffed with lifetimer George Brett already playing 3B. McKeon would rather not have to move Brett to 1B, which would probably mean taking an outfielder, and Mantle is the best there is.
4. Bill Joyce – (Lincoln Square Devil Dogs) – Statistically, John McGraw will be tough to pass up in this spot, but the DD’s will eventually be seduced by the balance and surprising power of Bill Joyce.
5. Frank Thomas – (Jenks Wildcats) – Jenks ownership has been very public about their impression of Roy Cullenbine, and they really have no interest in 3B John McGraw with lifetimer Mike Schmidt in their back pocket. Jenks will again go with a high total bases player, and Frank Thomas is as good as anybody available.
6. John McGraw – (McCall Mudhens) – the Mudhens would LOVE to go after Bill Joyce, but we just don’t think he’ll fall this far, which still leaves an amazing 3B in John McGraw. McGraw’s on-base percentage is off the chart and will provide a nice addition to the top of any lineup.
7. Joe Kelley– (Jeetzton Beanbags) – the Beanbags have been pretty quiet about who they’re looking at in this draft, but they always produce savvy draft choices that usually fill a void at a thin position. Kelley is a very balanced player, with great on base percentage and total bases; and he can play anywhere in the outfield. This selection could create a potentially potent 3 and 4 spot in the lineup with lifetimer Dave Windfield.
8. Roy Cullenbine – (Fogelberg Falcons) – the reigning champs would be ecstatic to see Cullenbine fall this far in the draft. Cullenbine has become known as the poor man’s Mickey Mantle, serving all outfield positions and showcasing a strong propensity to get on base as well as drive in runs with his high total bases.
A few things I have issues with here:
1. George Brett’s single season disc can NOT play 1B. In his 1980 season, the one his disc is modeled after he played 1 game at 1B. That’s not enough to warrant him playing 1B in ASB. If Matt would like to use his career black disc instead then of course he can play 1B. I doubt he’d like to make that move tho.
2. Joe Kelley’s single season disc can ONLY play LF. In 1894, the year of his disc he played 129 games in LF and ZERO games in CF and RF, why is he allowed to play all 3 spots? Again, use the black disc and fine, but no way his single season disc should get all three spots.
3. Roy Cullenbine is in a similar boat to Kelley… the single season disc used (1946) shouldn’t be allowed to play all OF positions. That year he played 12 games in left, ZERO in CF and 69 in RF. He DID play 21 games at 1B. It’s iffy if he should play LF, but if he must I’d say give him RF, LF, 1B status.
PS… great post. Love the draft board.
I thought the lifetimers could play any position they played throughout their career, that’s the main difference between a lifetimer and a single-season disc. If not, then we have a lot of changes to make, because this would effect Brett, Murphy, Molitor, Banks, Winfield, and Rose.
We do need to change the Cullenbine and Kelley discs. I think I was just going off of the Pos margin in both offensive and defensive stats, I didn’t realize there was a margin that broke down RF-CF-LF. Slight details, right? These changes are certain to impact the Big Board next week.
Cap,
I always thought they played just like a normal single season, we just used them because we loved the players. You take the good and the bad with that season, otherwise we should just use their career discs.
I have no desire to be a hard ass about it but clarity would be nice.
THIS is what this blog needs more of!!! A good healthy discussion!! YEAH!!
Ok… So Cullenbine and Kelly can only play the positions that they played during THAT regular season (55 games at a position during the season qualifies player for that position. For every position the player plays at least 10 games, the number is reduced by 5.). The discs will have to be changed to reflect this. Good catch Sam.
The single-season lifetime players are the only exception to this rule. They can play ANY position they played at least 100 games at during their career and still use the single season numbers… Let us know how you feel about it Sammy. A while back I wrote up a list of “rules” for this and was hoping for some feedback (under “*Rules* (ROUGH)” in the right nav bar).
So Cullenbine will be changed to: RF ONLY under the rules on the board. Do you guys think that’s fair or should the rule be changed?
Rule seems fair. I’ve been noticing a bunch of career blacks are wrong as I’m looking over SS and LF. For example Billy Hamilton should be an OF, not CF. He played 400+ games at LF and 164 games at RF and 900+ at CF, that’s an OF. Now, on the flip side, a guy who plays 900+ games at RF maybe shouldn’t also get CF credit if he plays only 100 games there as it’s a harder position. I’d be willing to hear arguments on both sides.
Anyway, those two players above should for sure change. My thoughts on lifetimers. It’s a HUGE advantage to have a lifetimer who shifts around. To me it’s kind of crazy to say a guy could play a position he never or only a handful of times played the season of his disc or the seasons previously. To use Brett as an example (I feel as a former Mustang I can harp on him 🙂 ) prior to and including the 1980 season he played NINE games at 1B total, he also played EIGHT games at SS… so should he be able to play shortstop? He had the same amount of experience. It just doesn’t make sense to me. My two ideas:
– Let the lifetimers play any position they met the criteria to play the season of the disc or any season prior. Sure, I’ll buy Rose being able to play 2B and the OF if we use his ’69 disc even tho he only played 2B twice that year, cause he’d played it in the past. But no playing 3B as he’d never played it up to that point in his career.
– Other way is to bring defense into the game. Brett was a solid, even GG third basemen one year, so if he plays 3B and he was a gold glover the year of his disc (Brett does not in this example) give him GG status, Otherwise say he’s a solid defensive player but no GG then he can play the position with no bonus or detraction, but say in Brett’s case he’d never played 1B up to that point, then fine, let him play 1B but with a penalty (he was a terrible defensive 1B anyway). I’ll rant more about this during my SS preview.
Those are my thoughts. Would like to hear what others think.
I have marked on the front and back all of the Career Discs that have additional positions. I can send you a list of everyone who I have available at every position if you want (might save you some time).
Lifetimer Position rule:
Yeah, it is an advantage to have a lifetimer that can switch from position to position. Yeah it is technically not correct… It’s something that we thought would add more value to a lifetime player. Another way to make them ‘special’… In my mind (and I know that there might be a few holes in this philosophy), if a lifetimer plays a position during their entire career, then they should be able to play it during the prime of their career… Brett played 461 games at first base late in his career, in my mind, he could have played first base just as easy during the prime of his career as he could have played third during that time. Again, this is a lifetime player only thing… I hope that made sense! … What do you think?
I can understand the argument, but I feel like we’ve played a certain way for the past 2 ASB Classics (as well as every other major), so the precedent has been set. If we want to make the game more real, fair, or whatever, we would pretty much have to reinvent the game, create all new discs, etc. Brett’s played 3B in the previous two Classics and he’ll likely play 3B in this one, so I don’t feel like it’s going to effect me a whole lot, but it would complicate things for other guys. Maybe it’s a lazy attitude, but I feel like we’ve been doing it this way for the past two years, why complicate it now? If necessary, why don’t we just put it to a vote for everyone involved?
In Brett’s case, since we’re using him as the prime example, the guy did win a batting title while playing 1B, so it’s not like he was a complete waste while at that position.
I have always thought a lifetimer that plays more than one position was a little strange, but it was the way we set the game up. I think changing it now would be a little tough. It’s a lot like how we figure base on balls stats. Those aren’t right but we have grown to make that the norm. The only fix I see to the situation is this. Let the lifetimer play at a certain position for the classic and once that position has been named that’s where he stays. After checking on Brock, under these rules he could play all outfield positions since he played all of the 1962 season in center and all of the 1963 season in right. I have never had that on my disc and don’t plan on playing him at any other position because I see him as a left fielder, the same way I see Brett as a third baseman and Molitor as a third baseman/DH.
If that sounds crazy then keep it the way it is. We have been playing with it like this for so long that it doesn’t really bother me. I do think it gives us an unfair advantage that they can play more than one position so if we need to let’s vote.
No need to vote. The Wildcats are the only franchise whose lifetimer plays one position so I don’t think anyone else would want to give up the flexibility when they make up their team. The league has spoken. We at Jenks shall move on.
Joe, please do send your list. I’d like to check it against what I have. Thanks.
Yes Ry, under the rules Brock can play all outfield positions… Where you play him is up to you 🙂
Sam… Move you ass back to the Midwest so we can play every week!!!! We can get the defense stuff hammered out and get a smoking-awesome division style league going with 4 teams in each league! … PLUS, we can get some stadiums built and a new lifetimer for the Cats’!!! MOVE BACK!