What about the the "there are no good players that I want at the current ADP and any of the guys I am targeting I can get 2-3 rounds later" reach. I think that reach is pretty justifiable. Brett Gardner is a great example of this. He is currently going around pick 130 but I think he will have a much better year than all of the guys in 100-130 range. So when I get to pick 100 and there is no one I really want, I can either waste a pick or reach mightily for Gardner.

Now you post it. Geez. So annoying. OK, then, here's my argument (again):

The only important thing in FB drafting is getting players who meet or exceed your expectations. And the best way to do that is to load up on 30/100 sluggers in first few rounds. They are both the most valuable commodity in the game and the most predictable. You simply cannot win your league without at least one. If, on the other hand, you snag three or four, you could dominate. (Consider there were only 15 such players in 2010.)

Of the 34 hitters who went 30/100 over the last two years -- baseball had 19 of them in 2009 -- 24 had reached the feat previously. Of the 10 newcomers, only five could be considered out-of-left-field shockers: Bautista and CarGo last year and Hill, Lind and Morales in 2009. The rest -- Votto, Hart, Ethier, Zimmerman and Reynolds -- had gotten close enough previously that their joining the 30/100 club was not unpredictable.

Not surprisingly, these players go early. You can draft elite speed much later -- look how available guys like Pierre and Davis are (you also have 50-steal potential in Gardner and Figgins) -- but reliable power disappears quick.

By the way, if there are any 30/100 newcomers this year, my guess they will come from among the following players: Stanton, Alvarez, LaPorta, Arencibia, Snider or Kubel.

Do not draft any starting pitcher in the first six rounds. It's just not smart -- unless you're in a league with complete games as a stat, in which case you might consider taking Halladay. The reason for this is simple. Pitchers are maddeningly unreliable. In most drafts, a starter taken in the first six rounds has only about a 50 percent chance of being successful, by which I mean providing stats that meet or exceed expectations. Greinke, Hamels and Verlander are just three examples of guys who've been drafted very early over the last couple of years and greatly underperformed.

The flip side is that there are plenty of aces that can be had in rounds 7-15 or later: Ubaldo, Price, Liriano and Weaver all went in that range last year, not to mention the likes of Latos, Cahill and Jaime Garcia -- who went largely undrafted. The more SPs you draft, the more likely you'll find your ace.

Pitchers are also more heavily valued on what they did the previous year. Can anyone say with certainty if Weaver or Jonathan Sanchez will have the better FB statline in 2011? They have quite similar career numbers. The only quantitative difference is that Sanchez is available much later in most drafts.

So it's power in first six rounds -- and SP in quantity in the later rounds.

You can't draft elite players at all your positions. So pick a slot or two you think can be filled with a later rounder -- and target the guy you like. For me, this year, it's second base. The injury problems facing early rounders Utley, Kinsler and Pedroia make me nervous. There are only two reliable 30/100 candidates at second base, Cano and Uggla, so if you miss out on them, don't panic. Figure out which of the intriguing, later options you like best -- Hill (36/103 in 2009), Beckham, Walker, Rayburn and Sean Rodriguez come to mind -- and make sure you get your guy.




Do not draft any pitcher in the first six rounds.

I wrote a long and reasoned argument about why reaching is not important -- and it didn't get posted. Thanks a lot, guys. Never again.

Reaching can be OK. Working on hunches can work well, or it could not work. If it doesn't work, particularly on a rookie who doesn't end up playing much or at all, there is a nice large free agent pool full of players to replace them with. No big deal if you are using your bottom 3 draft picks there......

A cousin to the Overreaction To Positional Scarcity Reach is the "Hey, you just took who I wanted" reach, which often leads you to fill that position with a guy from the next tier that you could have had 2 rounds later. Right after you click "Draft" you realize you could have had a nice 3rd SP instead.

i took juan pierre in the 5th rd and morneau in the 3rd...eat my @#$%!!

I hope you guys don't get paid by the word...some of these articles are downright flimsy, depth-wise.

We forgot the " If I dont grab him now I wont get him reach". I see it every year and have also been a culprit as well. For example, I had the 5th pick in my football league this year. To make things interesting we add receptions to our mix. With the 5th pick I grabbed Andre Johnson ahead of some really key players. I waited till round 4 and grabbed Schaub for the double bubble. I guess I dont have to tell anyone I ended up in 9th out of ten teams. This year I have the fifth pick and cant stop thinking of Adrian Gonzalez there. Is that a reach, absolutely. But he wont be there at 16 either.
Another mistake I see especially in baseball is the player you let slip because hes on a team you already own a few players from. For example I know a guy who drafted Votto, Phillips, and Bruce. A lot of guys knocked him for his choice and proclaimed his team bad. I heard a ton of " what do you do on Cincy's days off" or " what happens days Cincy gets a goos egg". But if these guys all pan out the days they play he should be fine.

Adrian Gonzalez & Bautista could both be 50HR guys this year.

Words to the wise for sure. But it's still hard. Take Bard. Prospective owner says to himself/herself "OK, Paps is going to flame out sometime this year, probably sooner than later, and then I'll have a stud closer on a stud team and I'll have got him for, well, not nothing, but (in my case I'm looking at him in) a 15th round selection." So we talk ourselves into it. Runs on positions can also be daunting. If all of a sudden Starlin Castro, who you'd been secretly waiting until the 12th round to select is already gone in the 6th, what are you gonna do? Take Desmond in the 7th or risk your life with Yunel Escobar?

That's why doing a few mocks is really helpful---I can try out different strategies and get a feel for what seems to work.

Could not agree more. Once your main core is set (anywhere from rounds 8-10+), I'd argue it's VITAL to reach for a guy with unproven MLB talent over the older guys. Obvious case in point: my league last year had Torii Hunter go round 9, while Cargo went 13th. As long as you're not depending on immediate production from guys in these later rounds, I'll always "reach" for the Gardner's, Rasmus's, Stanton's, Stubb's, Tabata's of today over the Abreu's, Granderson's, Guerrero's or Lee's (both of them) of today.

Some classic other reaches:

1 - The Look How Smart I am Reach - Similar to the Buzz-Rookie or Improvement reaches. Usually done in a draft with friends where someone wants to show how savvy they are by drafting a lesser known player. Usually doesn't pan out, because again at their best they justify the pick and at worst you've gotten bad value.

2 - Keeper League Reach - Anyone in a keeper league has played with a player who never wins because they constantly reach for young players and never draft the vets you need to win the league.

3 - Breakout Campaign Reach - 1 year wonders often wind up as first round picks. Another poster already described this one, but it's one I will always stay away from.

And the exact opposite:

The Post Hype Sleeper - Always nice to pick someone up the year after the buzz when they under perform. Sometimes a completely explainable injury or them simply being hyped at 21-22 and just maturing leads to natural improvement you would expect, but everyone is gun shy and let's them slip too low because they still have a "bad taste in their mouth" from how the disappointed the year before.

Here's the biggest reach of all: You're actually breathing.

Life itself is one big gamble. You take your life into your hands every time you get out of bed. Baseball is no exception. You may die at any fraction of a second, and the previous year's big winner may become the next year's biggest bust in that same amount of time. Recognize that you have no control over this universe, but you can at least make some educated guesses by gathering in as much information as you can; I'm not talking about dollar values but projected stats from many sources. Crunch your numbers, make your picks based on those numbers, and remember that life, like baseball, is always a gamble: Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, and there's not a @#$% thing you can do but try your best.

'Nuff said.

Now this is a sooth saying:

~ every time you draft a catcher, you are reaching ~

I tell you the truth.

I've noticed that people are generally afraid to eat that last piece of pizza, therefore you can take the "wait until it comes to you" approach and then POUNCE on it!!!

Some of the biggest reaches I see are fantasy columnists hyping prospects, then writing a story telling the masses not to buy the hype.

I'm with you on Bautista and Gonzalez, but Votto has has three solid major league years, one awesome, but the other two, very, very good.

I think a big problem is the "last year's breakout superstar reach." How many times has someone had a breakout superstar year only for it to turn into a career year in hindsight? How many of you made the mistake of overpaying for Andrew Jones in 2006? These guys need to do it again before we can believe it's for real. Joey Votto, Carlos Gonzalez, and Jose Bautista are not smart first or second round picks this year. They very well could perform up to first round status again this year, but those earliest picks are better spent on stars with great track records.

As in RL and in Fantasy balance is the key. You want to anchor your team with some established vets who are not over 31. Then you can take chances with older players and younger players. Any player over 31 is as risky as a 24 yr old 2nd yr man in my opinion. Injury and just plain losing it are very common for players that age. So the 31 all star may well become the 32 yr old solid player while the 25 year old solid guy becomes the all star.

If your anchor players mostly stay healthy it's usually fairly easy to replace chances that didn't pan out and injured players with rookies and surprise players who were on nobodies radar when draft time came around. Ryan Braun and Corey Hart both powered a championship run for me as rookies. Pablo Sandoval as a rookie was a mainstay of my offense on one team. If your vet heavy your going to be injury heavy and players over 31 in most roles are more dangerous picks than rookies. Few hitters are productive past 34 and it's a rare player who's productive past 36. Most of them are in the hall of fame or were prolific PEDs users. So your 33 year old SS is a very risky pick. One I'd offset with a 25 yr old up and coming SS. Picking a SP over 32 is begging for injury if their name isn't Halladay.

Baseball is all about risk management and so is your draft. You mitigate risks well and you'll have a leg up in the season. If your lucky and those vet players you picked mostly stay healthy and productive you are. If you gamble well and through a combination of luck skill and a sharp eye for rookies you'll do well. What I see in most leagues is a few teams that draft nothing but vets. Pick up almost nothing but vets off the wire. They usually don't do poorly but they normally also finish in the middle of the pack. So I'd say the above article is not so much a lesson in winning but a lesson in mediocraty. How to not lose but also not win. Winning means taking chances. You can bet money there are two other teams using the safe vet strategy and if they pick before you do then they'll be one step ahead/above you all season long. If you take good risks, balance them with a core of safer picks then your a whole lot more likely to be sitting at the top than if you play it safe. Even if you finish near the bottom at least it was an exciting ride. Just like in RL a team full of vets is a team full of injuries.. A team full of under performers. They'll not hurt you but they won't take you to the league championship very often either. You have to "reach" if you want that edge. You have to have a stable core team for reaching to do you any good. That is the balance you have to strike.

Some good info here, but the blog hints that projecting an increase for a player like Jay Bruce is a mistake. Each case is different, but that's a pretty darn conservative way to look at things.

Below are the fantastic numbers Bruce Almighty put up after the break last year as a 23 year old.

Post-All Star - AB's 186, R 30, HR 15, RBI 34, Avg .306, OBA .376, SLG .575, OPS .951

The above sample size is a limited size and projecting 600 ab's at that pace would be a big mistake. Even considering a horrible month of July as you should, Bruce's stats for all of 2010 stack up pretty nicely.

2010 - AB's 509, R 80, HR 25, RBI 70, AVG .281, OBA .353, SLG .493, OPS .846

The bottom line is that past and recent history suggest that Jay Bruce is starting to figure out life in the Majors and is a good bet to improve as a 24 year old. Mistake or not, I'm expecting a moderate increase in production and will draft accordingly as the potential reward is greater than the perceived risk.

Don't forget the risk of letting the opposition cash in on a player you let fall too far.

Great article. Reaching is the main strategy for getting ahead in fantasy, but it also destroys fantasy teams. If you draft someone based on what they COULD do rather than what they've done, then you are forced to hold on to them because there's always that thought in the back of your mind that they're not playing at their full potential. And you know that if you drop them someone else will pick them up and get that upside for free. This especially includes the oft injured, big name players (like Ian Kinsler) that aren't droppable but waste space on your roster while they sit on their potential on your bench. This is what truly defines the great fantasy team that still manages to lose every year. This year, my draft strategy is to specifically target the few players who aren't reaches. The proven production, healthy players who know how to play ball. The guys that you can build a team around. I'll save my reaching for free agent pick ups during the season when they're free.

The one reach that works in my opinion though: the 3rd year starting pitcher reach. It's the perfect mix of huge upside without the huge price, of youth with enough experience to excel. I'm looking at you, Tommy Hanson.

Well done....although the occasional "screw you reach" is fun too!

How about the injury-bounce-back reach? Surely people buying Josh Hamilton are expecting him for @#$% near 162 games, and not 120.
See also: Dustin Pedroia, Kevin Youkilis, Jacoby Ellsbury... Uh, any Red Sox player not named Jon, Jonathan, or Clay.

Fun column, Pianoman

I've noticed since we tend to game with the same group of guys year after year, there's a If-You-Can't-Beat-'Em-Join-Em reach. When you lose in the playoffs because some guy went on a 5 HR, .600 Avg tear over the last week of the season, you add that sucker in the value rounds and lament it the rest of the season.

Also the classic Contract Year reach, where people in their walk year get drafted a round or two higher cause people think they will put up monster numbers for a new contract