MVN - Most Valuable Network

A Pujols Injury Debate

I posted this earlier, but it somehow disappeared. Here it is again:

As you might have read below, I selected Albert Pujols 12th overall in last night’s “experts” draft. I’ve been debating the merit of this selection with Fantasy Hurler’s Mike Bock, and deemed the discourse relevant enough (or at least entertaining enough) to post here:

Anonymous Edwin said…

The Pujols pick was a no-brainer for me. While there might not be specific injury concerns with Fielder or Braun, there is moderate risk surrounding there performance. Pujols has probably the lowest performance risk out of any fantasy player ever. While I would say Pujols’s injury risk outweighs the performance risk of Fielder or Braun, I would only add a maximum of 25% failure risk. Not to mention the fact that if he’s out - injuries aren’t as opaque and vampiric as underperformance is - see Bay and Hafner in ‘07 (two of my four keepers in one league, BTW). All told, I will always by a $45 dollar stock at $30-32 and 25% risk than buy a $30-32 stock at 0-10% risk.

Crawford was a value pick, plain and simple. For me, he is a $34 player with $40 upside going for $30-32.

I liked Bedard and Roberts less, but my reasoning behind them was:

1) Bedard goes to a great pitcher’s park in a much weaker league. He gets to pitch against Oakland and Texas a bunch. His injury last year wasn’t arm related and he is healthy now. With the above bonuses, I’d say he is about an 60% chance at $30, 40% 20-25. I like that at 36 overall, worth $23-25 on average.

2) I can bet on .285/95/10/50/35 from Roberts at 2B. Plus, there is the upside of a potential trade to the Cubs and the potential for increased SBO with a below average offense. For his position, Roberts is average/+ in R and BA, average in HR, average/- in RBI, and + + in SB, a net gain of + +. Not bad at $23-24, I’d say. Think of Upton:

AVG -
R avg/+
HR +
RBI avg/+
SB +

which is also a net of + +. granted, that’s a crude system, but one i often use to evaluate a player in my head. and this is going from the fact that an avg 2B is something like .280/80/13/70/10.

all of the top of my head, but that was my rationale behind the picks.

2/25/08 1:59 PM

Anonymous Edwin said…

I consistently hate there/their.

2/25/08 2:00 PM

Anonymous Edwin said…

and all of the other typos and spelling errors in that post.

2/25/08 2:03 PM

 

Anonymous Eric said…

I liked the Roberts pick. The certainty of SB from Crawford and Roberts is better than gambling on Michale Bourns of the last half of the draft.

The Pujols one is too tought to pass-up with back-to-back picks. I can’t see him doing better than he did last season, though. That Cardinals offense is pathetic.

Imagine down-grading offensively from Dave Eckstein.

2/25/08 2:31 PM

Blogger Mike Bock said…

I come up with a net of “+++” for Upton, using your math. I must be missing something.

Pujol is a $45 dollar stock, while Fielder is at $30-32?

2007($45)Pujols: .327/99/32/103/2
2007($31)Fielder:.280/109/50/119/2

You’re basically telling me Pujols had an off year. But, if that off year was due to an uncorrected (and apparently worsening) injury, why expect him to return to the norm?

Well, you may have the steal of the draft. We’ll see.

2/25/08 3:02 PM

Anonymous Edwin said…

Mike:

For B.J., each avg/+ is worth 1/2 a +. Therefore R, RBI [2 x (avg/+)] = AVG [1 x minus], which leaves B.J. with a net of HR + and SB +, or 2 +.

As for Pujols, I would contend that he had an off-year. I don’t fully expect him to return to the norm (hence the 25%). I consider the 2007 injury response abberative and only a 25% projectable reality. The reason I believe this is because he has played with the injury since 2003, and has treated it the same way every year. I account 25% chance of entropic breakdown, 75% aberrative and correctable response.

An important indicator that no one has taken into account (that I’ve seen, anyway) is that Pujols attributed his full offseason of rest in 2003 to the way he felt in 2004 about the injury (http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/sports/stories.nsf/cardinals/story/0C185C21C38BD56D862573D80013EEEB?OpenDocument) In 2004-2006, the Cardinals went deep into the postseason. The Cardinals did not make the postseason in 2007, thusly giving Pujols another full year of rest. I think that we can attribute some of Pujols’s performance in 2007 to three consecutive years of deep playoff appearances. This is another reason why I consider Pujols a 75% chance to rebound to career norms.

2/25/08 3:58 PM

Anonymous Edwin said…

Full offseason of rest, I should say.

2/25/08 4:00 PM

Blogger Mike Bock said…

I understand your take on Pujols now. You believe his apparently chronic, degenerative arm condition that [reportedly] requires surgery will respond to rest in the same manner that it did in years past, when he was a younger man, despite the recent reports that he can’t “play through pain again this year.”

Fair enough. Do you really believe Pujols’s stated age is accurate, BTW?

2/25/08 4:03 PM

Anonymous Edwin said…

“Entropic breakdown” is the most redundant I think I’ve ever been - perhaps the most redundant anyone ever could be.

2/25/08 4:04 PM

Anonymous Edwin said…

A strained ligament is not degenerative. It is chronic if it is not addressed with surgery. The difference between age 24 (or 28) and age 28 (or 32) has no impact on healing ability - or at least no proven impact that I have ever read about.

Pujols has been managing the injury in a chronic context (created by his unwillingness to have it repaired) since 2003. I believe that three years of unsatisfactory rest created the conditions of “unmanageability” in 2007. With a full offseason of rest, I believe there is a 75% chance Pujols will be able to play within the injury-specific context of chronicity of 2004-2006, not 2007, which I believe to be aberrative for reasons listed above.

This entry was posted on Monday, February 25th, 2008 at 7:32 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.