The Long Game: Profitable Decisions

Who To Keep

The most important season for a fantasy owner is always the next one. Once you have a set of projected stats and earnings that you're comfortable using (whether you come up with them yourself, use our Draft Kit, or take the average of a number of different projection systems) divide your existing roster into three groups: Locks (players earning at least $5 more than their current salary), Bubble Boys (players earning within $5 of their current salary either way) and Likely Cuts (players getting paid at least $5 more than their earnings).

The third group, Likely Cuts, are players you really have no interest in hanging onto except under duress. That duress is usually going to come in the form of a league with extremely high inflation. There are cases where a player is getting paid more than he earns, but less than he would cost to replace at auction due to extreme inflation. If, for instance, inflation typically runs at about 33 percent in your league, a player projected to earn $30 might actually cost you $40 or more at auction, in which case it might make sense to keep him at $35. You should be very cautious in keeping players who fit this criteria, but in such leagues it's not the worst decision you could make. (See below for more on inflation). Otherwise, all the players in this group should be immediately dropped, or if they have enough star power, put on the trade block to see if another owner will voluntarily sabotage their chances by acquiring them at their inflated salary.

The Bubble Boys group requires some more thought. A player might be getting paid a few dollars more than his 'book value', but if he provides a scarce category (saves or steals, typically) he could still be worth protecting. Those stats have to come from somewhere, and scarcity is what drives bidding wars. If you let the player go, it could be tough to get the same relative production back at the same or better price. Players in this group with significant upside can also be worth protecting even if their salary doesn't seem to warrant it, because the profit potential if they do break out is substantial. Think of it like implied odds in poker. You're not just calculating your payoff based on what's already in the pot (the current season), but on what will end up in the pot if your hand hits (future seasons). Two players in this range for me are James Paxton, whose upside suggests a potential ace despite being projected to earn just $5 or so in the 12-team AL-only 5x5 league I have him in, and Nick Franklin, who could easily outpace his modest projections if he wins the Rays' starting second base job, and who would be a more-than-reasonable protect at $3 in an 18-team 5x5 mixed league in that case.

How Long To Keep Them

When it comes to the Locks, the players projected to earn real profit, or the Bubble Boys with upside, you may want to consider signing them to a long-term deal. The basic calculation isn't that difficult. Figure out the maximum contract length you can sign the player to so that his salary is still beneath his projected earnings. Figure out the total profit you'd earn over the life of that contract. Then do the same for a contract one year shorter, and so on all the way back to simply keeping the player for his option year.

For example, many owners (including myself, in that same 12-team AL-only league) will be facing a decision on a long-term deal for Corey Kluber. I have him at a tidy $6 with a projected earnings of $20, and given that he's just 28 years old, with no history of injury as a pro, there are no red flags on his resume that would make me wary of going long with him. Let's break it down and see what signing him long-term looks like from a profit perspective, given a standard extra $5 in yearly salary per additional season.

Inflation

Inflation is the scourge of all keeper leagues. Simply put, inflation is the amount players bought at auction have their salaries increased because other players were protected below their market value. If you keep a $1 player who would otherwise have gone for $11 at the table, that's $10 more you have to spend on other players. Maybe you use all $10 at once, and get a $30 player for $40, or maybe you spread it around, but either way it gets spent and drives salaries up.

In general economic terms, inflation reduces the value of future earnings. $1 earned in 2015 is worth more to you right now than a dollar earned in 2016, which is worth more than one earned in 2017 etc. In keeper league terms, however, what gets devalued are not earnings but your auction budget. In a redraft league, $260 at the auction table will get you somewhere around $260 in player value, assuming you know what you're doing. In a keeper league, if you protect no one and head to the auction table with $260, you will walk away with far less than $260 in player value.

So when it comes to making your contract decisions, leagues with heavy inflation should not, as you might think, necessarily encourage you to bank short-term profit. The extra $5 you're saving by cutting a contract short a year isn't going to get you $5 in actual value. Instead, you may want to protect your gains for as long as possible. Let's look at the Kluber chart again, this time with a hypothetical 40 percent rate of inflation factored in:

Other factors you may want to consider before signing a player long-term include:

- You should almost always go short on players with a history of getting hurt, whether it's a hitter whose hamstrings act up with depressing frequency or a pitcher who never seems to last 30 starts. The worst thing for your profit margin is to sign a player and then be stuck with him when he breaks down and returns little to no value at all.

- How difficult will the player be to replace once his contract ends? If a player doesn't have a particularly unique profile (your standard off-the-shelf 20 home run corner outfielder, for instance, or a starting pitcher with solid ratios who doesn't strike out a ton of guys) you're often better off going short on his deal, and banking that profit. On the other hand, a player who provides something fairly rare might be worth extending an extra year if the profit valuation is fairly close.

- How volatile is the player's production? Players who alternate great years with mediocre ones, or who had an unexpected production spike, should be viewed with caution and signed to a shorter deal. Sure, maybe that means you have to part ways with the next Cliff Lee or Jose Bautista sooner than you'd like, but the 'downside' to that caution is that you still bank most of the potential profit in a shorter window. The upside is that you don't get saddled with an ugly contract on the next Ricky Nolasco. When a contract seems like a large risk for little reward, you should stay away. Note that catchers (due to the inherent injury risk that comes with playing the position) and closers (due to the large turnover and flameout rates that go hand-in-hand with the role) should pretty much always be viewed as volatile. Also, keep in mind the potential strike zone changes that could be coming from MLB as a way to address the league-wide decline in offense.

- How good is a player's organization at developing and nurturing players of his type? The Rays, for instance, often do very well by their starting pitchers, so that might give you the confidence to go an extra year on Alex Cobb. Whether a player's home park is friendly to him or not is also worth thinking about, although in theory that should already be priced in to his projections.

- And finally, how much do you like the player? It's always more fun to have guys on your team that you actively root for. Since projections are never dead accurate anyway, if you have a man-crush on Jose Altuve and the numbers don't scream for one particular contract over another, why not keep him for the extra year?

Which Kids Are Worth Your Time

Once you've determined your major league keepers, it's time to take a look at your prospects. In dynasty, keep-forever formats, most of the time you'll simply hang onto a guy until he's no longer a prospect (either by graduating or flaming out). In leagues where you are only allowed to keep a limited number of prospects, however, you may need to make some tough decisions on which prospects deserve to be protected.

For instance, what's his prospect ranking? In a shallow league where only 60 or so prospects get protected and selected each year, a guy who ranks towards the bottom of most top 100 lists isn't worth hanging onto. You'd probably be better off tossing him back and trying to fill that spot with a better prospect.

Also, consider how far away a player is not just from getting to the majors, but from providing you with a profit. In traditional Ultra formats, where each reserve round pick has a specific salary assigned, a prospect might not project as valuable enough to match his eventual salary. Pitchers who the experts have tabbed with a mid-rotation ceiling, outfielders without one standout offensive tool, shortstops whose glove is still ahead of their bat... these are prospects who might have long major league careers, but do they have much profit potential? If they don't, cut them loose and either get a better prospect, or re-draft the player you let go in a later round and at a lower salary.

Finally, if a player isn't a top prospect, does he have a major league job? In some formats, a player on a 25-man roster can't be kept as a minor leaguer and has to take up an active roster spot heading into the auction, but in deep leagues that aren't so strict, a fringy prospect who wins a bench or bullpen spot could provide you with some crucial extra depth. A kid like Delino Deshields, for instance, who was a Rule 5 pick by the Rangers, has seen his prospect status fade badly the last couple of years, but if he sticks in Texas he could provide you with a handful of steals 'for free' from a minor league slot. In a deep AL-only league where hitting depth is going to be at a premium on the waiver wire, that's potentially an asset worth keeping.