How Salaries Effect the Game by RReap

Well the 1st half's results were disappointing from the overall finish standpoint...56th and I think my 2nd finish off the leaderboard in the last 22 halves. I got off to a bad start for a variety of reasons and was in the thousands in late May and already 400 points back from the overall lead. A few good weeks made up 100 points on the lead and over a thousand spots overall. Then a bad week dropped me another 100 points behind Pouliot and I knew the overall was done. Bad PS picks in the beginning, middle and end sealed my fate. Before last week another strong week allowed me to crack the top 50 at 38th and moved within 250 of Matt, before 3 bad staffs in a row dropped me back off the leaderboard and couldn't make up the ground the last 3 days...I did pick up 100 points on Pouliot in the past 2 months, but simply to far back to matter.

To me the game has changed a lot from the 2 halves that I won. While PS is always the most important selection, the salaries have changed a lot about the way I play this game. Several yrs ago, there were always 4-5 very reliable starters that everyone picked so hitters were actually very important. When the higher salaries kicked in, you immediately saw certain familiar faces moving up the leaderboard. Lineups then took more thought when deciding on which 2-3 cheap guys would play and which positions were best to sacrifice in order to get 6-7 studs with great matchups. Coors Field used to also cause a lot of similar lineups and has taken me too many years to stay away from...now that it is much more of average hitters park.

When salaries were high and PS picks were very similar it took more time to figure out the best cheap guys that would play and over time definitely separated the casual players from the contenders. Now that I don't have nearly the amount time that I once did, it doesn't really matter as much since you can pretty much take every player you want at every position. With starters becoming less predictable and bullpens being less reliable, there is a lot more chance that any of the logical best 2-3 PS picks could blow up in your face.

The competition is much stronger now with the salaries leveling the playing field. Whichever of the top players avoids the most PS blowups stands a great chance of being at the top at the end. Spending more time on the lineup may help avoid some DNP's and maybe add 100 points to your total but the bottom line is the PS means more now then ever. If there are 3 good choices, I generally prefer a home National League starter, a solid favorite, o/u 8 or less vs a road favorite or an American League starter (esp in a hitters park). That cost me a lot of good starts by Greinke early in the year and Verlander all half. Probably sticking with Santana too often is a good example of living in the past. Should have taken more Dodger staffs because of the home pitcher's park and the great pen. Didn't really have any faith in the SF staff this half either beside Lincecum (who has become the only starter that will chosen unanimously this half). Should have taken Cain more than once...

Picking again weak lineups and 2 to 1 favorites is usually what I lean towards when there are no real good PS matchups. Currently the Nationals, Padres and Royals come to mind...

Considering that my finishes have declined since I won the halves, maybe I need to come up with some better strategies of picking staffs...

Well those are my random, disjointed thoughts about ESPN's current BBC game...

I'll always enjoy it even if I don't do as well. Higher salaries or at least logical increases/decreases would certainly increase the enjoyment, but I don't see anyone at ESPN paying any attention to those matters. Well good luck in the 2nd half everyone!