For my draft board, I'm using a composite of a few projections. I thought it would be interesting to take a look at how the different projection systems viewed our keepers.
First, a few assumptions. Many of these systems had back end keepers listed as negative values. In order to prevent very strange things from happening to the overall valuations, I've simply listed players as being worth $0 if the projection has the below $0. Second, these values are calculated assuming 5 SP, 2 RP, 1 P - which matches the way we tend to fill out our rosters. For whatever reason, a lot of these projection systems seem to think you can go all middle relievers and be competitive in pitching, despite what common sense would tell you. I think it may have something to do with many of them being very conservative about wins. While wins are inherently hard to predict, I think the conservative projections minimize the difference in reliever wins and starter wins.
To start out, Luke is #1 in two of the three projections. Unsurprisingly, Mike Trout leads the way. Depressingly, the value of Mike Trout surpasses the total value of keepers for 5 of the 7 other teams, just edging out Andrew and Mark, who come in 4th and 5th, respectively.
Taylor comes in at #2, thanks to his impressive array of value keepers, all at $11 or lower. ESPN's projections are unfavorable for de Aza and Escobar, in particular, but Taylor's overall value is fairly consistent across all three projections. Across the board, all three systems rate Cespedes as Taylor's best keeper.
As far as my keepers go, it all depends on who you believe. ESPN projections adore my keepers, in part because those values seem to highly value elite players, and have me at 2nd overall in terms of value. Baseball Prospectus, on the other hand, is not a fan of Beltre, Butler, or Santana, and pegs me at having the second WORST value overall. BP actually has those three players as providing negative value, with their salaries outstripping expected returns by almost $10. The total difference in valuation is an astounding $50. All three agree that Edwin Encarnacion is by far my best keeper.
In fourth we have Andrew, Mr. Consistency, despite his former team name. Amazingly, there is a $4 difference between his most favorable projection (ESPN) and his least favorable (BP). In fact, all of his players are remarkably consistent, falling in a fairly tight window of values. BP departs from the other two by rating Ellsbury as a positive and is very down on Willingham (but still projects value), but otherwise there is a great deal of consensus. Alex Gordon comes in at #1 in all three projections.
In fifth, we have Mark's keepers, led by Austin Jackson at $6. None of the other players provide a substantial amount of value individually, but he also has no real holes in his keepers. Mark also is in good shape to fill difficult positions. Both outfield and firstbase were decimated by large numbers of kept players, plus relief pitcher and shortstop are always a disaster. To top it off, Zobrist's ability to play SS, 2B, and OF gives him spectacular flexibility in the draft to pick up values as he sees them, without worrying as much about positional eligibility.
In sixth, Caleb stockpiles elite players, but also pays a good deal for them. While that does limit his upside, he has an enviable core of an elite first baseman, starting pitcher, and catcher to build around. Prince Fielder is rated as his top keeper, followed closely by Price and Milone.
Kate comes in at 7th. In her case, her overall valuation is hurt by a very low rating from Baseball Prospectus, how does not see good things coming for Scherzer (negative value overall) or Viciedo. She can take solace in the fact that the other two projections have her keepers much more highly rated, with solid returns for Peavy and Victor Martinez, her best keeper overall. She also had the second highest amount of variability in her keeper values. As interesting note, Ian Kinsler is her most consistently valued player, something that shocked me considering how up and down his career has been. However, all three projections have him in a $3 window. His actual production over the past several years has not been nearly so consistent, though, and Kinsler could provide anything between $15 worth of value and a $5 loss without me being too surprised.
Finally, we come to Spencer. Spencer has some nice value, particularly in Desmond Jennings. Unfortunately for Spencer, Steamer projections really don't like his keepers - rating them as only providing a meager $2. They are very low on Anderson ($3 value) and don't rank Ogando.
