keyboard_arrow_uptop

We, at Baseball Prospectus, have been talking about first basemen for a while now (three days and change to be exact, depending on when you are reading this) and the party continues to rage on. Yet before we rage, we shall calibrate—since rankings aren’t useful without knowing what you’re reading. The list you are about to read here presupposes a 16-team standard (read: 5×5 roto) dynasty format, in which there are no contracts/salaries, players can be kept forever, and owners have minor-league farm systems in which to hoard prospects. So feel free to adjust this as necessary for your individual league, whether it’s moving non-elite prospects without 2016 ETAs down if you don’t have separate farm teams or moving lower-risk, lower-reward players up in deeper mixed or -only formats.

The position is nearly the polar opposite of the catcher dredge from last week. It’s deep, it’s wonderful at the top—there’s a lot to be happy about. There are even more first base prospects than usual (not that there are that many). Some of the depth causes may cause some surprising rankings—the larger the clump of deeper mixed league options, the lower some of my least favorite of the group will fall. That’s because if you own one and he’s bad, there’s another just waiting for you on the waiver wire or cheaply through trade. Whereas the few prospects here that have the potential to be top-15 options one day are less common. If you want to feel young, go to where the young people are.

The star power of this group awaits. Your list begins here, in the least surprising of places:

1) Paul Goldschmidt, Arizona Diamondbacks

Not only is Goldy a slam-dunk to sit at the top of this list, but he’s so valuable right now that he gives some of the brightest and youngest stars of this generation a run for their money across other positions. In other words:

2) Anthony Rizzo, Chicago Cubs

3) Jose Abreu, Chicago White Sox

4) Miguel Cabrera, Detroit Tigers

I’m on record saying that I don’t think Rizzo is quite as good as he’s currently being made out to be, and I’m not convinced he’s either a first rounder right now, or will be one over the remainder of his career. However, the only other guy here who is right now is Cabrera, and Rizzo has more than six years on him in the right direction. Abreu, on the other hand, is nearly four years younger than Cabrera and is not enough of an upgrade this instant to trade the end of a peak for the prime of one. Abreu will spend the next four years in U.S. Cellular and his contact rate improved during his second year in the United States. That leaves him with the potential for some .300-30 homer seasons before he reaches free agency. Cabrera still has the most 2016 value of this bunch, but even though he’s one of the great hitters of this generation, he’s still approaching his decline and injury phase—which will reduce his long-term impact.

5) Joey Votto, Cincinnati Reds

6) Eric Hosmer, Kansas City Royals

In many ways, these are two similar ships passing in the night. Votto had the bounce back in 2015, which buoyed his dynasty league value mostly due to the resurgence of his power. Hosmer had his strongest fantasy season to date and still has plenty of supporters who believe that more power is yet to come. However, the great thing about Hosmer’s dynasty league value is that he doesn’t need to hit 25 homers to be a consistently high-end fantasy first baseman.

7) Prince Fielder, Texas Rangers

8) Edwin Encarnacion, Toronto Blue Jays

9) Freddie Freeman, Atlanta Braves

This one may be the first group that gets a “huh” from the crowd. Both Encarnacion and Freeman get plenty of support from their sides of the spectrum (E5 from the “now” contingent and Freeman from the “there’s got to be more here” crowd), yet they both sit behind Fielder, who is not held in the same esteem across many leagues. The question is why that’s the case. The question marks were valid heading into 2015, as he had come off major neck surgery, but played in 158 games (just as Fielder does) and continued his great contact rate (just as Fielder does), only with a tinge less power. Encarnacion is great and wonderful, but when the 30’s come, give me the player who has a better track record of health and batting average. Freeman, on the other hand, will mire in a terribad Braves lineup for the next couple of years and just doesn’t have the upside to surpass either 30-something slugger ahead of him.

10) A.J. Reed, Houston Astros

This may seem aggressive, but as the depth on this list exposes itself to you—both in the aging and the only moderately interesting—the value of a potential top-five first baseman sticks out. That is what we’re dealing with, as Reed could be a .280-.290 hitter with 30-plus homers, and he could be in the majors as soon as the second half of 2016. In fact, he’s exciting enough that I had this commissioned from the one and only @holly_holl:

11) Albert Pujols, Los Angeles Angels

12) Adrian Gonzalez, Los Angeles Dodgers

13) Brandon Belt, San Francisco Giants

14) Lucas Duda, New York Mets

15) Kendrys Morales, Kansas City Royals

16) Carlos Santana, Cleveland Indians

17) Evan Gattis, Houston Astros

18) Ryan Zimmerman, Washington Nationals

And here starts the glut. Pujols and Gonzalez are aging and no longer put up the impact numbers of their primes. That said, Pujols did hit 40 homers last year, and if he can stay on the field, is a threat to approach that number again (though it comes at much more of a price than it did last decade). Gonzalez has been very consistent, but the batting average has drifted down to the barely helping range and expecting more than 20-25 homers going forward isn’t a great bet. Belt and Duda fall into the same bucket here but for different reasons. Belt’s health is always a concern and his strikeout rate requires more power output than he’s shown. Duda is generally on the field, but inconsistency has plagued him and held him back from taking a step towards the next tier.

Who knows what we’ll get from Morales in 2016, but the 2015 version was mostly the same one that Angels’ fans saw before his freak injury back in 2010. Of course he’s much older now though. Santana is still on the right side of 30, for now, but just can’t get enough traction with his batting average to move much higher than this. Gattis is DH-only, and unlike Prince Fielder, who knows when/if he’ll get any positional eligibility. My heart wants to put Zimmerman higher up on this list, but he’s just not a good bet to stay healthy. If you could guarantee me 135 games, I still think he could push .270 and 25 homers, but there are other wishes I’d ask for first.

19) David Ortiz, Boston Red Sox

For a player we know is retiring after 2016 to rank in the top-20 on a dynasty list, he has to be pretty special, and Ortiz is just that. I’m having a sad thinking that this is the last time I’m going to get to put him on this list.

20) Josh Bell, Pittsburgh Pirates

21) Matt Adams, St Louis Cardinals

22) Mark Teixeira, New York Yankees

23) Dan Vogelbach, Chicago Cubs

24) Pedro Alvarez, Free Agent

25) Chris Carter, Milwaukee Brewers

26) C.J. Cron, Los Angeles Angels

Bell may not have the power of A.J. Reed or Dan Vogelbach, but his bat-to-ball skills may be the best of the three, and he could see time in Pittsburgh later this year. I’m not giving up on Matt Adams just because of his injury and the Cardinals’ apparent willingness to give Brandon Moss the first base job over him in 2016. As you can tell by their placements on this list, I think they’ll reverse course if they start the season that way. Power is glorious and Teixeira, Alvarez, and Carter all have reasonable chances to get to 30 homers in 2016. Of course, Alvarez needs a job first. Finally, don’t let the few jumping off the bandwagon affect your resolve—believe in the light within Dan Vogelbach.

27) Greg Bird, New York Yankees

28) Alex Rodriguez, New York Yankees

I’m not going to endear myself to Bird supporters here, but that power spike in September is not something I’m buying a repeat of and he has nowhere to play in 2016 thanks to the elder statesman of this tier. Essentially, he’s a 2017 ETA prospect without huge upside (maybe .260 with 25 homers). On the other hand, what’s not to love about A-Rod? I could watch him hit dingers and smile until he’s 50. There’s no reason he can’t repeat his 2015 season.

29) Bobby Bradley, Cleveland Indians

30) Trey Mancini, Baltimore Orioles

These are two of the most interesting first base prospects in fantasy leagues, and rather than summarize myself too much here, I’ll just point out that Greg Wellemyer is doing a Tale of the Tape on these two tomorrow and you should read it.

31) Mitch Moreland, Texas Rangers

32) Adam Lind, Seattle Mariners

33) Byung-ho Park, Minnesota Twins

34) Victor Martinez, Detroit Tigers

35) Dominic Smith, New York Mets

36) Matt Olson, Oakland Athletics

37) Rowdy Tellez, Toronto Blue Jays

38) Mike Napoli, Cleveland Indians

39) REDACTED

40) Jonathan Singleton, Houston Astros

It saddens me to no end that Adam Lind has gone to Seattle, but the #AdamLindAppreciationSociety will roll on unimpaired. Rebound seasons could certainly be in the cards for Martinez, and Napoli, but even if they do return to some semblance of former glory, their ages prevent them from shooting up too high here. Byung-ho Park hit five more homers last year in the KBO than Yamaico Navarro did. The trifecta of prospects in the middle of this tier is a fun group because of their differences. Tellez has the power, Smith has the batting average and Olson has the OBP. The first one to get a second skill wins.

41) Jake Bauers, Tampa Bay Rays

42) Justin Bour, Miami Marlins

43) Yonder Alonso, Oakland Athletics

44) Josh Naylor, Miami Marlins

45) Rhys Hoskins, Philadelphia Phillies

46) Adam LaRoche, Chicago White Sox

47) Joe Mauer, Minnesota Twins

48) Kennys Vargas, Minnesota Twins

49) Logan Morrison, Tampa Bay Rays

50) Justin Morneau, Free Agent

Justin Bour is not going to end up on any of my teams this year. Hoskins and Naylor both could make big jumps up this list—the former if he can prove that his steps forward in 2015 were legit, and the latter if he can continue to take to pro ball seamlessly. The precipitous fall of Joe Mauer makes me long for simpler days, when his batting average was as reliable as the sun rising in the East and setting in the West. I’m not giving up entirely on Yonder Alonso, and he’s exactly the type of person to just start hitting well once he shows up in Oakland. Craig can only hope that Kennys Vargas is next in that line, as he certainly isn’t going to get much run in Minnesota this year.

You need to be logged in to comment. Login or Subscribe
ChrisHopcroft
1/21
Great list and analysis, as always, thanks! Wil Myers qualifies at 1B this year (and might end the year only eligible at that position?) -- I know he'll be covered in the OF roundup later on but out of interest where abouts would you slot him into this list?
bretsayre
1/21
Thanks! I'd slot him into the Josh Bell tier (it's a pretty tight group there). I still think he can be a reasonable contributor, but that health track record is getting scarier by the day.
GBSimons
1/21
Is Ryan Howard worth keeping at $2 in an eight-team, NL-only league? I have a good amount of speed in the OF and am looking for some cheap power. Thanks.
bretsayre
1/21
He's right on the cusp for me in that format. If it's not at the expense of another potential decent keeper, I'd hang onto him. Otherwise, let him go.
GBSimons
1/21
Thanks for the quick reply, Bret. Much appreciated.
froston
1/21
I understand that Chris Davis comes with big volatility, but putting him outside of the top 50 seems harsh
bretsayre
1/21
Check the OF list in four weeks. I think you may be pleasantly surprised.
sestey4
1/21
It feels like you should probably write at the top that Chris Davis wasn't considered. People with good teams in leagues with UTIL slots may end up cycling Davis between 1B, OF and UTIL. He is a first baseman, after all. This is a list of first basemen.
apaterson
1/21
Did Chris Davis die or something?
bretsayre
1/21
I really hope not. That would be terrible.
Boxcar23
1/21
Lmfao @ no Chris Davis. BP's fantasy stuff is awful
bretsayre
1/21
If you are playing Chris Davis at 1B this year, the joke's on you.
froston
1/21
"Dynasty Rankings". Chris Davis is obviously a dynasty 1B. You ranked a prospect 10th. Moss has OF and you still listed him. C'mon.
Boxcar23
1/21
So you're counting on a primary 1B to retain OF eligibility forever then? If you have a really good OF and not a good 1B, how would the joke be on you for using Davis there? Also, please tell me the dynasties where Greg Bird is drafted after Ortiz, Bell and Gattis. I want in.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
for what it's worth - I agree Moss should in with the OF group, and we've redacted him above to reflect that. We've generally determined eligibility for positions by the position someone is eligible at the year we release the rankings. For instance, Eugenio Suarez will be in with SS even though he's been announced as a 3B by CIN. The reasoning being that we can't really foresee how teams are going to employ guys on a year to year basis. We factor the likelihood of someone moving down the defensive spectrum in if we don't think they'll retain eligibility, but it's a fools errand to assume we know how teams will play players. Remember when Xander was assured of being a 3rd baseman? and Corey Seager the same? Drastic examples, to be sure, but there's reason to believe Davis could be employed in the OF enough to manage in-season eligibility for a few years, plus it address how people will use him in the coming season. Davis will be in with 1B next year, assuming he doesn't attain OF eligibility. I don't think it's unreasonable to operate under this construct, but it's also fair to prefer a different approach. This is the one we agreed worked best as a team, but we can understand if you disagree. That said, it's not a reflection of our opinion that he *will* retain that eligibility going forward.
sestey4
1/21
It's not unreasonable but it's also not what was done here; there are several standards being used in the same list. Gattis hasn't played 1B since 2013 and has four career games at the position -- there are two other positions (and DH) that he associates with much more closely. David Ortiz hasn't collected 10 games since 2006. A-Rod only played two games at first last season. Please get together and decide on one standard to use.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
I can understand not going through all the comments so I want to reiterate: Gattis, Ortiz, and others are included in the 1B list because the UT/DH list isn't really long enough to get it's own piece. Moss was the single exception on the list and was a mistake, hence he's been redacted. There are not several standards being used.
bhacking
1/21
Agreed, who's in what list aside, ranking Ortiz 19 and Bird 27 in a dynasty list is one of the...ahhh, stranger things I've seen here over the years. I'm not going to agree with all ranking and I shouldn't, I want alternative views to challenge my preconceived ideas. But this one is just plain....ahhh, strange.
JackCecil
1/21
Kennys Vargas to Colorado needs to happen
BenC22
1/21
Where is Khris Davis am I doing this right
Boxcar23
1/21
You guys charge people to read this stuff, so I don't think holding you to some kind of quality standard is unfair. Make jokes but this kind of garbage is the main reason I'm letting my sub expire.
adrock
1/21
Wow. What a torrent of entitled whining. Sure, I understand that it's reasonable to want to see Chris Davis listed with the 1Bs. The team has explained why they haven't done so. It's incredibly easy to make your own mental adjustment. If 'this kind of garbage' refers to the comprehensive position by position roll-out that BP has put together that goes beyond last year's excellent coverage, well, I guess your standards for 'not garbage' are exceedingly high.
derekdeg
1/22
Absolutely no one will miss you. Funny how often your comments are below the threshold and I have to actually click to see what you have to say. Jokes on me though. I have yet to find any comment worth the click.
lipitorkid
1/21
Ben I agree that some of the comments here could be a bit more measured, but this reply is way beneath you. [In both humor and as a function of your role on this site]
BenC22
1/21
There were only two pretty benign Chris Davis comments when I posted this and neither of them were terribly constructive. This was not in response to any of the more legitimate questions about methodology you'll find below. Also nothing is beneath my humor.
lipitorkid
1/21
I knew you would say that. I'll take a 5% reduction on my Super Premium account next season as payment for playing the straight man in your BP comment thread Benny Hill bit.
BenC22
1/21
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5d0KXJMRWQ
cjbrassa
1/21
Freddie Freeman = 26, career 131 wRC+, projected at ~135 Eric Hosmer = 26, career 108 wRC+, projected at ~ 115 Can someone please explain to me why Hosmer is the better dynasty asset?
froston
1/21
He is objectively not. The only real argument would be lineup situation and therefore short term R/RBI. But Freeman is flat out the more talented hitter and has been consistently good his whole career, whereas Hosmer has been a legit sandbag in 2 of the last 4 seasons. Hosmer above Encarnacion is just as mental.
huztlers
1/21
He's not, but I only get one meaningless vote. You should never put too much stock into last year's final rankings, which is the only way you can place Hosmer in that position. The January trend has been to pimp Hosmer and rag on Freeman. The amazing thing to me is how people feed off of each others thoughts so heavily. It starts with one opinion and grows to a consensus. In reality, Hosmer has always been a mediocre option at 1B. His speed is certainly trending down, while his hitting ability does not appear to be trending up in any way - I don't see how anything has changed for the better in his profile over the past year. Yet, somehow he has ascended the ladder...
jansonsjj
1/21
This is obviously Bret's list, but I will point out that Hosmer has averaged ~10 steals per year over his five year career, whereas Freddie might struggle to get 10 over his career. Unless you're playing in a wRC+ league (in which case invite me), that value needs to be accounted for.
ctt8410
1/21
Looking at these lists, Hanley is another name that seems to have more value at 1B than OF.
wilymo
1/21
wow, it's really hostile down here
apaterson
1/21
Evan Gattis doesn't have 1B eligibility. He didn't play a single game there this year.
cjbrassa
1/21
lol It's probably time to delete this list, fire the guy who posted it, and then release a new one in a few weeks.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
We include DH/UT guys in with 1B, and have for several seasons. It's fair not to prefer it, but it's a decision made so we can reasonably include some guys who gain in-season eligibility, usually at 1B.
cjbrassa
1/21
Evan Gattis will be an OF in almost every format this year, and is about as likely to retain that eligibility as Chris Davis is going forward. Treating Davis as an OF and Gattis as a 1B is egregious. Just admit it was an oversight and everyone can move on.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
Gattis received 11 starts in the OF this season. We use 20 as a threshold, as do many fantasy leagues. Which is why Davis gets OF eligibility and Gattis doesn't on this list. I don't think it's egregious.
apaterson
1/21
The Yahoo standard is 10 games or 5 games started. Yahoo is the most popular fantasy site, and that's the default setting.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
I believe that's the in-season setting. From season to season it's 20, last I saw.
cjbrassa
1/21
No, It's typically 10-5 even from season-to-season.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
Appreciate that info, and will discuss it going forward. That said, for this year (as with previous seasons) we're using 20. That is what ESPN uses from season to season - though I understand that's not as helpful as using Yahoo's guidelines, as it is more popular. At this point, the best we can do is make clear the guidelines we're using to construct eligibility. My apologies that it wasn't more clear to begin with. I think, certainly, reasonable minds can differ when it comes to choosing the right number for determining eligibility. Unfortunately someone is always left out, or in some cases, left in, when people think they shouldn't be. Still, we'll do our best to address that going forward.
apaterson
1/21
Nope. Miguel Cabrera had 3B eligibility last year despite playing only 10 games there in 2014. Same with Gattis' C eligibility, same with Bautista CF eligibility.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
Appreciated. I might have been unduly influenced in my leagues there where the standard is 20. Unfortunately I've not found a guideline online for Yahoo's season-to-season eligibility either. Please see above response in regards to addressing this moving forward.
apaterson
1/21
Thanks, and good luck ranking Ben Zobrist.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
to be clear - in regards to *our* addressing it moving forward (2017 and beyond) - not yours.
bretsayre
1/21
None of this matters. We're not Yahoo. The rules we use to determine eligibility is 20 games season-to-season and there aren't enough DH-only players to get their own week, so we wrap them in here. Everything else is just math.
cjbrassa
1/21
Wouldn't it make more sense for a bit of subjectivity in this process when it comes to dynasty rankings? Chris Davis omitted from 1B in a dynasty ranking is silly, because the most likely outcome is 1 year of OF and 5+ years of 1B. He's a 1B.
wilymo
1/21
i do agree with this. i think a little human touch on the include/exclude decisions is a better way to go than just using a hard math games limit. like, for a 1B/OF, putting the guy on both lists, but a C/1B only shows up on the C list. common-sense stuff like that.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
There is no doubt, many ways to do this. Perhaps there is one better than the plan we've implemented, of course. We've considered double-listing names in the past but I think that can push lower down names off the list that ultimately should be discussed, given that this is a dynasty ranking and that fringe/future players are a major part of the overall evaluation. Perhaps an accompanying article or section on where multi-positional guys would slot in?
wilymo
1/21
that's fine, just make the lists even longer and give up your free time and personal lives
froston
1/21
This is the main point, I think. The technical positional eligibility requirement arguments miss the mark. It's a dynasty 1B ranking, not a 2016 redraft ranking.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
We're aware that it is a dynasty ranking, and perhaps in the case of a guy like Davis, it seems clear. But if you use these types of subjective guidelines across positions, it becomes less so, especially in regards to prospects and how teams are anticipated to use them. I can understand the frustration, but I assure you there'd be frustration under any system used and that injecting such a level of subjectivity only results in even less satisfying answers than the ones you're receiving now. That is why we settled on using current eligibility with a threshold for games started as a year-to-year carryover.
wilymo
1/21
ok, but consider that your opinion that subjectivity results in less satisfying answers is, itself, subjective
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
agreed on subjective, but also informed by experience. Which isn't to say one automatically overrules the other. This is a useful conversation with readership, I think. But I want to make it clear there was a thought-process behind this.
ctt8410
1/21
You're ranking players. It's already highly subjective.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
Well yes, but that's about where players are ranked, not who is eligible for *that* particular discussion.
bretsayre
1/21
Funnily enough, in previous years we've gotten these same comments to remove subjectivity. You're never going to make people happy either way. Also, Chris Davis is a funny person to hang your hat on with an eligibility argument. Over the last five seasons, he's been 3B eligible twice, OF eligible twice and only once in that time has he gone into a season with solely 1B next to his name.
wilymo
1/21
oh i'm sure. those people are wrong though
froston
1/21
The only consistent eligibility he's had in those 5 years is 1B. If he was your dynasty 3B in 2014, you needed a new one last year. If he is your dynasty OF this year, you'll probably need a new one in 2017. He's also no longer young so much less likely to be anything but 1B. Not that funny. Fantasy baseball is serious.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
Sure, but you also probably *played* him at 3B last year, and many people will use him in the OF this year. I get where you're coming from, and I get disagreeing with our approach, but I also don't think our approach is ludicrous (perhaps an obvious statement). Guys gain and lose eligibility a lot, and dynasty rosters experience a lot of turnover in an effort to maximize those gains/minimize those losses. Pretending that a team is static and required to play Davis at 1B because he's likely to be there long term isn't significantly more reasonable than acknowledging he has that eligibility for rankings that we do every season, at least to my eyes. Again, I think reasonable minds can differ there, though.
tancooker0
1/21
I'd rather play Davis at 1B. The talent level at 1B drops off a lot quicker than it does for OFers.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
Obviously this can depend on league settings, and if you have a CI or how many OF spots you use. And yes, positional depth changes year to year as well. It's feasible they're closer this year or even that 1B is shallowed depending on your league. In general though, we have 1B as lower down the positional eligibility scale than OF. Hope you understand.
tancooker0
1/21
So should I invest heavily in Chris Davis as an OFer?
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
Find out during OF week!
tancooker0
1/21
So he should be good to go in the OF for the next 5+ years then?
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
not sure how you drew that from what I said. I've explained how we determined eligibility in multiple responses. Please read above or below for why he is where he is.
tancooker0
1/21
Where's Justin Smoak? Or do we need to wait until the OF rankings come out to see where he's ranked too..
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
he's not outfield eligible, silly goose
tancooker0
1/21
So he was forgotten about too?
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
Or unranked. Perhaps the author will weigh in.
bretsayre
1/21
Ask for the author and he shall appear. Smoak was unranked, and frankly was behind at least 4-5 other major league names who were also unranked.
lipitorkid
1/21
Kinda disappointed that this threaded reply didn't end in a long vertical column that only has one word per line.
wilymo
1/21
g i v e i t t i m e
kringent
1/21
It's not too late!
tancooker0
1/21
But he hit as many homeruns as the guy you have ranked 6th.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
the guy ranked sixth his .297 while smoak obp'd .299. More to a ranking than just homers.
tancooker0
1/21
Well ya. I didn't expect him to rank that high. But I'd think he'd be top 50.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
and that's fair! He might be in mine, but wasn't in Bret's.
Boxcar23
1/21
How in the world does this not matter? Unless you guys host your own fantasy platform, should you not adopt the default rules of the most popular fantasy provider? I assume that's why you rank on a 12 team 5x5 basis.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
I'm not sure how we'd figure it out, but I'd be interested to see if Yahoo is the most popular for dynasty leagues. I'm in 7 and 6 of them are on CBS because it's much easier to deal with minor leaguers.
bretsayre
1/21
We don't rank for 12-team leagues. As is written in the primer, we rank based on a 16-team dynasty format. Dynasty rankings are a niche, so what's most popular across all fantasy baseball is pretty meaningless, in my opinion.
ctt8410
1/21
So if I take this list into my startup draft, then I'm fully covered at 1B?
tancooker0
1/21
You should add Chris Davis to it though.
apaterson
1/21
Ok... but your premise is that you omit Davis from this list because he has substantially more value at OF. Even though I reject that premise, it should be applied equally to Gattis, who definitely has OF eligibility.
wilymo
1/21
they said they use 20 games for eligibility, gattis had 11. so under this system he doesn't. honestly i spend most of my time in these comment sections pointing out mistakes in the articles to where i probably get annoying, but at least i'm usually correct that the things i'm pointing out are mistakes. this davis/gattis thing isn't a mistake, it's just a side effect of the ruleset they're using that people happen to not agree with. personally i'd also put davis in any 1B list i was making, but this is getting silly
froston
1/21
Flippant subtweets from BP staff (and editors) don't strike me as very professional. Nobody is mad that Chris Davis was omitted. I doubt anybody cares enough to be mad. It just doesn't make any sense to omit him from a dynasty 1B list. Sure, it would make perfect sense to include him with the OF for a 2016 redraft list. It makes even less sense when you see that Brandon Moss and Brandon Belt, who both have OF eligibility in Yahoo, are on the list. That's simply incongruent.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
Moss was an oversight and was redacted as explained above. Belt has 14 starts in the outfield, while our threshold was 20. Davis had 30, and thus is OF Eligible, while Belt and Gattis are not.
wilymo
1/21
i do think the staff gets defensive too quickly sometimes, but people *are* coming straight in here with comments like "BP's fantasy stuff is awful" and "the guy who made this list should be fired". it's not crazy to interpret that as "mad"
sbnbaseball
1/21
There are better ways to communicate your displeasure with a rankings list. Instead of bashing, how about asking "why did you rank/not rank "xxxxxx" and explain your reasoning as to why you feel he should/should not be ranked. Most in this industry work full time jobs in addition to writing for fantasy sites. Keep that in mind when reading these rankings. Also, these rankings are one man's/one team's opinion on the position. You don't have to agree with the rankings. My question - I am glad to see Hoskins ranked here. He seems to have hit very well at every stop, including in winter ball in Australia. Do you see him continuing to hit for power at Reading this season?
juice133
1/21
I'm pretty curious to see what Hoskins does in Reading. I've seen him a bit each of the last two years, albeit more in 2014 than 2015, and I'm a bit skeptical that he's going to bring his power into game situations consistently against upper level arms. This isn't a bat-speed profile to generate the power, meaning he has to have impeccable pitch recognition and barrel control to make the hard contact for his power to translate. That's going to be a tall order for Hoskins. Also, I would note for context, even though I wrote him up as improving his stock in winter ball the other day, his performance in the ABL was likely against competition equivalent to something between short-season A-ball and Low-A, on the whole.
lipitorkid
1/21
This post by sbnbaseball should have a rating much higher than it does. And it wins the "I found a large crowbar, the train is back on the track."
LyleCox
1/21
why not just add Davis and end the discussion?
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
just when we're getting to the good part? pshaw.
cmaczkow
1/21
One option would be to just include players at each spot that they qualify. (I always do this on my draft lists, and italicize the entries under any non-primary position(s).) That way: 1. You don't need to make a blanket "where is he more valuable?" judgement that might not apply to some people's leagues/teams/keeper situations; 2. You don't have to deal with a million "Where is so-and-so?" posts which always come up, no matter how often you clarify who is where; 3. Comparing how a player ranks relative to his peers across each eligible position is an important part of determining value anyway, and would be a welcome addition to the analysis. I can't imagine it would be THAT much more work and the benefits would seem to be well worth it.
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
I addressed this option above (understood if you didn't see it/didn't want to comb through) and it's a fair one - perhaps the most sensible going forward. That said, some deserving players get left off of lists due to multi-positional guys, and given that this is dynasty and that people want to know who is next, who on the fringe is relevant, we try to meet those needs. As suggested above, perhaps including a section on where a multi-guy would otherwise slot is a possibility. Although, merely asking in the comments (as someone did for Myers) also works.
mattsussman
1/21
where is Who on this list
bretsayre
1/21
Who's on second. Check back next week.
jfranco77
1/21
Turns out Who is also OF-eligible
wilymo
1/21
ain't no love, in the heart of the comments ain't no love, in the heart of to-own ain't no looove, sure 'nuff is a pity ain't no love, cause chris ain't around
TheArtfulDodger
1/21
I adore this
lipitorkid
1/21
I actually read the comments where you can only read one letter at a time. I felt like a speed reader. Kinda like Billy Butler stealing a base on Lester with Conger behind the plate.
jansonsjj
1/21
I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Buck play Trumbo (or Trey Mancini for that matter) enough at 1B in 2016/2017 to have Davis retain his OF eligibility in the future.
holmesp2001
1/21
Who was REDACTED at #39. Wait a minute, why would I be looking to invest in the #39 first baseman?
dbrown
1/21
Moss, as explained above.
lipitorkid
1/21
If the comments slow down I'm going to bring up how much I enjoyed Sinead O'Connor's understated SNL appearance. Her final act in that appearance is how I felt seeing Yonder Alonso still on this list. Nice job picking Alonso over Rizzo, San Diego Fathers.
lowguppy
1/21
The barely painted over snark is part of why I stay. Ranking 50 of anything gets really boring without a little character, and these guys have at least a little. I do feel like a few more (or all) of these names could be summarized with 90s music videos though.
Silvergun
1/21
Lol, amazing.
GTOFORMULA400
1/22
I for one enjoyed the ranking and appreciate the insight. Thanks guys!
maxheringer
1/22
Stephen Vogt started 20 games at 1st base so...
TheArtfulDodger
1/22
He was ranked among catchers, where his bat is more valuable.
maxheringer
1/22
Sorry this was definitely a troll of the Khris Davis people. But I appreciate the response BP
TheArtfulDodger
1/22
gdi. I've been owned.
lipsgardner
1/22
Does Vogelbach have to be traded to find playing time? If yes, is that going to happen this year?
jnossal
2/10
BP has been taken over by infants.