As I began preparing for my 2012 drafts, I first reflected on the 2011 season.  Unlike fantasy football, where I won my second championship in four years and fifth in 28 seasons, I have been somewhat less successful in fantasy baseball – despite being crowned league Champs four times in 16 seasons, my last title came in 2005.

Everyone suffers injuries or is the victim of drafting players that underperform, so what have I been doing wrong these past six years?  Unfortunately, my space is limited here, so I'll focus on one particular strategy that may be the foundation for my draft issues – placing too much emphasis on position scarcity.

Last season I wrote a piece suggesting, nay recommending, that owners pass on Albert Pujols with the first draft pick, opting to go with Hanley Ramirez based primarily on position scarcity.  In hindsight, there are so many flaws with that strategy it makes me sick to my stomach.

Of course, there are many factors to consider when drafting, including age, contract status, past performance, ballpark effect, injury risk, etc.  However, it seems I was so blinded by the issue of position scarcity that I ignored some of these other factors... 

Historical Data
There is something to be said for having a sustained track record, emphasis on the word sustained.  It is why I cringe every time I see a professional team sign some player to a multi-year, multi-million dollar contract based on a small sample size (read Scott Mitchell with the Detroit Lions in 1994).  Statistically, over the 2006 to 2010 seasons, a case could have been made for either Pujols or Ramirez:

However, the $14 million man had been the model of consistency for the previous five seasons too, making Pujols about as sure a thing as there ever was. 

Injury Risk
Neither Pujols nor Ramirez had fallen prey to injury entering the 2011 season.  But, Ramirez had only been a full-time player for five seasons, compared to 10 for Pujols.  Moreover, Ramirez was a greater injury risk playing shortstop than Pujols was playing first base.  Factor in the injury risk associated with stealing bases compared to home run trots and the edge should have been to Pujols.  Of course we now know that Ramirez was plagued by a series of injuries to his foot, back and finally his left shoulder that limited him to just 92 games in 2011.

But I shouldn't be too hard on myself.  After all, there is still a significant difference of opinion among fantasy experts, and you can make a case for or against the use of position scarcity.

Many fantasy owners believe it is when there is a significant drop-off from the top performers at a particular position and those further down in the rankings.  But that is not position scarcity.  So what is position scarcity?

Using shortstop as an example, we need to draft a minimum of 12, and as many as 24, in a standard 12-team league (one shortstop and one middle infielder).  In truth, that number could be greater if you consider the utility spot and reserves but, for our purposes, let us assume that 18 shortstops will be drafted.  However, when we run dollar values off of projected stats, we do not end up with 18 shortstops that have positive dollar values, especially in Only leagues.  In fact, some of the last few players on our list may actually have a negative value.  Since we must pay at least $1 for each player and there are not enough positively valued players to fill all the starting slots, that position is said to be scarce.  And when we do determine that a position is scarce, we have to increase the values of the hitters at that position to ensure the last drafted player is worth $1.  That overall valuation is why you may pay more for the top shortstops, or why they may go early in snake drafts, even though their projected stats are inferior to other hitters being drafted in those rounds.

The argument against position scarcity is to go with the "best available player" approach.  If you select the best available player during each round, even if that means that 8 of your first 10 picks end up being a collection of first baseman, outfielders and starting pitchers, you will end up with a solid foundation, allowing you take a few more chances during the middle rounds.

Either way, heed my warning and avoid placing too much emphasis on position scarcity.  Rather, use it as a tool when comparing similarly valued players from different positions.  But that's fantasy 101.

Lastly, allow me to quote RotoWire.com president and co-founder Peter Schoenke, who so eloquently responded to last year's blog by writing (and oh, how I wished I had listened to him):

The counter argument is that in the first round of a snake draft (not auction) you draft based on floor in the first round because every player has risk.  Pujols has the lowest downside of anyone in baseball.  So you start your team with that blue chip and can figure out the rest.  Betting on your 2nd and 3rd round picks to put up better stats in a non-Pujols scenario gest (sic) risky because those players have more downside.