Utility infielders? Time to get those pitchers and catchers reporting

Some very exciting stuff on the lukewarm hot stove Monday -- especially if you're a fan of utility infielders.
Three or four of them signed minor league contracts. The Indians agreed to terms with Elliot Johnson, whose base stealing actually can give him some fantasy value; the going-several-directions-at-once Brewers welcomed Pete Orr, and Chris Nelson signed with the Reds, one of the few teams he didn't play for in 2013. I still haven't seen a confirmation that the Rockies and Paul Janish made a deal. If you're looking at Janish for your fantasy team, you're in a for a long season. He can help a team's defense for a few late innings a week.
And there's speculation that LHP David Huff, newly acquired from the Yankees, could fill a role as the Giants' fifth starter. If Huff's a viable major league starter at this point, why wouldn't New York keep him? Is his salary too small?
* * *
Basketball. I'm off to a 7-1 start this week, but I don't put much stock in that. I had four players active Monday to my opponent's one. He's leading in free throw percentage because his player, Trey Burke, made his only attempt. So my .875 is second to Burke's 1.000.
My division and league leads are 8 1/2 games with six weeks remaining. I don't plan to let up. My belief is that fantasy owners, winning or losing, owe it to the rest of the league to play from the first week to the last. On my part, there won't be any of the thinking that some NBA fans try to mind-meld on to their favorite team: "If we could finish seventh instead of sixth, we wouldn't have to face the (current hot team in third place in the conference)." I wouldn't look at overall lineups and say during the last week, "If I lay down against this fifth-place team, it could move into fourth and I'd have an easy road in the semifinals."
But you know what? I still have to win the league to get the first seed.
* * *
Hockey. All four of my bench players were from the Avalanche. Two factors went into that decision. 1) I have to limit the games played, as I outlined in the previous post, so that I'm not sitting on the fantasy sidelines for the last week or two, and 2) The Stars have been hot lately, so the matchups might not be good.
That strategy didn't look good as I watched at the American Airlines Center when "my" Nathan MacKinnon scored in the first minute or when Paul Stastny scored on a power play or later when it appeared that Stastny might have deflected what became the game-winning goal.
But in the end, the four Colorado players were a combined minus-4.
Here's an edited version of what I wrote about the game itself.
My acquisition of Kevin Bieksa looked good. He provided an assist and two penalty minutes to help me within within one PIM of the team directly ahead of me. A question I've often asked: Why the "I" in PIM?
* * *
The line for the big game 48 in my "Bet a Thousand" pool was set today at Denver minus-2. My own research had come up with this: Denver minus-2.
What to do? At the time I made the line, I established this line of thinking. If the weather is reasonable (which it is expected to be Sunday), that could be to Denver's advantage. Also, it's Peyton Manning against Russell Wilson. Of course, it's really Manning against the Seahawks' scary defense, but still he's Peyton Manning. Also -- and this is a line of thinking that could get you killed if you always used it -- a rule of thumb is to ask yourself whether a team is likely to win by a field goal or win by a touchdown. If Sunday's game comes down to the last minute tied and the Broncos have the ball, could they be likely to get a field goal?
An even more dangerous way to approach the decision is to look at history. We've had 47 years of big games. In that time, there has been only one game decided by 1 point: the Bills' wide-right loss to the Giants in big game 25. Six games were decided by 3 points, with five of those during the past 12 years. What I think we can take away from this is that it's likely whatever team wins will do it by 3 or more points.
So the question is "Are the Broncos likely to win?" I think so, even as much as I respect Seattle's defense.
I expect the people in my pool to be about evenly split. That would mean of the five people ahead of me in the pool, two or three of those ahead of me would be likely to take Seattle. So if Denver covers, I'd move up from sixth to third or fourth. If the Broncos win by 2, I'd remain sixth, the last place in the money. If Seattle wins, I'd lose anyway -- which I would also do if Denver somehow won by 1.
I think the Broncos will win, quite likely by a narrow margin such as 3 points. If I made a token "wager" such as $100, it's likely that at least one person would pass me and I'd be out of the money no matter who wins the game or covers.
On the other hand, if those at the top take Seattle, and one or more of the others take the safety-first approach, I could move up even higher than third or fourth.
The most I could finish with in my hypothetical bank would be $5,800, which would keep me in the money somewhere. Obviously, I would lose with $0, but I might also lose with $3,000.
It doesn't hurt that I have some other irons in the fire. In the Pittsburgh playoff pick-'em pool, I think I would finish first if Seattle wins. Also, I have a puncher's chance to win at least my original entry fee in a traditional 100-square Super Bowl pool with winners each quarter and prize money for diagonally touching squares.

Garza contract could set a bar too high

The baseline has been set for contracts for the remaining veteran free-agent pitchers. If I were a general manager, that baseline would frighten me.
$50 million for four seasons for RHP Matt Garza? What did he do last season to earn that kind of money? He also has $4 million in incentives, and a $15 option for 2018 that would be vested by a number of innings pitched.
Prediction (and please come back in four years to taunt me or tell me I was right): Garza not only would be with a new team by 2017, but also would not see that option vested.
The other weekend news concerned veterans who might retire. The Dodgers reported have made an offer to 3B+ Michael Young, who is contemplating retirement. And the Pirates are waiting to hear whether RHP A.J. Burnett would retire.
Another prediction: Garza's contract could tell Burnett that he can make a lot of money in 2014. He'll sign a contract with provisions for his family to travel with him at times. That family time seems to be a sticking point.
* * *
Hockey. I had just three players active Sunday, but still gained a point to 67, moving me within eight points of second place. The half-point I gained was in goalie wins, with Tim Thomas pulling it out in overtime even though he didn't play very well and allowed four goals. The other two goalie categories took additional hits from his performance.
I made some moves to try to improve, picking up essentially backup goalies from good teams. Their decimal categories of goals against average and save percentage should be helped by the defense in front of them. And their teams should score enough goals when they play to give them wins. So Jonas Gustavsson and Frederik Andersen are in, and Antti Raanta (who hardly ever plays) and Steve Mason are out. Mason hasn't seemed to recover from that rapid-fire three-goal barrage I saw in Dallas a month or so ago.
I also picked up Vancouver D Kevin Bieksa to replace the minus-14 Keith Yandle. In addition to being plus-4, Bieksa could help in shots and penalty minutes, and marginally in power-play points and ATOI.
Important key: In addition, I finally addressed my league's games limits. With roughly nine weeks remaining (a couple slightly truncated by the Olympics break), I can fall within the limits with games from 26 forwards, 14 defenseman, two either/or utility skaters and eight goalies. So I scheduled a plan for this week that knocked off a total of seven games from what I would have used with no limit. The tricky part is the days when almost every team plays. There are just four spots for skaters on the bench, so I have either to play more skaters than I want or to waive some to add players who aren't actually playing. Let's see how my method goes; I'll keep you posted.
With this plan, I wouldn't come up to the last week or two with no games remaining. But if I had implemented something like it at the beginning of the season, I could have gotten by with maybe one or two players per week sitting out.
* * *
Basketball. I might have outsmarted myself on this one. Playing my strongest (field-goal) shooting percentage lineup may have carried me to a narrow win in FG% by .0012, but could have cost me a point in free throw percentage.
I benched Victor Oladipo, who was 6 for 12 from the field and 6 for 6 at the foul line. The thinking was that bigger men closer to the basket would have higher percentages than outside shooters such as Oladipo.
The thinking was partially correct. Inconsistent G Joe Johnson was 2 for 7 from the field and missed 1 of 2 free throws. But Anderson Varejao was 1 for 9 from the field, and Jared Sullinger went 1 for 7. Carmelo Anthony's 35 points didn't help because he was 14 for 31 from the field. Can't really complain, though, because his 23 for 35 in Friday's 62-point effort was the biggest difference for me in FG%.
Even more damaging, big man Varejao also was 0 for 3 at the foul line. His knee could have been bothering him after he fell to the floor hard in a collision with Markieff Morris, but still ...
I can't find the team totals for the week, but substituting Oladipo's perfect free throw shooting for Varejao's perfectly awful night could have made up the difference in my .7664-.7582 loss. On Sunday, my team was 17 for 23 (just .7391) with Varejao, and would have been 23 for 26 (.8846). My opponent's players were on fire at 20 for 23 (.870).
The 7-1 week still increased my lead over two teams tied for second place to 8 1/2 games. I'm surprised, after it took so many weeks to make up the last few games to get into first place that I have built such a big lead in just two weeks. Can't let up, though.
Also made a player move at guard, with the Lakers' Jodie Meeks replacing Mo Williams.