#3 Dynasty Draft Pick
I posted this same message over at FakeTeams HERE, but thought I'd give it a shot here on Minor League Ball also.
Hey everybody. I'm in a Dynasty League and I have the #3 overall draft pick this year. We play on Yahoo and only Yahoo players can be picked up on teams. Almost every offensive and pitching stat counts, so it's not your typical 5x5. For instance, HLDs are just as important as SVs and BBs are just as important as HRs. My question is, who would you pick for my Dynasty Team with the #3 overall pick. I'm assuming that Heyward and Strasburg will go 1 and 2, so I'll list a few other possibilities at the end of this email. Here's my current team:
C Matt Wieters (Bal - C)
1B Lance Berkman (Hou - 1B)
2B Dan Uggla (Fla - 2B)
3B Alex Gordon (KC - 3B)
SS Hanley Ramírez (Fla - SS)
CI Ian Stewart (Col - 2B,3B)
MI José Reyes (NYM - SS)
LF Carlos Lee (Hou - LF)
CF Cameron Maybin (Fla - CF)
RF Justin Upton (Ari - RF)
OF Jay Bruce (Cin - RF)
UTIL Bobby Abreu (LAA - LF,RF)
UTIL Nelson Cruz (Tex - RF)
BN Lars Anderson (Bos - 1B)
BN Dexter Fowler (Col - CF)
BN Fernando Martinez (NYM - LF,CF,RF)
BN Buster Posey (SF - C)
BN Alexei Ramírez (CWS - SS)
BN Sean Rodriguez (TB - 2B)
BN Travis Snider (Tor - LF,RF)
SP Chris Carpenter (StL - SP)
SP Matt Garza (TB - SP)
SP Jake Peavy (CWS - SP)
SP Rick Porcello (Det - SP,RP)
SP Rich Harden (ChC - SP)
RP José Valverde (Hou - RP)
RP Chris Pérez (Cle - RP)
P David Price (TB - SP)
P Chad Billingsley (LAD - SP)
P Brian Matusz (Bal - SP,RP)
BN Johnny Cueto (Cin - SP)
BN Ervin Santana (LAA - SP)
BN Chris Tillman (Bal - SP)
BN Scott Kazmir (LAA - SP)
Please rank the following players SPECIFICALLY FOR MY TEAM:
Desmond Jennings
Mike Stanton
Chris Carter
0 recs |
14 comments
| Add comment
Comments
From what I see,
You need upgrades at 3b, 1b, LF. With Snider in the minors, LF can be put on hold. That leaves 3b and 1b. Generally I’d go with best player available, but you’ve got a loaded OF that is lacking a little speed, but very good overall. For me, it’s either Alvarez or Jennings. It looks like Alvarez is the better of the two in terms of fantasy for how your team is built. The other direction to go is Montero, but I think you’ll be waiting a year or two for him. Plus, you’ve already got Wieters so there really isn’t any need for him.
Alvarez is the way I would go just because he’ll be 3b eligible and I’m not high on Gordon developing.
"When Justin Upton faces Lincecum, I think Christ might appear in the heavens, and the world will end." -JakeFree
by JT12340 on Feb 11, 2026 10:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Montero
Best player available.
Hey guys, I run a music blog. alternative, powerpop, punk, electronica, screamo, etc etc, check it out. http://muzikdizcovery.blogspot.com/ artist interviews and many other stuff. free cookies! (not really, but still) :D
by cwhitman412 on Feb 11, 2026 10:42 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
For one...
Montero does not really have a position. Also, best player available to you may be different to someone else. I see the best player available as Pedro Alvarez. The only way you can use that is if there was one player who is much better than the rest. For example, if Jason Heyward was available, he would be the clear best player left and then you could use that.
by joegonzo on Feb 12, 2026 12:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
1b/3b is your black hole
so I go Montero, Smoak, Alvarez in that order.
by PrincetonCubs on Feb 12, 2026 12:03 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
+1
CF may not be your biggest need area, but you have to go with the best player available. And since OF position counts, Jennings has a TON of value.
by guru4u on Feb 12, 2026 9:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He has...
Dexter Fowler and F-Mart on the bench at CF and he doens’t have a good starter or any kind of depth at 3B. Considering Alvarez could put up numbers better than any 3B in the majors in a few years, I would take him.
by joegonzo on Feb 12, 2026 12:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I am sure
You could always trade Fowler and/or Maybin. F-Mart won’t qualify in CF for long, as he is unlikely to play there in the bigs.
I also like Gatling’s idea of trading the pick to move down a few spots - if you really like the current CF mix. I think you would be minimizing value by simply picking Alvarez at #3. Either trade down and still take him at #6 or 7, or take Jennings and deal one of the other CFers.
by guru4u on Feb 12, 2026 6:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ok...
for one thing, best player available could be Alvarez, Montero, Stanton, or Jennings. So out of those 4 players it is whoever fits your team best. Alvarez clearly fits your team the best out of the 4 and Jennings would not be that good of an idea considering the young OF talent you have and the lack of talent you have at 3B. Montero might not fit on your team at all once he moves to DH and Stanton is just too raw for me to even consider at this point.
1 Alvarez
2 Smoak
3 Carter
4 Jennings
5 Montero
6 Stanton
That is the order in which I think they fit your team combined with talent. Alvarez seems like the clear choice to me.
by joegonzo on Feb 12, 2026 12:12 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Trade down?
I think Alvarez is probably the best fit for your roster, but not necessarily the best value for your draft position. Anyone in your league absolutely in love with a guy like Stanton, Montero, or Jennings? You’d probably be better off dropping down a couple of spots and picking up an additional asset or two through a trade if you think you can still get Alvarez by moving down a bit.
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 12, 2026 4:39 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
What happens when...
he trades down and someone takes Alvarez before his next pick? Just because you don’t think he is rated as highly doesn’t mean other people believe the same thing. When they are as close in talent as these guys are, taking Alvarez presents just as good of value as taking anyone else available. you could argue Jennings has more because of the type of league, but you could make the argument that Alvarez also has more. If someone who is clearly better was available like Heyward, then you should take him, but if it is this close in talent you take the guy who fits your team best because someone else might have him rated that high also.
by joegonzo on Feb 12, 2026 11:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well
that certainly is a risk you’d take, but as I said above I’d considering moving down a couple of spots. He has the 3rd pick, moving down two spots puts him at #5, meaning only one pick between the one he trades(again as I suggested to someone specifically looking for one of Stanton, Jennings, or Montero) and the pick he makes. Now, if the guy pick 4th has a bigger need at 3B than rmarx does, obviously you wouldn’t want to trade down, which is why I said make a deal if you feel Alvarez will get to you. The other side of this coin is by moving down rmarx would be picking up an additional asset(s), so since the talent of the players mentioned is so close he still might end up better off making a trade and taking BPA at #5 because of whatever else he gets in a trade.
It’s no slight at Alvarez, I like the guy quite a bit. But I like Stanton, Montero, and Jennings more and it’s very likely someone in his league might truly prefer one of those guys over the others by quite a bit. The idea is to maximize your value with the pick, sometimes that means picking for need, sometimes it’s picking BPA, sometimes it’s a trade.
RIP Nick Adenhart
by gatling on Feb 13, 2026 12:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Heyward is not currently available in Yahoo leagues...
So one of the players on your list is going to be gone too. If Jennings is available I would take him in a dynasty league.
by AtomicDumpling on Feb 12, 2026 10:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I have to say...
your team is built really well for present and future.
by joegonzo on Feb 12, 2026 11:48 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
On Facebook? Use Connect to join SB Nation. Share insights with fans and friends.- » Create a new SB Nation account
- » Already registered with SB Nation? Log in!
by rmarx on 





