catcher values

tsfloyd  3/20/2015 7:41 PM

After conducting several mocks, I noticed I nearly always miss on catchers, since all but the top 2 appear so far down the list.

Put another way, all the catchers, except for the top few, have negative values, and negative positional values.  In a fast-moving draft, it's easy to miss catchers.

Is there a way to fix this?

descender  3/20/2015 8:34 PM

If other people are paying too much for weak hitting catchers, let them.  You should be able to fill other positions with more value and beat them in the long run.  The real benefit of using a site like this is to gain advantage over other people drafting poorly. :)

It really is a wasteland after the top ~4-5 catchers anyway... Posey/Santana should be drafted early, and the next 2-3 catchers are almost guaranteed to be overpriced.  Strategy?  Teach a catcher how to hit ;)

tsfloyd  3/20/2015 9:38 PM

What if I set Catcher spots to 1.2 instead of 1?

tsfloyd  3/20/2015 9:39 PM

Nope, no can do.

Position values must be whole numbers.  Perhaps include this in feature request?

ken_admin  3/21/2015 12:17 PM

Yes, only whole numbers are supported. What are hoping to change by using 1.2?

tsfloyd  3/22/2015 10:12 PM

I don't believe in position scarcity, exept slightly for catchers.  I can't wrap my head around why catchers always rate so lowly after the first three.  As a result, I always miss on catchers,  and end up picking a catcher last.  I was thinking if it were possible to set catchers at 1.3, let's say, some of the mid-catchers would be bumped up.