Quickly revisiting round 1:
King Felix
Beltre
Cruz
McCutchen
Uggla
Dunn
Choo
Bautista
V-Mart
JoJo
Werth
Posey
Hamels
Jeter
Round 2
15. Tom: Brian McCann (C) - One declining middle infielder is enough to start the draft. Given our scoring setup I really can't make a solid case for most of the "value" (by ESPN cheat sheet) picks here like Brandon Phillips (.330/.430 with declining speed in the best lineup of his career?) or Ichiro (Brett Gardner numbers in a worse lineup) or Michael Young (are you banking on 2009 numbers or 2010 at age 34?). McCann seems like a better fit, even though I'd be comfortable waiting longer on a catcher (Soto, Santana, Montero). You can bank a .375 OBP and SLG somewhere in the .450-.500 range with decent counting stats and feel comfortable.
16. Mike: Jered Weaver (SP) - Fairly confidant that the best pitcher available by the time this swings back around will be Max Scherzer, and I'd feel more comfortable gambling on first basemen, catchers, and outfielders later than picking through the middle tier of pitchers.
17. Joe: Alex Rios (OF) - If I'm Joe here, I start to feel the pressure to flesh out my outfield. Specifically I want to start thinking about speed, because the list of outfielders who give you SB without sacrificing other categories is slim. In a tough choice between Ethier and Rios, I think Rios's 30-SB potential with decent SLG behind it, in an improved CWS lineup, is a better bet. Also, ignoring Ichiro, he's the value pick.
18. James: David Price (SP) - There's another interesting opinion split here between Price, Gallardo, Carpenter, and Liriano. ESPN is convinced that Carpenter is going to have a monster year, with equivalent value to Verlander. Yahoo instead thinks David Price is the last 5-star pitcher available, drafted ahead of Verlander on average. While I think James might feel some subtle subconscious pressure to take the Cardinals guy, the younger arm is the better pick. Despite playing in the AL East on with arguably a worse lineup supporting him, Price's ERA and WHIP upside beats Gallardo's strikeout rate or Liriano's lineup. It's also worth noting here that this stupid cheat sheet has Price going AFTER Mariano Rivera.
19. Chris: Desperately unhappy with seeing Price and Weaver go. I'm not taking Phillips again. I can wait on 3B. Don't want Rollins. I'd consider pissing in someone's cheerios and taking Kendry Morales here for the utility slot and a hedge against Teixeira's notoriously painful starts, but his ankle's not 100% and he may not even be ready for opening day. Learned a lesson last year about filling the outfield too early. Too soon for catcher. Michael Young may pick up 2B eligibility at some point during the season, or he could get traded to the Royals or something. Aramis Ramirez is a big risk in a shitty lineup. Carpenter? FUCK.
This is precisely the pick where I need to hear other arguments. Putting this on pause until I can get the roundtable up and running.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
League of Ordinary Gentlemen: Mock Draft round 1 redux
With news today that Adam Wainwright is probably going to become fast friends with Dr. James Andrews, and having left my spreadsheet materials at home, I'm forced to revisit some of my round 1 mock draft choices. Let's assume for now that Tommy John is in order.
I think James now has an interesting decision to make w/r/t keepers. He can technically keep Wainwright around in hopes for a 2012 comeback, though he will be 30 years old, which is when I'd start gaming out future keeper replacement strategies, and there's no guarantee he makes a full recovery to form. But then, if you're going to risk your keeper slot on a stud arm recovering from ligament replacement, why not just keep Strasburg instead? He'll probably be ready for opening day 2012, is seven years younger than Wainwright, and has as much promise as any pitcher in the game right now.
But then, you're committing a keeper slot to someone who won't play 2011 and has no guarantee for success onwards, however successful modern Tommy John procedures tend to be. Tommy Hanson is another promising young arm who will actually pitch innings this season, and some fantasy outlets feel this will be his major breakout year.
If I'm James, the first thing I do is congratulate myself for owning the pitching side of the 2010 draft (Wainwright, Hanson, Hamels, Strasburg). Then I agonize for a month over two pitchers, to the point where I consider not keeping Utley so that I can hang onto them (but which two?). I really don't know what the right call is here. My guess is that you can probably gamble on picking up Strasburg during the draft in the mid-to-later rounds, and Wainwright shortly afterwards, whereas Hanson may be available at pick 11 but not 18. I'd probably go Pujols-Utley-Hanson, but I would feel terrible about it.
Either way, this has some implications for the back end of the first round. James has pick 11, and I had him going outfield, but I think that with the Wainwright-to-Hanson demotion, and with one less ace at the top of the SP pool, I'd have to deeply consider SP at 11. This means Chris Carpenter. I'd eat the full 1:30 of drafting time and probably still take Werth though.
Then Joe still goes Posey, leaving Mike (who I know wasn't thrilled with the Ethier pick) still needing pitching. With one less name at the top, you can probably justify Carpenter here, and maybe even Jered Weaver or Hamels (perhaps on the rebound at 16?). Carpenter/Weaver/Hamels are the guys straddling the back of the ace pool and the head of the "good arm with some questions" guys like Cain (can he keep outperforming his expected stats?), Oswalt (will age finally catch up?), Price (can TB give him enough run support?), Gallardo (can he build the stamina to not collapse late in the season?), and Liriano (was he Cain-lucky or was this a return to form?).
So let's say the end of round 1 goes:
James: Werth
Joe: Posey
Mike: Hamels (youth and team factors winning over Carpenter's injury concerns and Weaver in the AL)
Tom: Jeter
How could round two theoretically go?
Tom: Brandon Phillips (locking in the middle infield before another 26 picks go by and he's stuck in the bottom half of both positions)
Mike: Weaver (youth, strikeouts)
Joe: No idea. Jimmy Rollins for position scarcity, Carpenter for board value, Ichiro for steals and runs, Alex Rios for overall counting numbers in a better CWS lineup. I'll have to think about this more before I move onto round 2 analysis.
Jeter/Phillips feels like a really shitty pair of picks for Tom, though. Stepping back from the weeds of draft lists and positional needs, I'd be very unhappy with those players on my roster as my round 1/2 picks. Maybe Tom actually goes Weaver at 14 and Jeter 15, leaving Carpenter for Mike if he wants it, which technically makes Phillips the value pick for Joe at 17? Ugh.
I think James now has an interesting decision to make w/r/t keepers. He can technically keep Wainwright around in hopes for a 2012 comeback, though he will be 30 years old, which is when I'd start gaming out future keeper replacement strategies, and there's no guarantee he makes a full recovery to form. But then, if you're going to risk your keeper slot on a stud arm recovering from ligament replacement, why not just keep Strasburg instead? He'll probably be ready for opening day 2012, is seven years younger than Wainwright, and has as much promise as any pitcher in the game right now.
But then, you're committing a keeper slot to someone who won't play 2011 and has no guarantee for success onwards, however successful modern Tommy John procedures tend to be. Tommy Hanson is another promising young arm who will actually pitch innings this season, and some fantasy outlets feel this will be his major breakout year.
If I'm James, the first thing I do is congratulate myself for owning the pitching side of the 2010 draft (Wainwright, Hanson, Hamels, Strasburg). Then I agonize for a month over two pitchers, to the point where I consider not keeping Utley so that I can hang onto them (but which two?). I really don't know what the right call is here. My guess is that you can probably gamble on picking up Strasburg during the draft in the mid-to-later rounds, and Wainwright shortly afterwards, whereas Hanson may be available at pick 11 but not 18. I'd probably go Pujols-Utley-Hanson, but I would feel terrible about it.
Either way, this has some implications for the back end of the first round. James has pick 11, and I had him going outfield, but I think that with the Wainwright-to-Hanson demotion, and with one less ace at the top of the SP pool, I'd have to deeply consider SP at 11. This means Chris Carpenter. I'd eat the full 1:30 of drafting time and probably still take Werth though.
Then Joe still goes Posey, leaving Mike (who I know wasn't thrilled with the Ethier pick) still needing pitching. With one less name at the top, you can probably justify Carpenter here, and maybe even Jered Weaver or Hamels (perhaps on the rebound at 16?). Carpenter/Weaver/Hamels are the guys straddling the back of the ace pool and the head of the "good arm with some questions" guys like Cain (can he keep outperforming his expected stats?), Oswalt (will age finally catch up?), Price (can TB give him enough run support?), Gallardo (can he build the stamina to not collapse late in the season?), and Liriano (was he Cain-lucky or was this a return to form?).
So let's say the end of round 1 goes:
James: Werth
Joe: Posey
Mike: Hamels (youth and team factors winning over Carpenter's injury concerns and Weaver in the AL)
Tom: Jeter
How could round two theoretically go?
Tom: Brandon Phillips (locking in the middle infield before another 26 picks go by and he's stuck in the bottom half of both positions)
Mike: Weaver (youth, strikeouts)
Joe: No idea. Jimmy Rollins for position scarcity, Carpenter for board value, Ichiro for steals and runs, Alex Rios for overall counting numbers in a better CWS lineup. I'll have to think about this more before I move onto round 2 analysis.
Jeter/Phillips feels like a really shitty pair of picks for Tom, though. Stepping back from the weeds of draft lists and positional needs, I'd be very unhappy with those players on my roster as my round 1/2 picks. Maybe Tom actually goes Weaver at 14 and Jeter 15, leaving Carpenter for Mike if he wants it, which technically makes Phillips the value pick for Joe at 17? Ugh.
Friday, February 18, 2011
League of Ordinary Gentlemen: Mock Draft pt1
The very act of estimating keepers and organizing the various sheets of paper and checklists and rankings required to accomplish a mock draft without the use of a spreadsheet makes me suddenly respect the commissioners of pre-internet rotisserie. Though I will admit I spent less time meticulously measuring and drawing columns than agonizing over keeper predictions.
For example: Ryan has to choose between A-Rod, Pedroia, Ryan Howard, Jose Bautista, and Felix Hernandez. I happen to know who he's picking today, but I didn't yesterday when I started putting ideas to paper, and this was surprisingly tough. You have to consider that A-Rod is 35 and clearly in his declining years, whereas Bautista is rather unproven but younger. Which is a better keeper? A-Rod has more common-wisdom draft value, but in the calculations for keepers, he has to take a hit, no? Similarly, Ryan Howard is the poster child for fantasy-consensus decline, and he plays a rather deep position (1B is stacked, though most will end up keepers). He's ahead of Felix Hernandez in all available fantasy rankings and mock drafts, but this league sees elite pitching go very early. Are you willing to risk not having a AAA+++ young ace SP so that you can keep a 32-year-old first baseman ranked 5th by Yahoo and 8th by ESPN?
Stew has to choose between Matt Kemp and Zack Greinke. Consider that Greinke is the carry-over keeper, is in the NL now, and this league sees starting pitching deplete way before other leagues. Despite this, Kemp has a sizable lead on Greinke in all available preseason rankings, mocks, and ADPs.
Paul has to pick Shin-Soo Choo or Josh Johnson. Between Adrian Beltre, Brian McCann, Justin Morneau, Jose Reyes, and Ubaldo Jimenez, Shawn has to choose three. Morneau still isn't 100% and just this week started baseball activities, who knows which Reyes shows up this year (and will Bay/Beltran rebound to help the Mets offense?), pitchers tend to have less value on ADP charts but there's no way Ubaldo survives the turn. Joe has to decide whether he wants the potentially awesome or potentially injured Nelson Cruz, or roll the dice on a much younger and promising (but largely unproven) pitcher in Mat Latos.
Further complicating my preparation was my inability to access the final joined roto-H2H standings, so I'm forced to set the draft order as the final H2H rankings if I wanted to start this project at work, which I do. Anyway, here were the final estimated keeper decisions, and draft order.
Chris J: Miguel Cabrera, Ian Kinsler, Clayton Kershaw
Stew: Joey Votto, Matt Holliday, Matt Kemp
Kyle: Rickie Weeks, Ryan Zimmerman, Carlos Gonzalez
Austin: Adrian Gonzales, Hanley Ramirez, Dan Haren
Owen: Joe Mauer, Jason Heyward, Tim Lincecum
Fabian: Evan Longoria, CC Sabathia, Jon Lester
Paul: Robinson Cano, Kevin Youkilis, Shin-Soo Choo
Shawn: Justin Morneau, Jose Reyes, Ubaldo Jimenez
Ryan: Dustin Pedroia, Ryan Howard, A-Rod
Chris T: Mark Teixeira, Ryan Braun, Carl Crawford
James: Albert Pujols, Chase Utley, Adam Wainwright
Joe: Prince Fielder, Roy Halladay, Mat Latos
Mike: David Wright, Troy Tulowitzki, Justin Upton
Tom: Josh Hamilton, Cliff Lee, Justin Verlander
For the purposes of this mock draft, while I may be aware of certain other team owners' draft tendencies (I know Mike sorts by OBP, Owen isn't afraid of prospects or injury risks) I won't pretend to get into their heads to make decisions. All selections would be as if I was the team owner picking at that point in time.
Round 1
This is always the most predictable round in terms of structure. The first 4-5 picks will take the best-of-the-board players who probably would have been keepers on other rosters. The next 3-4 will take the remainder of the ace-potential pitchers. The rest of the round will soak up the best players at scarce positions. It's worth noting here that eight teams are keeping first basemen (I'm not including Youkilis, who will quickly qualify at 3B) and I'd be pretty happy sitting a while to gamble on Morales or Konerko. You probably wouldn't want to sink much lower though.
I'd also say 2B and 3B are deep positions. After Uggla, can you really notice a huge difference between Brandon Phillips and Gordon Beckham? Once Beltre and Bautista are picked, you still have a variety of prospects and projects at 3B all the way down to Mark Reynolds, Pablo Sandoval, and Ian Stewart. Those aren't bad gambles at the bottom.
SS is the shallow spot this year. Best on the board is Derek Jeter, whose rate stats declined severely last season, and isn't getting any younger. The falloff from there is also pretty severe. Do you really want Jimmy Rollins in round 2 (effectively round 5)? He's 33. Here are his last two seasons: .250/.296/.423 and .243/.320/.374. Is he going to steal 47 bases again like in 2008? He stole 48 in 2009-10 combined. Is he going to score as many runs without Werth around? I'd go deeper but I can't open Fangraphs at work anymore. The point is this: Yahoo's preseason top 100 ranks Rollins between Clayton Kershaw, Buster Posey, Jon Lester, and Zack Greinke. Which of the five would you choose last?
1. Chris J: Felix Hernandez (SP). For the record, this will be the second straight year King Felix will have been dropped into the draft pool and selected first. It seems like an obvious choice, with the highest "value" of all remaining players, keeper potential (not keeping Kinsler forever), and the next value pick has too many injury concerns.
2. Stew: Adrian Beltre (3B). This was a tough decision between Beltre and Bautista. I'm going 3B here instead of Nelson Cruz (value pick) because Stew already has Holliday and Kemp in the outfield, and I learned last year that filling your OF quickly leaves you strategically capped in later rounds when there are valuable OF still remaining. And I know I said 3B is a deep position, but I think Beltre's move to Texas, sandwiched between Hamilton and Cruz, can only help his offensive numbers. This could be his career year. I also think that there'll be plenty of good pitchers on the turnaround, whereas Bautista and Beltre will be gone well before Stew picks again.
3. Kyle: Nelson Cruz (OF). Going value here, as there aren't many more guys in the draft pool who will slug something in the .575 range. There are ample injury concerns here, but the upside + Texas + the stolen bases can't be passed up.
4. Austin: Andrew McCutchen (OF). McCutchen is technically the value pick (a dollar above Bautista, two yahoo ranks above Uggla) but I think it's also the right call after recognizing that I probably don't want Dan Haren to be my keeper next year. He's six years younger than Bautista, and is effectively the poor man's Carl Crawford. Combined with Hanley, this also puts me in an extremely good position for stolen bases, without having to (yet) sacrifice an OF or middle-infield spot to someone who'll slug .350.
5. Owen: Dan Uggla (2B). If I'm Owen I'm not necessarily thrilled about this pick, but it makes the most sense strategically. I really want Adam Dunn here, who is worth more than his 5x5 rankings since we play OBP. But, position scarcity being what it is, Uggla + Konerko/Morales is probably better than Phillips + Dunn.
6. Fabian: Adam Dunn (1B). I already have 3B locked up, so Bautista means nothing to me. I also have two stud pitchers. When reviewing the best remaining hitters for C/1B/OF, the choice is clear.
7. Paul: Zack Greinke (SP). Paul also has a third baseman already, so the choice is between Werth ($17) or Greinke ($17), and knowing how this league operates, grabbing the pitcher.
8. Shawn: Jose Bautista (3B). I'd consider myself lucky to see him drop this far. He's also coincidentally the consensus value pick here, but I'd want to lock in the (potentially) elite power now. He does have a certain one-year-wonder quality to him, given he has some track record of failure before 2010, but Fangraphs and other fantasy sources seem pretty sure that his power stems from a change in batting stance and swing.
9. Ryan: Victor Martinez (C). Looking ahead through the next ten picks (five teams each way) only Mike and Chris T seem likely to take a pitcher, so I'm pretty sure I can exit round 2 with a good strikeout arm. None of those teams has a catcher, however. While I consider catcher relatively deep this year, if I don't take one here, I'm positive Martinez/McCann/Posey will be long gone when I'm up again in round 3, and I'm pretty sure those guys will put up counting stats the other catchers can't match.
10. Chris T: Josh Johnson (SP). I have something of a soft spot for ace pitchers coming off arm injuries. I also desperately want to avoid last year's draft situation of perpetually waiting on pitching until I was stuck with Lackey as my #2. I'd also consider 2B and 3B rather mined out by this point, and I don't want to fill my OF just yet. It's worth noting that ESPN feels JJ is a major injury concern, but Yahoo doesn't share those complaints, so there's a rather large gap between their respective valuations on the two sites.
11. James: Jayson Werth (OF). Absent a more obvious choice, I went value here (by ESPN, they have a nicer cheat sheet), but I could justify going Posey or any number of pitchers here. Only Mike ahead of me could possibly go pitcher, so I feel ok holding off (and I already have one stud SP). Also worth noting that Yahoo disagrees with ESPN and they've buried Werth in the rankings. Since we're an OBP league, I'm leaning with the higher estimation.
12. Joe: Buster Posey (C). Not thrilled with this choice. I'd have liked to go OF here, but the next tier of outfielders (Rios, Pence, Ethier, BJ Upton, Ellsbury) feel like unsure things, given injuries from last year, or valuations based on 1-year breakouts immediately after mediocrity. Ichiro is up there on the value charts, but that's because of his BA, and we're an OBP league, so there's no reason Ichiro should be taken ahead of Brett Gardner. The other positional options are Jeter (ugh), Michael Young (ugh), Brandon Phillips (ugh from experience), or another pitcher...and I don't need to go SP3 so early.
13. Mike: Andre Ethier (OF). Too early for the remaining 1B. Too early for McCann. Don't like 2B offerings. Tom's not taking pitchers so I can wait for next round. Of the available outfielders in this tier, Ethier has the highest OBP and slugging potential.
14. Tom: Derek Jeter (SS). Have to buy in now, otherwise I'll be closely following Starlin Castro at-bats throughout the season. I'll also have to think about whether I want a Rios/Upton/Ellsbury to pair this pick, go catcher, reach for 1B (will Konerko last 26 picks?), settle for a 2B/3B (Young/Ramirez/Phillips?), or just say fuck the whole goddamn thing and take a third pitcher (Hanson, Carpenter, Weaver, Hamels, Price...).
The quality of my analysis certainly declined late in the round, after the easy picks, and also once I transitioned home from work and had to contend with Dora & Diego and spilled food and other assorted distractions.
For example: Ryan has to choose between A-Rod, Pedroia, Ryan Howard, Jose Bautista, and Felix Hernandez. I happen to know who he's picking today, but I didn't yesterday when I started putting ideas to paper, and this was surprisingly tough. You have to consider that A-Rod is 35 and clearly in his declining years, whereas Bautista is rather unproven but younger. Which is a better keeper? A-Rod has more common-wisdom draft value, but in the calculations for keepers, he has to take a hit, no? Similarly, Ryan Howard is the poster child for fantasy-consensus decline, and he plays a rather deep position (1B is stacked, though most will end up keepers). He's ahead of Felix Hernandez in all available fantasy rankings and mock drafts, but this league sees elite pitching go very early. Are you willing to risk not having a AAA+++ young ace SP so that you can keep a 32-year-old first baseman ranked 5th by Yahoo and 8th by ESPN?
Stew has to choose between Matt Kemp and Zack Greinke. Consider that Greinke is the carry-over keeper, is in the NL now, and this league sees starting pitching deplete way before other leagues. Despite this, Kemp has a sizable lead on Greinke in all available preseason rankings, mocks, and ADPs.
Paul has to pick Shin-Soo Choo or Josh Johnson. Between Adrian Beltre, Brian McCann, Justin Morneau, Jose Reyes, and Ubaldo Jimenez, Shawn has to choose three. Morneau still isn't 100% and just this week started baseball activities, who knows which Reyes shows up this year (and will Bay/Beltran rebound to help the Mets offense?), pitchers tend to have less value on ADP charts but there's no way Ubaldo survives the turn. Joe has to decide whether he wants the potentially awesome or potentially injured Nelson Cruz, or roll the dice on a much younger and promising (but largely unproven) pitcher in Mat Latos.
Further complicating my preparation was my inability to access the final joined roto-H2H standings, so I'm forced to set the draft order as the final H2H rankings if I wanted to start this project at work, which I do. Anyway, here were the final estimated keeper decisions, and draft order.
Chris J: Miguel Cabrera, Ian Kinsler, Clayton Kershaw
Stew: Joey Votto, Matt Holliday, Matt Kemp
Kyle: Rickie Weeks, Ryan Zimmerman, Carlos Gonzalez
Austin: Adrian Gonzales, Hanley Ramirez, Dan Haren
Owen: Joe Mauer, Jason Heyward, Tim Lincecum
Fabian: Evan Longoria, CC Sabathia, Jon Lester
Paul: Robinson Cano, Kevin Youkilis, Shin-Soo Choo
Shawn: Justin Morneau, Jose Reyes, Ubaldo Jimenez
Ryan: Dustin Pedroia, Ryan Howard, A-Rod
Chris T: Mark Teixeira, Ryan Braun, Carl Crawford
James: Albert Pujols, Chase Utley, Adam Wainwright
Joe: Prince Fielder, Roy Halladay, Mat Latos
Mike: David Wright, Troy Tulowitzki, Justin Upton
Tom: Josh Hamilton, Cliff Lee, Justin Verlander
For the purposes of this mock draft, while I may be aware of certain other team owners' draft tendencies (I know Mike sorts by OBP, Owen isn't afraid of prospects or injury risks) I won't pretend to get into their heads to make decisions. All selections would be as if I was the team owner picking at that point in time.
Round 1
This is always the most predictable round in terms of structure. The first 4-5 picks will take the best-of-the-board players who probably would have been keepers on other rosters. The next 3-4 will take the remainder of the ace-potential pitchers. The rest of the round will soak up the best players at scarce positions. It's worth noting here that eight teams are keeping first basemen (I'm not including Youkilis, who will quickly qualify at 3B) and I'd be pretty happy sitting a while to gamble on Morales or Konerko. You probably wouldn't want to sink much lower though.
I'd also say 2B and 3B are deep positions. After Uggla, can you really notice a huge difference between Brandon Phillips and Gordon Beckham? Once Beltre and Bautista are picked, you still have a variety of prospects and projects at 3B all the way down to Mark Reynolds, Pablo Sandoval, and Ian Stewart. Those aren't bad gambles at the bottom.
SS is the shallow spot this year. Best on the board is Derek Jeter, whose rate stats declined severely last season, and isn't getting any younger. The falloff from there is also pretty severe. Do you really want Jimmy Rollins in round 2 (effectively round 5)? He's 33. Here are his last two seasons: .250/.296/.423 and .243/.320/.374. Is he going to steal 47 bases again like in 2008? He stole 48 in 2009-10 combined. Is he going to score as many runs without Werth around? I'd go deeper but I can't open Fangraphs at work anymore. The point is this: Yahoo's preseason top 100 ranks Rollins between Clayton Kershaw, Buster Posey, Jon Lester, and Zack Greinke. Which of the five would you choose last?
1. Chris J: Felix Hernandez (SP). For the record, this will be the second straight year King Felix will have been dropped into the draft pool and selected first. It seems like an obvious choice, with the highest "value" of all remaining players, keeper potential (not keeping Kinsler forever), and the next value pick has too many injury concerns.
2. Stew: Adrian Beltre (3B). This was a tough decision between Beltre and Bautista. I'm going 3B here instead of Nelson Cruz (value pick) because Stew already has Holliday and Kemp in the outfield, and I learned last year that filling your OF quickly leaves you strategically capped in later rounds when there are valuable OF still remaining. And I know I said 3B is a deep position, but I think Beltre's move to Texas, sandwiched between Hamilton and Cruz, can only help his offensive numbers. This could be his career year. I also think that there'll be plenty of good pitchers on the turnaround, whereas Bautista and Beltre will be gone well before Stew picks again.
3. Kyle: Nelson Cruz (OF). Going value here, as there aren't many more guys in the draft pool who will slug something in the .575 range. There are ample injury concerns here, but the upside + Texas + the stolen bases can't be passed up.
4. Austin: Andrew McCutchen (OF). McCutchen is technically the value pick (a dollar above Bautista, two yahoo ranks above Uggla) but I think it's also the right call after recognizing that I probably don't want Dan Haren to be my keeper next year. He's six years younger than Bautista, and is effectively the poor man's Carl Crawford. Combined with Hanley, this also puts me in an extremely good position for stolen bases, without having to (yet) sacrifice an OF or middle-infield spot to someone who'll slug .350.
5. Owen: Dan Uggla (2B). If I'm Owen I'm not necessarily thrilled about this pick, but it makes the most sense strategically. I really want Adam Dunn here, who is worth more than his 5x5 rankings since we play OBP. But, position scarcity being what it is, Uggla + Konerko/Morales is probably better than Phillips + Dunn.
6. Fabian: Adam Dunn (1B). I already have 3B locked up, so Bautista means nothing to me. I also have two stud pitchers. When reviewing the best remaining hitters for C/1B/OF, the choice is clear.
7. Paul: Zack Greinke (SP). Paul also has a third baseman already, so the choice is between Werth ($17) or Greinke ($17), and knowing how this league operates, grabbing the pitcher.
8. Shawn: Jose Bautista (3B). I'd consider myself lucky to see him drop this far. He's also coincidentally the consensus value pick here, but I'd want to lock in the (potentially) elite power now. He does have a certain one-year-wonder quality to him, given he has some track record of failure before 2010, but Fangraphs and other fantasy sources seem pretty sure that his power stems from a change in batting stance and swing.
9. Ryan: Victor Martinez (C). Looking ahead through the next ten picks (five teams each way) only Mike and Chris T seem likely to take a pitcher, so I'm pretty sure I can exit round 2 with a good strikeout arm. None of those teams has a catcher, however. While I consider catcher relatively deep this year, if I don't take one here, I'm positive Martinez/McCann/Posey will be long gone when I'm up again in round 3, and I'm pretty sure those guys will put up counting stats the other catchers can't match.
10. Chris T: Josh Johnson (SP). I have something of a soft spot for ace pitchers coming off arm injuries. I also desperately want to avoid last year's draft situation of perpetually waiting on pitching until I was stuck with Lackey as my #2. I'd also consider 2B and 3B rather mined out by this point, and I don't want to fill my OF just yet. It's worth noting that ESPN feels JJ is a major injury concern, but Yahoo doesn't share those complaints, so there's a rather large gap between their respective valuations on the two sites.
11. James: Jayson Werth (OF). Absent a more obvious choice, I went value here (by ESPN, they have a nicer cheat sheet), but I could justify going Posey or any number of pitchers here. Only Mike ahead of me could possibly go pitcher, so I feel ok holding off (and I already have one stud SP). Also worth noting that Yahoo disagrees with ESPN and they've buried Werth in the rankings. Since we're an OBP league, I'm leaning with the higher estimation.
12. Joe: Buster Posey (C). Not thrilled with this choice. I'd have liked to go OF here, but the next tier of outfielders (Rios, Pence, Ethier, BJ Upton, Ellsbury) feel like unsure things, given injuries from last year, or valuations based on 1-year breakouts immediately after mediocrity. Ichiro is up there on the value charts, but that's because of his BA, and we're an OBP league, so there's no reason Ichiro should be taken ahead of Brett Gardner. The other positional options are Jeter (ugh), Michael Young (ugh), Brandon Phillips (ugh from experience), or another pitcher...and I don't need to go SP3 so early.
13. Mike: Andre Ethier (OF). Too early for the remaining 1B. Too early for McCann. Don't like 2B offerings. Tom's not taking pitchers so I can wait for next round. Of the available outfielders in this tier, Ethier has the highest OBP and slugging potential.
14. Tom: Derek Jeter (SS). Have to buy in now, otherwise I'll be closely following Starlin Castro at-bats throughout the season. I'll also have to think about whether I want a Rios/Upton/Ellsbury to pair this pick, go catcher, reach for 1B (will Konerko last 26 picks?), settle for a 2B/3B (Young/Ramirez/Phillips?), or just say fuck the whole goddamn thing and take a third pitcher (Hanson, Carpenter, Weaver, Hamels, Price...).
The quality of my analysis certainly declined late in the round, after the easy picks, and also once I transitioned home from work and had to contend with Dora & Diego and spilled food and other assorted distractions.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Thoughts on HSR
I've participated in some online debate recently regarding the wisdom of the Obama administration calling for $53 billion in funding for high speed rail programs across the US. I was in the middle of drafting a post responding to some of the weaker or misunderstood arguments for and against when I discovered that Florida governor Rick Scott released a statement today justifying his rejection of $2 billion of such federal funds. Much of it is boiler plate Republican talking points about spending and taxes, and I'm happy to address those matters privately, but the explanations are a little rote for the purpose of this post, which is to clarify some of the more mistaken beliefs surrounding HSR itself.
Ridership and revenue projections are historically overly-optimistic and would likely result in ongoing subsidies that state taxpayers would have to incur. (from $300 million – $575 million over 10 years) – Note: The state subsidizes Tri-Rail $34.6 million a year while passenger revenues covers only $10.4 million of the $64 million annual operating budget.
This seems to be the major conservative hang-up about high speed rail: There's no guarantee that it can pay for itself, and will probably require taxpayer subsidy for both construction and ongoing operation. My response is: You mean like every other form of transportation in the country? Fuel surcharges and state subsidies fund the national highway network. Tax breaks and bailouts are the only thing keeping domestic airlines in business, not to mention airports themselves. The MTA doesn't operate in the black, and I don't think it ever will, but that doesn't mean we should shut down NY's subway system.
The insistence that HSR pay for itself is a side-effect of Republican dogmatic belief in the almighty profit motive, and that there is no purpose beyond revenues. That HSR should be a business. I can't describe how many people I've debated this week about what exactly a public good is, or how a transportation network can provide regional economic benefits beyond ticket sales.
Current commuter rail shares railway with freight rail, causing congestion for both. If you've ever taken Amtrak between DC and NY you've probably spent some time at a dead stop in Delaware waiting for a coal train (who has right of way) to pass through a single-track lane. HSR would help alleviate such delays and improve both regional commuter transit times AND freight transit efficiency. This improves labor mobility (in the commuter sense, not permanent relocation) and freight costs, and is a double-positive in economic terms.
HSR will also be more competitive with air transit, expanding the range at which there's price and time parity between the two (to somewhere around 400-500 miles), which increases inter-city tourism, expands commuter range, and puts more people on rail instead of air, which is more energy efficient and offers better revenues per passenger-mile. It may also increase the draw of rail over road, decreasing highway congestion, decreasing road maintenance costs, lowering road accident incidence, maybe eventually lowering insurance rates, decreasing vehicle ownership, giving people more money to spend on shit they don't need at Best Buy to create retail jobs.
The point being, better transportation helps business, usually at a multiplier far greater than the nominal amount of taxpayer funds the transportation network requires to operate. Ask Mayor Bloomberg if he thinks the benefits of the MTA are worth a couple hundred million per year to the city.
It is projected that 3.07 million people will use the train annually. Keep in mind that Amtrak’s Acela train in Washington, D.C., Boston, Philadelphia, New York and Baltimore only had 3.2 million riders in 2010. And that market’s population is 8 times the size of the Tampa/Orlando market.
This is particularly dishonest, considering the "Amtrak Acela" competes with the Amtrak Regional, MARC, SEPTA, NJ Transit, MTA, ConnDOT, and the MBTA between each pair of cities, using the same rail lines. Tampa-Orlando is serviced by...Amtrak. Twice a day. It's no surprise that the 3.07 projection seems high. It's because there's less competition for the route.
Rather than investing in a high-risk rail project, we should be focusing on improving our ports, rail and highway infrastructure to be in a position to attract the increased shipping that will result when the Panama Canal is expanded when the free trade agreements with Colombia and Panama are ratified and with the expansion of the economies of Central and South America.
Improving your rail infrastructure like segregating passenger and freight rail so that your precious shipments from Panama get their own uninterrupted transit line?
Look, I'm not saying a national HSR grid is automatically a wise investment. There should be extensive studies done to identify the most likely regions where HSR can help improve current transportation conditions to an economic degree that justifies their implementation costs. What I'm saying is that this study wasn't done by Rick Scott before dismissing HSR out of hand as a "boondoggle", and is generally not done by the army of conservative bloggers and politicians who feel compelled to reflexively challenge HSR as liberal government expansion instead of bothering to consider basic economic and public policy principles.
There are so many examples of HSR working across the globe that dismissing the whole concept as waste is foolish.
Ridership and revenue projections are historically overly-optimistic and would likely result in ongoing subsidies that state taxpayers would have to incur. (from $300 million – $575 million over 10 years) – Note: The state subsidizes Tri-Rail $34.6 million a year while passenger revenues covers only $10.4 million of the $64 million annual operating budget.
This seems to be the major conservative hang-up about high speed rail: There's no guarantee that it can pay for itself, and will probably require taxpayer subsidy for both construction and ongoing operation. My response is: You mean like every other form of transportation in the country? Fuel surcharges and state subsidies fund the national highway network. Tax breaks and bailouts are the only thing keeping domestic airlines in business, not to mention airports themselves. The MTA doesn't operate in the black, and I don't think it ever will, but that doesn't mean we should shut down NY's subway system.
The insistence that HSR pay for itself is a side-effect of Republican dogmatic belief in the almighty profit motive, and that there is no purpose beyond revenues. That HSR should be a business. I can't describe how many people I've debated this week about what exactly a public good is, or how a transportation network can provide regional economic benefits beyond ticket sales.
Current commuter rail shares railway with freight rail, causing congestion for both. If you've ever taken Amtrak between DC and NY you've probably spent some time at a dead stop in Delaware waiting for a coal train (who has right of way) to pass through a single-track lane. HSR would help alleviate such delays and improve both regional commuter transit times AND freight transit efficiency. This improves labor mobility (in the commuter sense, not permanent relocation) and freight costs, and is a double-positive in economic terms.
HSR will also be more competitive with air transit, expanding the range at which there's price and time parity between the two (to somewhere around 400-500 miles), which increases inter-city tourism, expands commuter range, and puts more people on rail instead of air, which is more energy efficient and offers better revenues per passenger-mile. It may also increase the draw of rail over road, decreasing highway congestion, decreasing road maintenance costs, lowering road accident incidence, maybe eventually lowering insurance rates, decreasing vehicle ownership, giving people more money to spend on shit they don't need at Best Buy to create retail jobs.
The point being, better transportation helps business, usually at a multiplier far greater than the nominal amount of taxpayer funds the transportation network requires to operate. Ask Mayor Bloomberg if he thinks the benefits of the MTA are worth a couple hundred million per year to the city.
It is projected that 3.07 million people will use the train annually. Keep in mind that Amtrak’s Acela train in Washington, D.C., Boston, Philadelphia, New York and Baltimore only had 3.2 million riders in 2010. And that market’s population is 8 times the size of the Tampa/Orlando market.
This is particularly dishonest, considering the "Amtrak Acela" competes with the Amtrak Regional, MARC, SEPTA, NJ Transit, MTA, ConnDOT, and the MBTA between each pair of cities, using the same rail lines. Tampa-Orlando is serviced by...Amtrak. Twice a day. It's no surprise that the 3.07 projection seems high. It's because there's less competition for the route.
Rather than investing in a high-risk rail project, we should be focusing on improving our ports, rail and highway infrastructure to be in a position to attract the increased shipping that will result when the Panama Canal is expanded when the free trade agreements with Colombia and Panama are ratified and with the expansion of the economies of Central and South America.
Improving your rail infrastructure like segregating passenger and freight rail so that your precious shipments from Panama get their own uninterrupted transit line?
Look, I'm not saying a national HSR grid is automatically a wise investment. There should be extensive studies done to identify the most likely regions where HSR can help improve current transportation conditions to an economic degree that justifies their implementation costs. What I'm saying is that this study wasn't done by Rick Scott before dismissing HSR out of hand as a "boondoggle", and is generally not done by the army of conservative bloggers and politicians who feel compelled to reflexively challenge HSR as liberal government expansion instead of bothering to consider basic economic and public policy principles.
There are so many examples of HSR working across the globe that dismissing the whole concept as waste is foolish.
Thursday, February 10, 2011
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Pathfinder E6 experimentation: Bard
Just testing some things out.
Slartibardfast
Bard 6 (Arcane Duelist)
Race: Human
25 points:
10->17 (13)
10->14 (5)
10->14 (5)
10->12 (2)
Str: 14
Dex: 22 (17 + 2 human + 1 level bonus + 2 Belt of Dex)
Con: 12
Int: 10
Wis: 10
Cha: 14
Feats:
H1 Weapon Finesse: Rapier
B1 Arcane Strike
L1 Power Attack
B2 Combat Casting
L3 Furious Focus
L5 Weapon Focus: Rapier
B6 Disruptive
Traits:
Killer (+2 damage on crit)
Heirloom Weapon (+1 hit)
Gear: (16000)
Belt of Dexterity +2 (4000)
Heirloom Rapier +1, Keen (8000)
Leather +2 (4000)
To Hit (assuming within 30ft):
+4 BAB
+6 Dex
+1 Weapon Focus
+1 magical rapier
+1 heirloom rapier
+2 Inspire Courage (competence)
+2 Heroism (morale)
= 17
Damage:
+3 str (using rapier 2-handed)
+1 magical rapier
+2 Inspire Courage (competence)
+6 power attack
+2 Arcane Strike
= 14 (+2 on crit)
Math vs AC 20:
+17 [1d6+14]: .60(17.5) + .30(.90(37) + .10(17.5)) = 21.015 DPR
This build could technically be cheesed slightly more, substituting a belt of strength and using cat's grace to buff dex, accounting for summoned creatures, but this is more realistic than dedicating every 2nd level spell slot to buffs. While the total DPR is lacking, this build does buff the whole party with +2/+2, and there's something to be said for the consistency of hitting 90% of the time (and critting 27%).
AC: 20 = 10 + 6 dex + 4 armor
AC could be increased by sacrificing DPR, using a shield instead of the rapier 2-handed, taking combat expertise and/or dodge (or just going the full mobility/spring-attack route since you only get one attack anyway), spending that 4000gp on a deflection item instead of stat buffing, etc. Still, for the utility, it seems like druid is a better choice. It's an interesting build/concept anyway. It may scale up better once it gets the second attack and can toss in some burst-enchants on the rapier, but that's outside of E6.
Slartibardfast
Bard 6 (Arcane Duelist)
Race: Human
25 points:
10->17 (13)
10->14 (5)
10->14 (5)
10->12 (2)
Str: 14
Dex: 22 (17 + 2 human + 1 level bonus + 2 Belt of Dex)
Con: 12
Int: 10
Wis: 10
Cha: 14
Feats:
H1 Weapon Finesse: Rapier
B1 Arcane Strike
L1 Power Attack
B2 Combat Casting
L3 Furious Focus
L5 Weapon Focus: Rapier
B6 Disruptive
Traits:
Killer (+2 damage on crit)
Heirloom Weapon (+1 hit)
Gear: (16000)
Belt of Dexterity +2 (4000)
Heirloom Rapier +1, Keen (8000)
Leather +2 (4000)
To Hit (assuming within 30ft):
+4 BAB
+6 Dex
+1 Weapon Focus
+1 magical rapier
+1 heirloom rapier
+2 Inspire Courage (competence)
+2 Heroism (morale)
= 17
Damage:
+3 str (using rapier 2-handed)
+1 magical rapier
+2 Inspire Courage (competence)
+6 power attack
+2 Arcane Strike
= 14 (+2 on crit)
Math vs AC 20:
+17 [1d6+14]: .60(17.5) + .30(.90(37) + .10(17.5)) = 21.015 DPR
This build could technically be cheesed slightly more, substituting a belt of strength and using cat's grace to buff dex, accounting for summoned creatures, but this is more realistic than dedicating every 2nd level spell slot to buffs. While the total DPR is lacking, this build does buff the whole party with +2/+2, and there's something to be said for the consistency of hitting 90% of the time (and critting 27%).
AC: 20 = 10 + 6 dex + 4 armor
AC could be increased by sacrificing DPR, using a shield instead of the rapier 2-handed, taking combat expertise and/or dodge (or just going the full mobility/spring-attack route since you only get one attack anyway), spending that 4000gp on a deflection item instead of stat buffing, etc. Still, for the utility, it seems like druid is a better choice. It's an interesting build/concept anyway. It may scale up better once it gets the second attack and can toss in some burst-enchants on the rapier, but that's outside of E6.
Friday, February 4, 2011
A Depressing Conversation
I just had this chat with my mother, transcribed verbatim.
Her: How much is a third and a third?
Me: ..what?
Her: I'm making a recipe that calls for a third of proscuitto, but I want to double the recipe. How much is that?
Me: ..............two thirds.
Her: Right but how much is that? Is it less than half a pound?
Me: Excuse me?
Her: Like what number. How much?
Me: .66666666666666666666
Her: Oh, so it's a little more than half a pound.
Me: Yes. It's actually two thirds of a pound. Because you're doubling the recipe that asks for one third.
Her: So if I go to the deli, how much do I ask for?
Me: ....two thirds of a pound.
Her: But that's so awkward.
Me: No, it's a perfectly normal weight to ask for at the deli.
Her: So I ask for a little more than half a pound?
Me: HOW AM I YOUR SON?!?!
Her: How much is a third and a third?
Me: ..what?
Her: I'm making a recipe that calls for a third of proscuitto, but I want to double the recipe. How much is that?
Me: ..............two thirds.
Her: Right but how much is that? Is it less than half a pound?
Me: Excuse me?
Her: Like what number. How much?
Me: .66666666666666666666
Her: Oh, so it's a little more than half a pound.
Me: Yes. It's actually two thirds of a pound. Because you're doubling the recipe that asks for one third.
Her: So if I go to the deli, how much do I ask for?
Me: ....two thirds of a pound.
Her: But that's so awkward.
Me: No, it's a perfectly normal weight to ask for at the deli.
Her: So I ask for a little more than half a pound?
Me: HOW AM I YOUR SON?!?!
Re: Andy Pettitte
Haven't we seen this before? Isn't this essentially the Roger Clemens Playbook for Skipping Spring Training, April, and May? I guess it depends somewhat on how Andy parses his words during this morning's press conference, but I have a suspicion that he'll be spotted throwing some long-toss in a few months.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
BC2: Harvest Day
Harvest Day
I like this map for a multitude of reasons. The vehicles are just plentiful enough to mix up the strategy whenever one appears, but not so plentiful that they're the dominant theme of the map. I also appreciate that they've implemented both wide open farmland and tight, enclosed villages without letting the whole map be a sniper playground, thanks to irregular terrain.
Rush defense: As with other tank-laden maps I tend to prefer engineer kits, though this map (like Valparaiso) reduces the vehicles available to the offense as you progress through the match. Generally I'll stick with engineer, RPG, and 4x UMP for the first three bases, then switch to assault or shotgun recon for the final hilltop battle. I should note that it's occasionally beneficial to spawn with anti-tank mines and plaster the roads and bridges with them.
Farm 1: There are two stationary ATs here, one covering nearly the entire enemy deployment area, and the other just the two roads crossing through the base. They're both also extremely exposed and vulnerable to long-distance tank shelling and snipers on the adjacent hill. I'll usually stay on the AT on the barn's second floor until that becomes a focus of destruction (the barn almost always gets collapsed first), then linger near the secondary AT and protect the hillside from recon and infantry flankers until a tank comes rolling into town. I prefer to stay away from the riverside portion of the base here because it's way more exposed to snipers, and lets enemy tanks drive much closer without exposure to ATs. The second AT station also generally lets you run to M-COM alpha when it's charged while facing enemy defensive positions (the hay bales and the shipping container near the fence) instead of just letting them shoot you in the back.
Farm 2: The heavy MG here is in a great position to spot and kill flankers running through the treeline and snipers squatting behind the small hills along the river, and it's mostly protected from tank fire until the tank's already in the base. I like to stay on it to pick off the inevitable engineers who try to sneak to the other side of the field (towards the radio tower) to spawn-kill the defender tank. Just watch out when your bullet shield gets tracered, because you'll only have 4 or 5 seconds before the RPG arrives. I believe there's a stationary AT here, but it's completely exposed on the river bank and you'll get sniped if you even think about trying to use it for longer than three seconds.
Village Square: This is a difficult base to defend because the approach is totally visually shielded, and the M-COMs aren't even within view of one another, so your team will always be blindly split. And the one heavy MG only faces one M-COM and doesn't cover any of the approach lanes. If you don't have a recon tossing sensor balls, this is a good time to switch from engineer and test out your shotgun, G3, M14, or VSS skills. I generally still sit on the MG to cover the one M-COM in the middle of the square, but it's pretty exposed, and often totally away from the main action.
Hilltop Village: There's one AT here, and it only faces a stretch of road that's 20 meters long, and unless you have some advance notice and excellent timing it's totally useless as an anti-vehicle measure. The thing to do here is recon, because you can sensor the houses, but also drop down behind the singular enemy tank whenever it comes (via a multitude of shortcuts or cliffs) and C4 while the rest of the infantry is off fighting on the stair approaches. There's a grenade launcher in the tall building housing the M-COM but it's literally the first thing a tank driver sees on his way up the hill, and you will be killed if you stay up there.
Rush attack: Despite the prevalence of enemy metal during the first three stages, I actually prefer to assault the majority of the map and play more of a mid-range support role. You can do more elimintating AT-users and MG-campers with a 4x scope or a 40mm grenade than with an RPG shooting tanks head-on, and once you get into the bases, enemies generally won't be seaching the second floors of their own buildings for you. You can serve as a spawn point and surprise cover fire in relative safety.
Farm 1: There are three approaches: 1) The long run around and up the eastern hill with your recon buddy, where the descent is exposed. 2) The middle of the field, which is exposed to tanks, but offers some protection once you reach the base's periphery. 3) The road west across the river, totally in the open but usually less-monitored. The most successful choice depends on where the bulk of the enemy forces are focusing.
Farm 2: If you cross the river east, you can almost always run the long way around the base totally unseen, and walk right into the back door unless you catch an unlucky spawn. I do this every time. Every time. In untold dozens of matches, I've only ever been caught out there once.
Village Square: This is more of a play-by-ear exercise, depending on whether the bulk of enemy forces are focused east or west. I find that west is generally less guarded, and this is another area where sneaking into a rooftop is more useful for the team effort than racking up a quick two kills in frantic CQC and dying. I've often reached the M-COM in the square without ever firing a bullet (though if there's someone on the MG, you're toast, but then you can just take it out with a grenade on the second attempt).
Hilltop: The road is a deathtrap. Anybody can just leap down and backstab you, at any time, and you'll have no warning, so don't use the tank as a shield. You can either just brute-force your way up the eastern stairs and establish an upper spawn point, or try to be clever and flank the western hilltop (again with your recons) and hope you're not seen as you approach the tall buildings from behind.
Conquest: I find the stationary AT at C to be a remarkably safe location. You're protected from gunfire from D by terrain, from flankers by the shed nearby, from B by distance, leaving only the B flag area itself (from the A direction) as your only exposure. And if your team owns A you're almost completely free to fire missiles at will directly into B (and the hills above), the central field connecting each area, and along the road to D. If given a choice, I'll linger at C and "defend" while missiling B. Usually, attackers from D will take a jeep and circle around the back of the nearby barn, which you'll hear. This is a good map for any kit: Medics and recon for long-range slaying, assault for medium range intra-base stuff, engineer for vehicles.
I like this map for a multitude of reasons. The vehicles are just plentiful enough to mix up the strategy whenever one appears, but not so plentiful that they're the dominant theme of the map. I also appreciate that they've implemented both wide open farmland and tight, enclosed villages without letting the whole map be a sniper playground, thanks to irregular terrain.
Rush defense: As with other tank-laden maps I tend to prefer engineer kits, though this map (like Valparaiso) reduces the vehicles available to the offense as you progress through the match. Generally I'll stick with engineer, RPG, and 4x UMP for the first three bases, then switch to assault or shotgun recon for the final hilltop battle. I should note that it's occasionally beneficial to spawn with anti-tank mines and plaster the roads and bridges with them.
Farm 1: There are two stationary ATs here, one covering nearly the entire enemy deployment area, and the other just the two roads crossing through the base. They're both also extremely exposed and vulnerable to long-distance tank shelling and snipers on the adjacent hill. I'll usually stay on the AT on the barn's second floor until that becomes a focus of destruction (the barn almost always gets collapsed first), then linger near the secondary AT and protect the hillside from recon and infantry flankers until a tank comes rolling into town. I prefer to stay away from the riverside portion of the base here because it's way more exposed to snipers, and lets enemy tanks drive much closer without exposure to ATs. The second AT station also generally lets you run to M-COM alpha when it's charged while facing enemy defensive positions (the hay bales and the shipping container near the fence) instead of just letting them shoot you in the back.
Farm 2: The heavy MG here is in a great position to spot and kill flankers running through the treeline and snipers squatting behind the small hills along the river, and it's mostly protected from tank fire until the tank's already in the base. I like to stay on it to pick off the inevitable engineers who try to sneak to the other side of the field (towards the radio tower) to spawn-kill the defender tank. Just watch out when your bullet shield gets tracered, because you'll only have 4 or 5 seconds before the RPG arrives. I believe there's a stationary AT here, but it's completely exposed on the river bank and you'll get sniped if you even think about trying to use it for longer than three seconds.
Village Square: This is a difficult base to defend because the approach is totally visually shielded, and the M-COMs aren't even within view of one another, so your team will always be blindly split. And the one heavy MG only faces one M-COM and doesn't cover any of the approach lanes. If you don't have a recon tossing sensor balls, this is a good time to switch from engineer and test out your shotgun, G3, M14, or VSS skills. I generally still sit on the MG to cover the one M-COM in the middle of the square, but it's pretty exposed, and often totally away from the main action.
Hilltop Village: There's one AT here, and it only faces a stretch of road that's 20 meters long, and unless you have some advance notice and excellent timing it's totally useless as an anti-vehicle measure. The thing to do here is recon, because you can sensor the houses, but also drop down behind the singular enemy tank whenever it comes (via a multitude of shortcuts or cliffs) and C4 while the rest of the infantry is off fighting on the stair approaches. There's a grenade launcher in the tall building housing the M-COM but it's literally the first thing a tank driver sees on his way up the hill, and you will be killed if you stay up there.
Rush attack: Despite the prevalence of enemy metal during the first three stages, I actually prefer to assault the majority of the map and play more of a mid-range support role. You can do more elimintating AT-users and MG-campers with a 4x scope or a 40mm grenade than with an RPG shooting tanks head-on, and once you get into the bases, enemies generally won't be seaching the second floors of their own buildings for you. You can serve as a spawn point and surprise cover fire in relative safety.
Farm 1: There are three approaches: 1) The long run around and up the eastern hill with your recon buddy, where the descent is exposed. 2) The middle of the field, which is exposed to tanks, but offers some protection once you reach the base's periphery. 3) The road west across the river, totally in the open but usually less-monitored. The most successful choice depends on where the bulk of the enemy forces are focusing.
Farm 2: If you cross the river east, you can almost always run the long way around the base totally unseen, and walk right into the back door unless you catch an unlucky spawn. I do this every time. Every time. In untold dozens of matches, I've only ever been caught out there once.
Village Square: This is more of a play-by-ear exercise, depending on whether the bulk of enemy forces are focused east or west. I find that west is generally less guarded, and this is another area where sneaking into a rooftop is more useful for the team effort than racking up a quick two kills in frantic CQC and dying. I've often reached the M-COM in the square without ever firing a bullet (though if there's someone on the MG, you're toast, but then you can just take it out with a grenade on the second attempt).
Hilltop: The road is a deathtrap. Anybody can just leap down and backstab you, at any time, and you'll have no warning, so don't use the tank as a shield. You can either just brute-force your way up the eastern stairs and establish an upper spawn point, or try to be clever and flank the western hilltop (again with your recons) and hope you're not seen as you approach the tall buildings from behind.
Conquest: I find the stationary AT at C to be a remarkably safe location. You're protected from gunfire from D by terrain, from flankers by the shed nearby, from B by distance, leaving only the B flag area itself (from the A direction) as your only exposure. And if your team owns A you're almost completely free to fire missiles at will directly into B (and the hills above), the central field connecting each area, and along the road to D. If given a choice, I'll linger at C and "defend" while missiling B. Usually, attackers from D will take a jeep and circle around the back of the nearby barn, which you'll hear. This is a good map for any kit: Medics and recon for long-range slaying, assault for medium range intra-base stuff, engineer for vehicles.
BC2: Valparaiso Rush
Valparaiso
Rush defense: This map is growing on me, now that I know more of its small tricks, where people hide, where to intercept parachuters, where snipers like to camp. It's also a fairly large map (5 bases) with rather diverse sub-zones, such that a team who specializes in a particular rush style (say, snipers and a tank-rush) and breezes through one area may get stonewalled at the next if they can't switch tactics or skill sets. The overall tenor of defending the map, or the one I prefer to adopt, is anti-vehicle. The chopper is present at most bases, and represents the biggest threat in terms of death and as a spawn point for parachuters.
Fishing Port: The attackers get a tank and a chopper, so I almost always spawn as an engineer initially to try to tracer/RPG the chopper, which gets to the base a full minute before everything else. I like to setup near the warehouse on the water (adjacent to the heavy MG) because the chopper usually makes its turn in the back, and that's the easiest point to tracer it. And if that fails, you can usually hop on the MG for some light damage while it's over the water. The remainder of the round usually involves staying engineer for constant anti-tank anti-chopper work, but during lulls I'll switch to assault with the AN-94 and a 4x scope to take out rushers from a relatively safe distance towards the back of the base.
Lighthouse: I'm all about the stationary AT on the roof, here. Attackers still get one tank and one chopper, and if you can't tracer the chopper you can use the AT to spam it with missiles until you get lucky. Also, the AT has a sight line to a forested area where enemy infantry likes to setup when pushing, so you can spot AND missile them while still (relatively) safe towards the back of the base. I typically engineer full time on this map so I can tracer when the chopper is behind the AT's aiming arc, and jump down to RPG a tank if it makes it past the front line. The only exposure at the AT is if someone gets a sniper into the lighthouse, at which point you pretty much have to give up on half your base anyway.
Village: There are enough buildings, docks, nooks, and crannies here that recon makes the most sense. VSS is probably the way to go, since you can still hip-fire if necessary, and the built-in scope lets you do long-range spotting and sniping on guys coming down the hill. I like to park on the shore, in one of the buildings between the hill and bravo, and spam motion sensors while keeping an eye out the window to the opposite side (towards alpha, which is generally the first infantry target).
Hilltop: The area of engagement here is rather small, so I like to go assault with XM8 and rely on natural vision to spot targets atop the hills. It's suicide to go up there as a recon, and standing in the back of the base to snipe means your motion balls are worthless AND you can't see anything anyway. I'll typically park near alpha around a concrete block and just shoot whatever moves. There's not much strategy here.
Last stand: The stationary AT in the back of the base points directly down the main road, where the enemy tank will likely park to provide long-distance covering fire. Thus, I park on the AT and kill every vehicle that dares brave the road. There's some risk of exposure to snipers, but it's mitigated if your team is aggressive with pushing the line forward. If it's just you vs. whoever is on the road, you can missile-spam them the whole game. Kit is almost irrelevant for this strategy, but I tend to medic here to heal myself when necessary, and if the AT is destroyed I can still long-range guys down the road (or in the river if I head to the side of the base) with the MG36. If the line of engagement crosses the river, you've already lost, so there's little sense in planning for CQC.
Rush attack: Full medic the whole map. The MG36 is perfect for sniping and covering fire, but you can still rush behind your infantry and keep them alive when you want to be more aggressive. I've found a few useful nests:
Fishing port: There's a hill that splits the final wooded approach into two roads. Atop that hill, within deep tree camo, is a small depression you can duck into and still fire out of, in the shade, totally protected. It offers unobstructed view of the foreward-most heavy MG, the building next to it, and the alpha M-COM. I wait for my team to set the M-COM and then kill anything that tries to come close. Once that's done, I jump down the western slope and stand behind my infantry as they press bravo, keeping an eye on the tower by the treeline (enemy spawn point).
Lighthouse: Stay behind your team and just heal/rez people as they climb the hill. Once you're on top, there's a concrete block wall on the eastern side that you can duck behind for full cover, but aiming around to the left lets you cover M-COM alpha and the main base, and the right lets you pick off anybody trying to flank your squar.
Village: Sneak down the western hillside, up against the rock cliff, to pick off forward infantry while your team advances down the main hill. Once your team's fully inside the base, there's a building on the water where you can sneak up under the floor but still shoot towards their spawnpoints towards the back of the base (and M-COM bravo).
Hilltop: The magic spot here is on the back of the hill between the two road forks. It might take some work getting up there safely (it's a popular defensive position) but once you're up there, crawl to the southern end and get behind a tree. You have total sight to alpha (including the floor gap underneath, which is important here) and you can spot and occasionally snipe dudes spawning in the back and running to the building surrounding bravo (though you don't have direct sight unless someone destroys every building on that side of the base).
Last Stand: The ridge of rocks and shrubbery lining the main road gives you a little cover, and you can shoot the two guard towers from there (and the stationary AT if you're lucky). Once your team's inside the base, I like to drop down into the river and cross on the eastern path, sneaking up the hill and laying down covering fire from next to the cliff, since you can cover bravo and the back-spawns from that position. Just try not to get shot too much since you're rather exposed there.
Rush defense: This map is growing on me, now that I know more of its small tricks, where people hide, where to intercept parachuters, where snipers like to camp. It's also a fairly large map (5 bases) with rather diverse sub-zones, such that a team who specializes in a particular rush style (say, snipers and a tank-rush) and breezes through one area may get stonewalled at the next if they can't switch tactics or skill sets. The overall tenor of defending the map, or the one I prefer to adopt, is anti-vehicle. The chopper is present at most bases, and represents the biggest threat in terms of death and as a spawn point for parachuters.
Fishing Port: The attackers get a tank and a chopper, so I almost always spawn as an engineer initially to try to tracer/RPG the chopper, which gets to the base a full minute before everything else. I like to setup near the warehouse on the water (adjacent to the heavy MG) because the chopper usually makes its turn in the back, and that's the easiest point to tracer it. And if that fails, you can usually hop on the MG for some light damage while it's over the water. The remainder of the round usually involves staying engineer for constant anti-tank anti-chopper work, but during lulls I'll switch to assault with the AN-94 and a 4x scope to take out rushers from a relatively safe distance towards the back of the base.
Lighthouse: I'm all about the stationary AT on the roof, here. Attackers still get one tank and one chopper, and if you can't tracer the chopper you can use the AT to spam it with missiles until you get lucky. Also, the AT has a sight line to a forested area where enemy infantry likes to setup when pushing, so you can spot AND missile them while still (relatively) safe towards the back of the base. I typically engineer full time on this map so I can tracer when the chopper is behind the AT's aiming arc, and jump down to RPG a tank if it makes it past the front line. The only exposure at the AT is if someone gets a sniper into the lighthouse, at which point you pretty much have to give up on half your base anyway.
Village: There are enough buildings, docks, nooks, and crannies here that recon makes the most sense. VSS is probably the way to go, since you can still hip-fire if necessary, and the built-in scope lets you do long-range spotting and sniping on guys coming down the hill. I like to park on the shore, in one of the buildings between the hill and bravo, and spam motion sensors while keeping an eye out the window to the opposite side (towards alpha, which is generally the first infantry target).
Hilltop: The area of engagement here is rather small, so I like to go assault with XM8 and rely on natural vision to spot targets atop the hills. It's suicide to go up there as a recon, and standing in the back of the base to snipe means your motion balls are worthless AND you can't see anything anyway. I'll typically park near alpha around a concrete block and just shoot whatever moves. There's not much strategy here.
Last stand: The stationary AT in the back of the base points directly down the main road, where the enemy tank will likely park to provide long-distance covering fire. Thus, I park on the AT and kill every vehicle that dares brave the road. There's some risk of exposure to snipers, but it's mitigated if your team is aggressive with pushing the line forward. If it's just you vs. whoever is on the road, you can missile-spam them the whole game. Kit is almost irrelevant for this strategy, but I tend to medic here to heal myself when necessary, and if the AT is destroyed I can still long-range guys down the road (or in the river if I head to the side of the base) with the MG36. If the line of engagement crosses the river, you've already lost, so there's little sense in planning for CQC.
Rush attack: Full medic the whole map. The MG36 is perfect for sniping and covering fire, but you can still rush behind your infantry and keep them alive when you want to be more aggressive. I've found a few useful nests:
Fishing port: There's a hill that splits the final wooded approach into two roads. Atop that hill, within deep tree camo, is a small depression you can duck into and still fire out of, in the shade, totally protected. It offers unobstructed view of the foreward-most heavy MG, the building next to it, and the alpha M-COM. I wait for my team to set the M-COM and then kill anything that tries to come close. Once that's done, I jump down the western slope and stand behind my infantry as they press bravo, keeping an eye on the tower by the treeline (enemy spawn point).
Lighthouse: Stay behind your team and just heal/rez people as they climb the hill. Once you're on top, there's a concrete block wall on the eastern side that you can duck behind for full cover, but aiming around to the left lets you cover M-COM alpha and the main base, and the right lets you pick off anybody trying to flank your squar.
Village: Sneak down the western hillside, up against the rock cliff, to pick off forward infantry while your team advances down the main hill. Once your team's fully inside the base, there's a building on the water where you can sneak up under the floor but still shoot towards their spawnpoints towards the back of the base (and M-COM bravo).
Hilltop: The magic spot here is on the back of the hill between the two road forks. It might take some work getting up there safely (it's a popular defensive position) but once you're up there, crawl to the southern end and get behind a tree. You have total sight to alpha (including the floor gap underneath, which is important here) and you can spot and occasionally snipe dudes spawning in the back and running to the building surrounding bravo (though you don't have direct sight unless someone destroys every building on that side of the base).
Last Stand: The ridge of rocks and shrubbery lining the main road gives you a little cover, and you can shoot the two guard towers from there (and the stationary AT if you're lucky). Once your team's inside the base, I like to drop down into the river and cross on the eastern path, sneaking up the hill and laying down covering fire from next to the cliff, since you can cover bravo and the back-spawns from that position. Just try not to get shot too much since you're rather exposed there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)