Draft Day Manifesto 2: Electric Boogaloo

I asked the great Mike Polikoff, who oversees our league manager product (Free to play! Free live scoring! Fully customizable! With auction drafting, FAAB bidding and mobile app capability! Sign up today! Twice!) to look at the champions of our standard league (10-team mixed leagues, 5x5 roto scoring) over the last three years to see how many total fantasy points the average winning fantasy team had in ESPN standard leagues.

In 2008, the average winning team scored 80.19 points (out of a possible 100, of course).

In 2009, the average winning team scored 80.85 points.

In 2010, the average winning team scored 81.64 points.

Get to 80 points, kids, you got a really good shot. Now, I know many of you are in head-to-head leagues; we're getting to you in a moment, but right now I want to blow you away with some Beautiful Mind-type math. Seriously. Watch this. Math nerds, unbuckle your pants. Because it's about to get hot in here.

8+8+8+8+8+8+8+8+8+8 = 80
10+10+10+10+10+6+6+6+6+6 = 80
8+5+7+9+8+8+10+9+6+10=80
9+7+9+9+9+1+8+9+10+9=80

Blows your mind, right? I could do that all day. How you like them apples?

Just to dumb it down for those of you without an awe-inspiring analytical mind like mine, there's lots of ways to get to 80 total points in a 5x5 10-team league, including, as you see in the last example, completely tanking a category. You have to win or finish high in a lot of categories, but you're gonna have to do well to win, period. The point, obviously, is it can be done and that there are many, many ways to win a fantasy league.

You shouldn't be locked into just one way, especially before the draft. You can have a specific strategy or theory and you'll need to have an opinion on every player before you draft/auction, but -- and this will all come together in a bit and make sense -- you don't want to be locked into any specific way you must try to win.

So, to recap so far: Every single decision must be governed by your understanding of what's most likely to happen, there are many ways to win a league, and I am looking for a few good robots. Simple concepts, but crucial ones that you don't want to overlook.

Hold those thoughts as it's time for another award-winning awkward transition. Let's talk player evaluation, rankings and projections.

A quick scour of the Internet shows many fantasy sites claiming the most accurate projections, the best rankings, the most in-depth analysis, blah blah blah. And no doubt, there is tons of fine work being done out there by many sites. I know that the folks who put together ESPN's rankings and projections spend a lot of hard work and many months on them. They're terrific, both the projections and the people behind them. So the following is not a slight at any of them.

But check this out. Inspired by a column my colleague AJ Mass wrote last year, I conducted a little experiment with some of the gang on my Facebook page. On Wednesday, Feb. 8, 2012, I asked them to pick one player, anyone they wanted, in the following positions: C, 1B, 2B, SS, 3B, OF. I also asked them to pick any three pitchers. I told them we would be using standard 5x5 roto categories and they should construct a team with the idea of winning. I also told them we would use LAST YEAR'S stats. So they would know exactly, I mean exactly, what they're getting out of each player.

I chose six people. Smaller lineups and fewer people than in a normal league, but it works for our purposes. Here are the teams they chose.

Pick-Your-Team Experiment: Rosters

Pretty good teams, right? Of all the picks, Tim Lincecum is the only question mark for me, given that he had a down year (for him), but otherwise, no issue. Not surprisingly, Matt Kemp, Jose Bautista and Justin Verlander showed up on almost every list, along with many folks taking Roy Halladay and/or Clayton Kershaw, and most everyone had either Albert Pujols or Miguel Cabrera at first base. Shortstop was either Jose Reyes or Troy Tulowitzki across the board.

Now, here's whom I went with: Victor Martinez, Adrian Gonzalez, Ian Kinsler, Jose Reyes, Jose Bautista, Matt Kemp, Justin Verlander, Clayton Kershaw and Craig Kimbrel.

OK, so now, using last year's stats, let's total these teams up in standard rotisserie scoring. The first number is the team's total stats in that category, the second number (in parentheses) is the amount of points that team earned in that category (total of seven possible).

Pick-Your-Team Experiment: Standings

To be fair, I chose my team before looking up any stats or rosters for the other teams, but I felt fairly confident that most people would take Napoli at catcher, Cano at second and no one would take more than one closer. So I felt that V-Mart's average and RBIs would be huge advantages at the position over Napoli and everyone else. Remember, while V-Mart hit .330 and Napoli hit .320, the key is that Martinez had around 170 more at bats than Napoli. Those 170 at-bats, especially in a league this small, would make a huge difference in batting average and (along with V Mart's RBI's) would help off-set Ian Kinsler's poor average and lowish RBI totals. Kinsler's home runs, runs scored and SB advantage at second base was too good to pass up, though I thought strongly about Pedroia. In terms of the pitching, I knew by taking Kimbrel I would guarantee me a win or tie in saves, keep my ERA and WHIP down and give me enough K's to get past anyone that decided to go Rivera instead of Kimbrel. Kimbrel, along with Kershaw and Verlander, would probably get me middle of the pack in pitching overall. Fewer people went closer than I thought, which worked out as four of them had to split 10 points (2.5 each), hurting all of them and taking away the advantage they gained in strikeouts and wins by going with three starters. So you see, it was as much about what everyone else did than it was about knowing what numbers were the best.

Now, I acknowledge that this wasn't a purely scientific experiment. But regardless, the point I want to make is probably the most important thing you should take from this article.

Every guy in this draft knew exactly what stats they were getting. They had their choice of any player and could construct their team without any constraints other than positional eligibility. And none of them "won" the league.

Even if you pull me out of the league, there are still five guys who would have "lost." (Mapes wins due to a more categories tiebreaker, 3-2-2). Look, I love the sabermetric kids as much as the next MIT grad. But there's a lot more to fantasy than just the numbers. Even if you had a magic set of projections in front of you right now, projections that were 100 percent guaranteed to come true down to the final batting average decimal point, it's still only one piece of the puzzle.

The evaluation of players is important, of course, but not nearly as important as how each player's stats combine with all the other stats of your players, and then how those stats compete with the combined stats of every single other team in your league.

The italicized part is the key because that's not something you'll really know on draft day. Yes, there is draft software that, using projections, can give you an idea of where every team stacks up in every category during your draft/auction, and our Insider recommends engine goes as far as suggesting which players might best fit your team based on that information.

The problem with that, of course, is that it's a moving target. Even if the projections are exactly right, you don't know what the other teams will do over the course of the draft. Maybe they have a different set of projections they're working from. Or maybe they want to load up on closers or speed so they can trade later. Nor can you instinctively take into account how those owners will play their teams. Will they trade and work the wire like crazy? Will they be patient? There's too much information you don't have; I like to be aware of what other teams are doing as far as roster spots they've covered (and in an auction I keep track of other teams' money for the end game) but for the most part during draft day, I concentrate on my team and my team alone.

OK, so how do we build our team? We'll get to that, but first, just to recap: Every decision must be governed by what's most likely to happen, there are many ways to win, projections, even if they are 100 percent accurate, are not the end all be all; it's much more important how you put those stats together and how those stats stack up with all the other teams. You won't be able to determine with great accuracy during the draft how they will stack up, so you are concentrating on your team. If, using the handy cheat sheet that I'll introduce here in a bit, your projections get you close to 80 points, you'll have left the draft with a team that, barring unforeseen injuries or crazy, Adam Dunn-like drop-offs, will compete for the title. And that's all you want out of the draft/auction. A solid foundation for a team.

We now pause to rank the top 10 robots of all time in order of awesomeness, starting with number 10.

10. '80s Robot from new Muppets movie. He drives a Rolls.
9. Lisa the robot from "Weird Science." People forget, Kelly LeBrock was actually an insanely cool robot they created. Kelly LeBrock had a "make you forget she's a robot" way that was very different than many other styles of "forget I'm a robot" techniques.
8. RoboCop. He's a robot. Who fights crime.
7. Marvin the Paranoid Android. I now have two Douglas Adams references in this column. Should I go for three?
6. Atom from "Real Steel." He's a boxing robot. With a heart!
5. Twikki from Buck Rodgers. As discussed on the podcast. Sarcastic, funny and by carrying Dr. Theopolis around his neck, he was clearly the inspiration for Flavor Flav.
4. Bender from Futurama. He had me at "Robot Porn."
3. Data from "Star Trek, The Next Generation." Out Spocked Spock.
2. The Terminator. Arnold when we still loved him. "Your clothes ... give them to me now."
1. R2D2. Still the King.

Others receiving votes: Any of the Transformers, Wall-E, The Iron Giant, KITT from "Knight Rider" (not sure if he qualifies as a robot ... ), the robot from "Lost in Space" (Danger Will Robinson!), Dynomutt from the "Blue Falcon and Dynomutt" cartoon that only I enjoyed, Johnny 5, the Fembots from "Austin Powers," C-3PO and, of course, the Pimpbot 5000.

Targets: It's not just a chain of stores for which my brother once interned

So while projections aren't perfect or even super important, they do have a function and a useful one at that. Most projections are reasonable. There will always be outliers -- no one foresaw Jacoby Ellsbury's power outburst last year or the way Carl Crawford tanked -- but in general, projections are, pardon the pun, usually in the ballpark. You need a set of projections you trust. If you draft online at ESPN.com, ours are built into the engine. And if you draft elsewhere, you can see them all right here.

Remember when I blew your mind with my crazy Beautiful Mind math? Many ways to get to 80 points. But just to give us a jumping off point, let's choose the first one. Finishing third in every single category (8 points) gets you to 80. And that's a good rule of thumb for leagues that use rotisserie scoring. Aim for third in every category.

So as you build your team, I want you to use this wonderfully handy cheat sheet that I hinted about earlier. In it, you'll see, over the last three years, the average amount of home runs the third-place team has hit was 280. So that's the ballpark we want to be in. So say your first pick is Troy Tulowitzki. You see we have him projected for 32 home runs. OK, 280-32=248. For the rest of the draft we will hopefully acquire around 250 more home runs. Do that for every category -- again, we just want to be in the neighborhood. As the season progresses, you can trade and add/drop accordingly if you're ahead or behind in various categories, but right now we're just concerned with getting a solid foundation so that we just have to make small moves, not massive ones.

Back to Tulo. Assuming health, Tulowitzki is going to hit 30 home runs, have 95 RBIs, hit .300, score 90 runs and steal 10 bases or so. Maybe a little more, maybe a little less, but generally, that's what, on draft day, we have to assume he's gonna do.

So you see the three-year average at RBIs for a third-place finish is 1,063. You just rostered 95 RBIs, so now you need another 968. Most draft software will keep track of your accumulated stats; you just need to know what targets you are aiming for.

I'm a big believer in letting the draft come to you and taking the best player available. There are exceptions and we'll talk in a moment about how to determine which is the best player available, but for the most part, you are taking the best player available in a draft and adding to your point totals in each category, getting closer to your targets.

As the draft progresses, you may need to adjust. Say there is a run on speed and you feel like there is no way you can get to 187 steals, good for third place. You're looking at probably 150 steals total, which, after you consult your handy chart here, you learn is probably going to be around sixth place, good for five points. So you need three more points somewhere else. Maybe you take another bopper and try to win home runs. You take an extra closer you hadn't planned on to try to win saves.

Whatever it is, instead of reaching for some cheap speed guy who will kill your batting average and provides nothing else (like Jordan Schafer), you can build on a category you already have a lot of. Build on strength, which either will make up the points you lose in the other category or give you something to trade with later.

Same principles apply for an auction, where it's easier to avoid traps like that since you have a shot at every player. Just make sure you know what each player is worth, stats wise. I'll give you tiers in a second for overall value by position, but one thing I like to do is divide by basic stat tiers, especially for auctions.

Here's how many 30-homer guys there are. Here's how many 20-homer guys there are. Here's how many 150-strikeout guys there are.

So as you're looking at your team, and with your targets you are aware that you need, say, 40 more homers and there are at least 15 guys left with at least 20 homers (last year, 68 players hit at least 20 home runs), so you are OK if you miss out on this guy at this round. You'll get a shot next round.

That's what "Meryl" is about. Named for multiple Academy Award-winning actress Meryl Streep, who has a staggering 17 Oscar nominations. More importantly, they are for many different kinds of roles. Comedy ("Devil Wears Prada"), Romance ("Bridges of Madison County"), Drama ("Silkwood"), Inspirational ("Music of the Heart") and on and on. She's a chameleon. She's won for all sorts of different roles. She adapts (she was also nominated for "Adaptation") to the role and the character, not the other way around. Like, I love Clint Eastwood, but in every movie, he's basically Clint Eastwood, you know?

It's a little Zen-like, but the idea here is that Meryl is about being flexible and snapping up value where it happens (and it will happen) and not worrying about specific projections. But rather letting the draft come to you and building toward 80 points whichever way is most feasible. There's nothing magical or overly complicated about it. It may seem fairly obvious and in a way, it is. But as we get bombarded with a million stats and theories and blurbs of news it's easy to get overwhelmed. Understanding and remembering these simple concepts will go a long way to keeping your mind clear during draft day. Understand that the draft is only half the process and that in-season trading/free-agent acquisition will play a large part in how your team performs, in addition to how healthy it stays and, of course, how your total stats compete with everyone else's stats (and how you successfully react to that).

Can we get to the players now, please?

Some overall thoughts on this year's player pool. You hate to base something on just one year, so take it with a grain of salt, but it's worth noting that last year there were 68 players who hit at least 20 home runs and only 50 players who stole 20 bases. Here's how it broke down by position last year. If a player qualified at more than one position, I counted him for all those positions. I also counted Hanley Ramirez and Miguel Cabrera at third base -- in addition to their current shortstop (Ramirez) and first base (Cabrera) eligibility -- since that's where they'll be playing this season.

Power and Speed benchmarks by position, 2011

Overall, it's important to get speed in the middle infield. Everything's relative, of course. If you have Michael Bourn on your team, you'll be fine regardless. But since you'll (for the most part) be forced to get power at first and third, and hopefully get some at catcher and some in the outfield, you need to grab speed where you can, and that means in the middle infield. Ideally you're getting guys who do both, but when in doubt, I'll go speed up the middle because I know there are positions where my choices will come down to decent power guys versus flawed speed guys later in the process, and I much prefer it when the better player is also the best fit for my squad.

Let's go position-by-position, breaking them down by tiers; groups of players that, in essence, have about the same value, even if they compile completely different kinds of statistics. I also factor in the reliability of their health, playing time and consistency (how likely are they to put up the stats?). You like Miguel Cabrera, another guy prefers Albert Pujols. Who cares? They both rock and they're in the same tier. Joey Votto and Adrian Gonzalez are also very good, but not in the same class as Miggy or Sir Albert. So they are a tier. And so on and so forth.

This goes back to our idea of not getting too hung up on rankings, auction values or even specific projections. This is much more about understanding the depth of value at each position. Sort of position-scarcity but about the different levels of depth (or lack thereof) within each position and how that depth is broken out into groups of similarly valued players.

Simply put, you can hurt your chances of getting to that 80-point total because you're scrambling in the endgame to fill certain positional requirements when you could have avoided that with a better understanding of the player pool. As your draft (or auction) progresses, you can glance at the tier of each position and let this (along with our handy category/points chart) guide where you need to jump and where you can wait.

Let's get back to the simple idea of "What's most likely to happen?"

As you draft and you're deciding between two players, ask yourself: What's more likely to happen? When we all got together for the rankings summit, I was incredulous that the group wanted to rank Brett Lawrie many slots ahead of Kevin Youkilis at third base.

I understand Youk has injury issues and Lawrie lit it up last year. Could Youk get hurt again and it turns out Lawrie is Ryan Braun? Of course.

But what's more likely to happen? That Youkilis, whose underlying numbers all seem mostly intact and has been a great hitter for multiple seasons at the big league level, gets back to being an elite fantasy third baseman? Or that a rookie with 150 total at-bats in the majors continues to crush?
Lawrie is a hoopy frood who really knows where his towel is. I get it. And he will steal, which has value.

But let's check out two players:

Player A: .333, 23 runs, 8 HRs, 20 RBIs, 14 SB.
Player B: .160, 21 runs, 2 HRs, 5 RBIs, 6 SB.

Player A is Desmond Jennings over his first 141 at-bats last season. Player B is Jennings over the next, and final, 106 at-bats. We used this example on our podcast. Anyone can look good for 150 at-bats. It's a very small sample size. Lawrie (and Jennings) will both be very good major league players, probably as soon as this year. But you can't tell me, based on just 150 at-bats, that it's more likely that he outproduces a guy like Youkilis, or even Alex Rodriguez, whom he is also ranked ahead of.

I say it is more likely that the veteran off one bad year outproduces the hot rookie off 150 at-bats, and I'll draft accordingly.

Some more general guidelines that fall under the "what's more likely," mantra ...

• Offense before pitching. You are more likely to find good pitching on the wire than stud hitting.

• Power before speed. You are more likely to need power since, while there was more power last year than speed, it also took a lot more home runs to win than it did speed, which you can get by in with small contributions from a lot of players. You can never have too much power.

• Starters before closers and strikeout guys over control guys. You are more likely to find a stud closer than a stud starter, and a strikeout pitcher is more likely to have fantasy value than a control guy.

• Well-rounded guys over one-category studs; i.e. the 15/15 guy is better than the five-homer/30-steal guy. A guy who contributes across the board is more likely to provide more value, even if something goes wrong, than someone who is one-category dependent.

See? Simple. What's more likely to happen?

Are you more likely to get value out a guy who just had a bad year or the hot rookie that everyone covets? Think back to last year, when guys like Jacoby Ellsbury, Matt Kemp, Curtis Granderson, Josh Beckett, Jose Reyes, James Shields, Lance Berkman and Dustin Pedroia went in your draft. Generally, the answer is "later than they normally do," all because they all had one bad year.

Nothing is guaranteed, but to me, it is much more likely that guys like Carl Crawford and Hanley Ramirez bounce back than not. That's where this year's values will be found: in the big-name players who were bad last year. When my Love/Hate comes out in early March, you'll see that as a theme. Old, unsexy guys who have been productive for much of their careers but coming off sub-par seasons, over the flash-in-the-pan young guys that have everyone all excited.

In fact, check this out. There are charts for each of the past three seasons. The left side of the chart is the top 10 players taken in ESPN standard drafts according to average draft position, and the number in parentheses is where that player finished that season on our Player Rater. The right side of the chart is the reverse. The top 10 fantasy players for that season according to our rater, with their preaseason ADP in parentheses.

2009 Average Draft Position versus Final Player Rater value

2010 Average Draft Position versus Final Player Rater value

2011 Average Draft Position versus Final Player Rater value

So, pretty interesting, right? Of the top 30 players drafted the past three years (10 per year), only 16 of them wound up being a top-40 player. In other words, only 53 percent of the first-round picks the past three seasons have returned even a fourth-round value. Now look at the left-side lists, with the final Player Rater top 10. Eleven of the 30 players on those lists were drafted outside the top 40.

Those players: Greinke, Ellsbury, Vazquez, Felix, Jeter in '09, CarGo, Hamilton, Wainwright, Bautista in '10, and Ellsbury again in '11, along with Granderson. Chances are, if you had one of those guys, you won that year. CarGo was a youngster with potential, as was Felix Hernandez, and Bautista had finished the previous year strongly but was older than most breakouts. Those three exploded unexpectedly. By that I mean they were all sleepers for me and many others in the preseason, but no one expected them to be top 10. We had never seen that level of production for a full season at the major league level from these guys.

But the remaining eight guys? All were veterans who had experienced success on some level in the majors and had dropped due to one bad year, injury concerns, slower-than-expected progression, etc. Eight of 11? Old, unsexy vets. Two of 11? Sexy youngsters, as it were. And Bautista is just a crazy anomaly, a player who changed his approach midway through his career and transformed himself into the best power hitter in baseball. That doesn't happen all the time.

So, based on the past three seasons, I ask you, what's more likely to happen? The youngster goes nuts or the vet puts it together again? Two of 11, or eight of 11?

Exactly.

The exercise also is another reason to show why you should use rankings, projections and dollar values as general guidelines but not as anything hard and fast. It's a 53 percent chance you're getting the return on investment you want.

Positional tiers

My final rule of thumb, when drafting, is of course ...

A scarce position over a more plentiful one. You're more likely to find productivity at certain positions than others during the season.

Fair enough, you say, because you are the type of person who speaks to a screen, but which are the scarce positions this season?

Here are my tiers. These are not in order of my ranks, which I will release soon. And I don't want to get to into talking about specific players, sleepers and busts and the like. Pretty much everything else I write and talk about for the rest of the preseason will be about that. This is more or less about the names in tiers. If a player qualifies there, I've included him, adding Miguel Cabrera and Hanley Ramirez to the third base pool with their expected eligibility there 10 games into the season.

Finally, remember that ESPN standard leagues are 10-team mixed leagues, which means a fairly large free-agent pool. So in a league like that, I'm much more likely to take a chance on a guy who might be more risky because I know if I don't get him, it's easier to replace him.

Catcher

Tier 1: Mike Napoli, Brian McCann, Carlos Santana.
Tier 2: Matt Wieters.
Tier 3: Alex Avila, Miguel Montero, Buster Posey, Joe Mauer.
Tier 4: Everyone else. (Remember, ESPN standard leagues use only one catcher.)

Overall thoughts: I like catcher this year, especially for one-catcher leagues. I wouldn't reach for a catcher this year, as I'm fine with anyone in the first three tiers and there's lots of potential sleepers not listed here either. Wieters is a sneaky source of runs scored, incidentally. More on runs scored in a bit.

First Base

Tier 1: Miguel Cabrera, Albert Pujols.
Tier 2: Joey Votto, Adrian Gonzalez.
Tier 3: Prince Fielder.
Tier 4: Paul Konerko, Mark Teixeira.
Tier 5: Eric Hosmer, Mike Napoli, Lance Berkman, Michael Morse, Carlos Santana, Freddie Freeman (I like him a lot this year) and Ryan Howard (this will change once we know where he is health-wise).
Tier 6: Michael Young, Michael Cuddyer, Adam Lind, Gaby Sanchez, Joe Mauer (assume he'll qualify there at some point), Mark Reynolds, Carlos Pena, Edwin Encarnacion, Ike Davis.
Tier 7: Everyone else. Upside guys with questions like Mark Trumbo (have to see how his playing time shakes out with Pujols there and Kendrys supposedly healthy. There's talk of outfield, we'll see) or Kendrys Morales (health) Justin Morneau (same) and upside guys like Lucas Duda, Brandon Belt, Mitch Moreland, Mike Carp, Anthony Rizzo, etc. There's value to be had out of this tier, but it is fraught with danger.

Overall thoughts: More shallow this year than most; you're gonna want a big bopper early. I'm not comfortable with anyone lower than tier four as my first baseman. And if you are in an NL-only league, it gets ugly quick. After Votto, you're in the Morse-Berkman-Freeman area ... none of whom are proven commodities except Berkman, and who knows how healthy he can stay or what the offense is capable of without Pujols anchoring it. If I am in an NL-only league and don't get Votto, I'm waiting. That said, I feel you'll do just fine filling the corner infield spot with a first baseman; those tiers are fairly deep this year as there are a lot of lower-end first basemen I like.

Third Base

Tier 1: Miguel Cabrera, Jose Bautista.
Tier 2: Hanley Ramirez, Evan Longoria, Adrian Beltre.
Tier 3: David Wright, Ryan Zimmerman, Pablo Sandoval.
Tier 4: Aramis Ramirez, Michael Young, Kevin Youkilis, Brett Lawrie, Alex Rodriguez.
Tier 5: Ryan Roberts, Mark Reynolds, Martin Prado, Emilio Bonifacio, Edwin Encarnacion, David Freese.
Tier 6: Mike Moustakas, Chase Headley, Lonnie Chisenhall, Chipper Jones, Daniel Murphy.
Tier 7: Everyone else.

Overall thoughts: Much deeper than expected, especially when you add Miggy and HanRam to it, as both should qualify there within the first two weeks of the season or so. Fairly solid all the way through tier four, so you can wait a little (not a ton, but a little) on third base. Just remember, as I stated with first base, you'll probably want to fish elsewhere for your corner man if people start reaching for third basemen.

Second Base

Tier 1: Robinson Cano, Dustin Pedroia, Ian Kinsler.
Tier 2: Ben Zobrist, Dan Uggla, Rickie Weeks, Brandon Phillips, Howard Kendrick, Chase Utley.
Tier 3: Ryan Roberts, Dustin Ackley, Neil Walker, Danny Espinosa, Jemile Weeks, Jason Kipnis.
Tier 4: Aaron Hill, Daniel Murphy, Kelly Johnson.
Tier 5: Everyone else.

Overall thoughts: I like the selection this year. Much more than in years past, as even guys in tier three -- like Ackley or Roberts -- could potentially be very useful. As much as I love Cano, I don't see him as a mid first-rounder the way others have him. Second base is deeper than you think, though the lower tier guys aren't as enticing to me, so while I feel you can wait a bit on second base, I wouldn't wait much longer on filling my middle-infield slot.

Shortstop

Tier 1: Troy Tulowitzki.
Tier 2: Jose Reyes, Hanley Ramirez.
Tier 3: Elvis Andrus, Starlin Castro, Jimmy Rollins, Asdrubal Cabrera.
Tier 4: Alexei Ramirez, J.J. Hardy, Derek Jeter, Jhonny Peralta, Erick Aybar, Dee Gordon.
Tier 5: Stephen Drew, Emilio Bonifacio, Ian Desmond, Yunel Escobar, Alcides Escobar, Marco Scutaro, Cliff Pennington, Jason Bartlett.
Tier 6: Everyone else.

Overall thoughts: Another position that is deeper than you think. If I can get a starting shortstop from the first three tiers and then get my middle infielder from tier four (or from second base) I'm happy. This is also a place to find some cheap speed late, with guys like Bonifacio, Desmond, Escobar and Pennington, among others.

Outfield

Tier 1: Matt Kemp, Jose Bautista, Ryan Braun (if not suspended).

Tier 2: Justin Upton, Jacoby Ellsbury, Carlos Gonzalez.

Tier 3: Mike Stanton, Andrew McCutchen, Matt Holliday, Curtis Granderson, Michael Bourn.

Tier 4: Jay Bruce, Nelson Cruz, Josh Hamilton, Hunter Pence, Ben Zobrist, Ryan Braun (if 50-game suspension is upheld), Alex Gordon, Carl Crawford.

Tier 5: Shane Victorino, Lance Berkman, Corey Hart, Michael Morse, Adam Jones, Jayson Werth, Ichiro Suzuki.

Tier 6: Chris Young, Drew Stubbs, B.J. Upton, Brett Gardner, Coco Crisp, Desmond Jennings, Michael Cuddyer, Howard Kendrick, Jason Heyward, Carlos Beltran.

Tier 7: Andre Ethier, Cameron Maybin, Shin-Soo Choo, Nick Markakis, Torii Hunter, Logan Morrison, Melky Cabrera, Nick Swisher, Jeff Francoeur, Angel Pagan, Carlos Lee, Alex Rios.

Tier 8: Emilio Bonifacio, Martin Prado, Josh Willingham, Jason Kubel, Lucas Duda, Yoenis Cespedes, Matt Joyce, Carlos Quentin.

Tier 9: Brennan Boesch, Mitch Moreland, Mike Carp, Peter Bourjos, Delmon Young, Alfonso Soriano, Brandon Belt, Dexter Fowler, J.D. Martinez, Allen Craig, Michael Brantley, Jason Bay, Aubrey Huff, Austin Jackson.

Tier 10: Everyone else.

Overall thoughts: It gets ugly quick. Here's where your biggest offensive scarcity is, especially considering you play five of them. So many question marks, starting in tier two. Is Ellsbury's power legit? Which is the real CarGo, 2010 or 2011? What about Granderson's power against lefties? Is that for real? What effect does Pujols leaving have on Holliday? And then we get to tier four, the "can they stay healthy?" tier. What happened with Crawford last year? Will Braun be rusty? And what is he like without Fielder? And is Gordon for real? The deeper you go, the more questions I have. So if all other things are equal when choosing, go outfielder early. And with so many more outfielders than any other position, this is where you will shape what stats you get and what you will need elsewhere, so pay careful attention to what kind of production you're drafting in the outfield.

Starting Pitching

Tier 1: Roy Halladay, Justin Verlander, Clayton Kershaw.

Tier 2: Cliff Lee, Felix Hernandez, Jered Weaver, Zack Greinke, Cole Hamels, Dan Haren, Tim Lincecum, CC Sabathia, David Price, Jon Lester.

Tier 3: Ian Kennedy, Matt Cain, James Shields, C.J. Wilson, Yovani Gallardo, Stephen Strasburg, Ricky Romero, Matt Moore, Madison Bumgarner, Chris Carpenter, Daniel Hudson.

Tier 4: Michael Pineda, Adam Wainwright, Mat Latos, Matt Garza, Josh Beckett, Neftali Feliz, Jeremy Hellickson, Jordan Zimmermann, Tommy Hanson, Shaun Marcum, Brandon Beachy, Ubaldo Jimenez.

Tier 5 (the high risk, high reward tier): Josh Johnson, Max Scherzer, Yu Darvish, Gio Gonzalez, Cory Luebke, Anibal Sanchez, Tim Hudson, Doug Fister, Johnny Cueto, Jaime Garcia, Hiroki Kuroda, Wandy Rodriguez, Brandon Morrow, Scott Baker, Ervin Santana, Ted Lilly, Jhoulys Chacin, Alexi Ogando.

Tier 6: Brandon McCarthy, Colby Lewis, Roy Oswalt, Tim Stauffer, Gavin Floyd, John Danks, Jonathan Sanchez, Francisco Liriano, Johan Santana, Clay Buchholz, Mike Minor, Ryan Dempster, Chad Billingsley, Edwin Jackson, Ricky Nolasco, Bartolo Colon, Jake Peavy, Ryan Vogelsong, R.A. Dickey.

Tier 7: Everyone else.

Overall thoughts: In a league as shallow as a 10-team mixed league, you can make an argument for tons of guys to be in tier six, but I had to cut the line somewhere. You'll be able to play the matchups and stream quite a bit as you make your way through the season. Starting pitching is obviously deep, but that also means you need better pitching to win.

Again, we head back to our handy chart and look at what the average winning team did in pitching categories last year compared to an average of what it took to win the previous two seasons ('09-10).

Average Statistics required to win a category

Every category was that much harder to win except for, well, wins, and that is likely attributable to the fact that, while the number of baserunners and runs allowed can fluctuate from season to season, the number of wins available is limited to the number of games played, and that hasn't changed. As a result of pitching getting better, I want at least one pitcher from the first two tiers to anchor my staff, and hopefully I'll get two. That'll provide a lot of cushion, especially if you go cheap on closers, as I like to do in shallow mixed leagues. I will usually grab one starter in the first four or five rounds and then another around Rounds 8-10 and then not again until I've filled my offense. I will wait as long as possible to get closers because saves always come into the league.

I know there are some people who advocate getting the "sure thing" closer because they have lower ERAs and WHIPs and can get (in some cases) a nice amount of strikeouts. The problem is, except for Mariano Rivera, I'm not convinced there's such a thing as a sure-fire closer. Ask anyone who drafted Brian Wilson or Joakim Soria last year. In fact, check this out. Here's the top 10 closers last year in terms of average draft position, and where each finished the year among relievers on our Player Rater.

1. Brian Wilson: Finished 21st
2. Heath Bell: 9th
3. Mariano Rivera: 4th
4. Joakim Soria: 33rd
5. Neftali Feliz: 20th
6. Carlos Marmol: 27th
7. Jonathan Papelbon: 10th
8. Francisco Rodriguez: 25th
9. Jonathan Broxton: 211th(!)
10. Joe Nathan: 81st

Look at that. Of the 10 highest-drafted closers, only three finished in the top 10. Three! That was just one year, but I'm pretty sure I don't need to spend a lot of time to tell you there's tons of turnover at closer. I do this exercise every season, and every year there are players that disappoint or wildly exceed their average draft picks at all positions ... but none with as much regularity or as much turnover as closers. I'm not even doing tiers. In 10-team mix leagues, do not pay for saves. Wait for the bargains. Always and forever. So if you want to spend an early draft pick on a closer in a mixed league, I'm not your guy. I'll rank them when I release my rankings, but in a year when I am advising a Zen-like approach where you embrace the "most likely to happen," you'll be grabbing closers late.

The Not-So-Super-Secret Stats That Win Leagues

While there are many ways to win, when you look at the data about all the winning teams over the past three seasons, one offensive category consistently dominates the winner's portfolio of stats:

Runs scored.

The average winning team in each of the last three years in ESPN standard leagues had more points from runs scored than any other offensive category. (Same, incidentally, for strikeouts in pitching.) A quick glance at my dumb little league where we drafted from last year's stats shows that my winning team did, in fact, have the most runs scored. And had the team with the second-most runs scored (Aizer) used my fairly obvious pitching staff (Verlander, Kershaw, Kimbrel) instead of using Lincecum, he'd have finished second overall.

Runs scored is always an underrated stat. We're more impressed by big homers and big RBI totals or big batting averages. But runs, while not flashy, are a product of good baseball. You get at-bats and you get on base? You're going to score some runs, along with helping in the other categories, because the more at-bats you get, the more likely you are to get a hit, drive in a run, crank one out of the park or swipe a base. And while you can get multiple RBIs or even multiple steals from one at-bat, you can score only one run at a time. That is also true for home runs, of course, but not every batter is a home run hitter. But every batter is a potential run scorer.

The teams that score the most runs are the teams that are getting on base the most and generally getting the most at-bats. You get the most at-bats and get on base the most, generally good things are going to happen. Super simple. Not sure what to get with a particular draft pick, when it's down to going with the guy who might steal five bags or the guy who might hit 10 homers ... just go for the guy most likely to have the most at-bats and a good on-base percentage. Say it with me: When in doubt, what's most likely to happen? And over the past few seasons, logically, those who pile up the most runs wind up winning their leagues.

The Not-So-Super-Secret Final Ingredient For Success

Time. Like anything else, the more time you put in, the better your chances at success. With jobs or school and kids and significant others ... time is hard to come by. And a lot of what we do here is take the time to research and think and then summarize all of that in articles or rankings or podcasts ... because you don't have the time. But there is no substitute for putting the work in. Make the time for the leagues you've joined, and only join the number of leagues you have the time for.

But TMR, I don't play straight Roto, I play head-to-head!

Head-to-head leagues continue to gain in popularity, and I have good news for you, sailor. I would use all these theories in terms of building your team the exact same way in head-to-head, but I would make some tweaks.

In general, in head-to-head, it's all about the weekly matchup, obviously. So pitching becomes key. I still like to have an ace anchor, but much more than in a season-long league, you're gonna play the matchups. I wait even longer on saves as well. It's a week and such a short window that even the best closers may not get more than one save chance, if that. Take Mariano Rivera, the most consistent closer in fantasy. He got his 13th save came on May 10 last season. No. 14 came six appearences later, including one blown save and one non-save-opportunity 12th-inning loss, on June 1. That said, I tend to have as many relievers as I can and will fill my bench with only pitchers. On days when your starters aren't going, throw in good middle relievers who can help keep ERA and WHIP down, strike out a couple of batters and might even vulture a win or a save; often the difference in head-to-head.

Head-to-head each versus head-to-head most: The most important distinction in assembling a head-to-head team is how the wins are calculated. In "H2H Each," you face off against one opponent each week and compete in various categories, roto-style. Each win in a category counts as a win. So, if you play with standard 5x5 categories, let's say you sweep all the pitching and win home runs and RBIs. You'd win that week 7-3 and that would be your record. Let's say you did it two weeks in a row. Now you're 14-6. However, in "H2H Most," in the same scenario, instead of your record being 7-3 (you won seven of the 10 categories) your record would 1-0. And then 2-0.

My strategy here is the same spirit as trying to finish third in every category in a traditional rotisseries league. You don't need to win every week 10-0 in "H2H Each"; going 7-3 every week will get you into the playoffs. And in "H2H Most" leagues, 6-4 will play every week. So I prefer to blow off certain categories and just try to make sure I win those that I set out to dominate. In that scenario, I blow off starting pitching. Grab Mo Rivera, Craig Kimbrel, Drew Storen and some other elite closers early. The only time you'll see me pay for saves in 10-team mixed leagues. Then, fill out the rest of your staff with elite middle guys, like Mike Adams, Tyler Clippard and Jonny Venters. Those types. The idea here is that you'll win saves by sheer volume of opportunity, and ERA and WHIP by keeping both of those really low. That's three. Then all you need is three more offensive categories in H2H Most, four in H2H Each, and you're in business.

So how do you get there? If you are in a "H2H Most" league, you should be cornering the market on speed/top of the lineup guys. You want batting average, runs scored and steals. Those are the categories that are harder to come by and will be more likely to win on a consistent weekly basis, especially if you have those guys at every position. You know the saying: speed doesn't slump. With those three categories added to ERA, WHIP and saves, you should be set up for plenty of 6-4 wins.

If you're in a "H2H Each" league, the theory is the same on pitching, but since you can wait on your middle guys, you should be loading up on offense, using ADP to determine when you need to jump in to get the good closers you want. You need to crush offense and then win two of the pitching categories you're invested in, or four of five on offense and all three pitching ones. Both work.

Of course, true to the Zen approach, there are multiple ways to win the league; if you go all offense until you're full, you can go the other way with your pitching. If you don't have acquisition limits, just blow off saves, ERA and WHIP. You'll take wins and strikeouts by sheer volume, streaming as many starters as possible every day, and crushing with your offense.

The biggest thing in head-to-head is position scarcity. If you're going for the all steals/runs/high average guys theory, for example, you need to know how many of those guys are at each position and grab them before the well runs dry.

The final type of league is head-to-head points, where you get points for stats (one point for a single, two for a double, etc.) and most points wins the weekly matchup. A small percentage of leagues will play for total season points, but the principle is the same: you want as many points as possible and you don't care how your players come by them. This is another place where position scarcity comes into play. You don't need to worry about specific stats; it's just most points, wherever they come from. So you just need to make sure you grab the positions where point scorers are scarce. And this is a place where it's more important than ever to know your league's scoring system. In a points league, having a guy like Mark Reynolds may not hurt you ... unless you count negative points for strikeouts. Conversely, a lot of points leagues award points for bases on balls. So a guy like Nick Swisher last year (.260 average but .374 OBP) was much more valuable in this format than he was a standard roto league. Again, use projections you trust and figure out what players will score in your scoring system. Getting in the ballpark is all you need -- like all head-to-head leagues, it's all about matchups and you'll play the waiver wire a lot -- but this will help you identify what players are worth in your league and where the position scarcity is. This is the league where standard rankings will deviate the most. Don't let that bother you. If your scoring system says that Craig Kimbrel is the most valuable player in the league, then go ahead. Take that closer first overall.

Enough with the head-to-head already. And I'm a little TMR-ed out. How 'bout some more theories?

Can do. This section is mostly repeated from previous columns, but it is still worth reviewing. So here are some popular theories that you can either adopt for yourself or need to be able to recognize if one of your opponents decides to.

The LIMA plan: Invented by Ron Shandler and named for unlikely late-'90s fantasy ace Jose Lima, LIMA stands "Low-Investment Mound Aces." Basically, with a $260 salary cap, you spend only $60 on pitching, $30 of that on a closer. The idea is to get a bunch of pitchers whom your competition frowns upon but whose underlying numbers indicate that they've been unlucky to this point, are primed for breakouts or are simply undervalued because they have no name recognition. If you get enough of those guys, at least a few of them are bound to break out, and your investment is low enough that you won't have to think twice about throwing back a guy who doesn't work out in favor of a good waiver-wire pickup.

Then, with $200 for offense, you load up there, dominating all the offensive categories. You have to really know pitching and pay close attention to the trends all season long, but it has proved very effective to those who know how to play it. It's also a great strategy for head-to-head.

The ZIMA plan: This is my twist on Ron's LIMA plan. Basically, it's the same thing; spend most of your money on offense, then fill in some cheap, low-risk pitching, mixing in starters and high-upside relievers (guys who could close). The difference is that in my version, you spend $30 of the $60 on one upper-tier elite starter (such as Roy Halladay or Clayton Kershaw) or two upper-level starters -- (say, Jon Lester and David Price) for about that $30-$35 and don't pay for saves at all, looking to snag those off the wire later and hoping that one or two of your high-upside relief guys turns into a closer.

The MRI theory: This is fantasy editor Pierre Becquey's invention, and I've used it very successfully in various leagues. The idea here is that you get two high-strikeout aces for your staff (last season, in an NL-only league, I had Tim Lincecum and Clayton Kershaw), then you spend the rest of your money (or late-round draft picks) on middle-relief guys. All need to have high strikeout rates and preferably have the potential to close. Kenley Jansen is this year's poster boy. Guys like Vinnie Pestano or Tyler Clippard are smart plays. (I always add one twist here: I'll be willing to go to low-double digits if a decent middle-of-the-pack closer is available; think Matt Capps or Chris Perez.) You're going to dominate in ERA and WHIP thanks to the mix of your aces and the fact that your middle relievers' ERA and WHIP will be a lot more valuable to your squad because you're pitching so few innings.

That allows you to Maximize your Relief Innings, hence "MRI." Once you've laid out your ERA/WHIP cushion, you can go fishing for starters later in the season to pad your wins and strikeouts (where you'll be in the middle of the pack, thanks to your high strikeouts-per-nine-innings rates) while knowing exactly what kind of punishment your ratios can take. Since middle-relief guys are pretty cheap, you should be able spend a lot of money on offense.

Modified Labadini: The Labadini Plan, as it is known, is named after Larry Labadini, who first tried it in a national competition in 1996. Of his $260 budget, he spent $251 on offense and just $9 (or $1 per player) on pitching. This is extreme, obviously, but I do believe you can do a modified version of this, especially in our standard 10-team mixed leagues. The idea is that you way undervalue pitching and spend, say, $30 to $40 of your $260 on pitching. (Or don't take a starter until at least Round 12.)

That's because in a mixed league with only 10 or 12 teams, there will be lots of quality starting pitching both late (and cheap) in the draft and available during the season on the waiver wire.

If you do this, you must nail offense and be the kind of person who works the waiver wire very well. But considering I already feel you don't need to pay for saves, this definitely can work. A subset version of this is ...

... Streaming pitchers: Again, the idea is that you have both a fairly large free-agent pool and the ability to change your roster daily. Or at least add multiple people every week. This works best in head-to-head formats, but the idea is that you just play the matchups every day, grabbing junk pitchers who have favorable matchups off the waiver wire. You have a constant turnover of pitchers, as every day you go with whomever has the best matchup. This really works only in mixed leagues and leagues that do not have transactional limits.

Having said that, the more active you are definitely has an effect on how well you do. Once more, we sent the great Mike Polikoff into the league manager tools to find out whether the number of transactions an owner did corresponded with how well he finished. Not surprisingly, the more active the owner, the higher he finished. The draft-and-stand-pat approach is a pretty quick way to get to last place.

No One Knows Anything: There are many names for this, but I named it after the famous William Goldman saying. This is an extreme version of what I've preached throughout this article. The idea is to totally ignore the cheat sheets and dollar values because you know they'll be totally different at the end of the year. When you want a player, you bid whatever it takes to get him. Period. Never worry about what others are doing or what the correct price is. Decide who you want on your team and get those players no matter what. Obviously, you can't do all studs -- you'll run out of money and you're probably not drafting against morons -- but the idea is that you can't really predict that a $45 Hanley Ramirez will tank or that a $1 Alex Avila will crush. Prices (or draft round) are really only relevant on draft day, then only in determining the market against your fellow bidders/drafters. NOKA says forget the other drafters, get whom you want and hope they do what you expect them to do. Like I said, I think projections and rankings should be used loosely, but NOKA suggests you throw them all away.

Draft day: The TMR's 10 Rules of Drafting

This section is also returned from last season with a few timely updates.

OK, it's game day, baby. Time for the big show. Don't bother cramming on the way in or anything stupid like that. It's like a test. You know it or you don't. You're pregnant or you're not. You want to project an air of confidence -- even if you don't feel it. Make others sweat, be it in person or through chatter in your draft engine. That's my first draft day hint.

1. Never show fear. Just be confident. You don't have to be cocky or a jerk. But occasionally sighing a breath of relief when the owner before you picks as if to say, "Glad you didn't grab the correct guy," will do wonders to rattle your weaker-willed leaguemates.