The Oakland Approach

[honestiago1]

As most of us will remember, the late 80s, early 90s A's under LaRussa had some of the best top-to-bottom bullpen work of the modern era. In particular (1990?), there was one year where Eck, Honeycutt, Nelson, and Plunk all where spectacular (it was the year Storm Davis won 19 with about 160 IP and a 4.something ERA.

Anyway, there's a team in the last league I played called "Strange Experiment" that drafted a stable of pricey relievers (Quiz, Holland, D. Robinson, W. Hernandez and Orosco) and tagged them with 5-.75 starters (Matthews, LaPoint, Lollar, Burris andSorenson). Team won 86 games and is currently playing for the championship. It's very similar to the A's, except that Oakland did have some very good starters (Stewart and Welch to name 2).

Has anyone else ever gone so far as to draft that play that many .75 starters and still win?

[KingLouie]

This was not exactly my template, but here's what I've done with my Oakland team, and it's been fun.

I spent at least some dough on my starters. I managed to pick up Blylevin and Ruess. Both were in good years, which made them particularly tough at home. I also had Eck coming out of the pen. He was in his worst year, but he still managed 13 wins and (I think) the same number of saves.

The rest of my staff was all under $1 million. With some mining of the free agent pile, I managed to eventually patch together a decent enough collection of low-priced guys.

To bolster my pitching, I also went for 1s (most of the time) on defense up the middle.

My pitching ended up ranked first in the league. My hitting was ranked ninth. Right now the team is in the playoffs.

Watching the Mets while growing up, with the likes of Tom Seaver, Tug McGraw, Nolan Ryan, etc., gave me an appreciation for big ball parks and good pitching.

[honestiago1]

Strange Experiment ended up winning my league. My own team was a mediocre 80-82. We went on a run late, but not enough to catch anyone. Lack of decent starting pitching hurt, and I had a team in Wrigley that seemed better built for Busch Stadium. The last two teams I've drafted, I've taken the Astrodome. I'd rather cut down on the other team's runs. Figure I can scratch out enough to win most games (isn't that what the ChiSox are doin' this season?).

[richswerb]

Depending on whos left at #24, I could be adopting a similar approach in the Am Nat league ...

[honestiago1]

I think OAK is a good pick, mainly because you get Ricky. He's the best leadoff man in major league history. He can bat anywhere in the lineup. He's a '1.' You also get McGwire, a great run producer, and Canseco. There are some very good relievers, and you have some inning eaters among your starters. If you can get those bats into a hitter's park, you'll score a lot of runs.

[richswerb]

Thats the way I looked at it. Hopefully theres a team left for me at 24 with a hitters park and a couple arms. Opportunity to get Eck, McGwire, Plunk, Stewart, and my 3 OF and DH (Ricky, Hendu, Canseco, D.Murphy) was too much to pass on.

[honestiago1]

It's hard to read the NL teams, but it seems to me ATL and CHC are the weakest ones. If you get either of those you'll have another good bat (Sandberg, who'd fit in perfectly with your roster), and Murph (giving you yet another good CF). I'm not sure how much pitching is going to be there, though. However, both those parks are HR parks.

This assumes, of course, that those teams slip. You never know what people are gonna do. I'm sure some eyebrows raised when I took DET. There's several teams out there I think are better, but I have my reasons for taking the Tigers (which I'll divulge later on, assuming they pan out).

Anyway, this is VERY interesting. I wish genevajack were around so we could finish this thing today.

[1st Command Commando]

Detroit was a great pick. They are always chosen in this format, cause there isn't another team with 1s who can hit reasonably well at 2B and SS. I use Jack Morris alot as well, so hang a gold star on your pick.
Jim

[honestiago1]

Glad someone else appreciates Morris. Dude is a horse. He's a throwback to guys like Catfish and Fergie Jenkins (lotsa innings, HRA's, gets W's). Also got an overlooked run producer in DEvans, a pair of inning eaters in Petry and Terrell (well, SOME of Terrell's years), and Mr. Gun behind the plate (with HR pop), Parrish. I'm still sweating the picks, though, since DET goes against type for me.

I'm waiting for someone to snag TOR, who has some great players that are moderately priced (plus Henke and Ward). CAL gives you some good bats, some very good gloves, and access to a probable non-drafted pitcher (Langston, a 4y-SEA). I thought about those teams, but, as you pegged it, Trammell-Whitaker can pick it and hit better than any other combo in the league.

(and thanks for understanding my madness). :shock:

[bjs73]

[quote:8a23f8510d]Glad someone else appreciates Morris. Dude is a horse. He's a throwback to guys like Catfish and Fergie Jenkins (lotsa innings, HRA's, gets W's). Also got an overlooked run producer in DEvans, a pair of inning eaters in Petry and Terrell (well, SOME of Terrell's years), and Mr. Gun behind the plate (with HR pop), Parrish. I'm still sweating the picks, though, since DET goes against type for me.[/quote:8a23f8510d]

What? No love for Willie Hernandez and A. Lopez? Both those guys at one point in time (or more) has anchored my mediocre pitching staff from the bullpen. Willie H. can make grown men cry in his best year. Plus all of his years are serviceable no matter what.

Now for your pennance:

Go roll a 20 sided die in the corner of your bedroom until you roll a "1" five times in a row....