You'll also see guys with great freeze lists turn into over-critical shoppers: "No, that might be a buck too much." "No, he had a bad year three years ago." If your freeze list is great, track your categories carefully, and spend the money on t-bills.

To elaborate on that, I've seen more than a few owners make the mistake of trying to get cute and turning a good freeze list into a mediocre team by over thinking things. "I need to dump saves" or "I can maximize value by getting the guys with the highest Post All Star HR totals!" Being category or strategy cute is great if you have a bad freeze list and are going to finish 8th by having a straight auction, but there's no need to do it if you're holding the hammer.

"I've never thought Stage Four was more than the application of artistic flair to Stage Three principles."

Well said, Toz. Makes me feel like, I dunno, Rembrandt or one of them turtles.

I think Peter really hit the nail on the head. I know when I set my bid limits, my paper has the limit. My brain has the strategy. In my AL in 2010, I had a killer freeze list and not a lot of money to work with...I knew I needed to buy stats and overpaid slightly for Michael Young, one, because I could, two, because it was the right position, and three, because I needed those particular stats (of course, he hit .284 and not in the .320s, but life goes on).

I've never thought Stage Four was more than the application of artistic flair to Stage Three principles.

I do agree with that as well.

If it says $26 on your list and he's the guy you need to win, you say $27.

This is righteous Stage Four talk. Key is not to be cute. If you have the cudgel, use it.

You're right, Peter. Much better to have $43 on your sheet, even if you can afford more, not just to free up money for other things but to avoid a phony sense of confidence when $41 turns out to be enough. But you definitely want to be prepared to make an adjustment if $43 turns out not to be enough.

This all assumes you have not just one of the better freeze lists but the best freeze list. And that starting pitching is not your longest suit. And that there are few top-notch starters available.

In that situation you don't want to be cute and let the other guy have Halladay at a ridiculously inflated price just because he can't afford it.

The team that calculates he could pay Halladay $50 also knows that other teams bid limits are going to top out at $40, so he's going to assign a bid limit of $43 (or whatever) so that he doesn't shortchange himself elsewhere. If someone improbably enforces up to the high 40s he'll have to make an adjustment, but that early in the draft teams aren't going to push too hard.

The question then becomes, can you price enforce above your max bid, if that means you may have to eat that high production player and reduce your quality elsewhere.

I say max bids are for a reason. If someone else has a higher max on a player, that's the reason he gets the player. Going meta and price enforcing to a perceived max bid for someone else, well, that could be Stage 4, or Stage 9, or suicide depending on when in the auction it is and what the result is.

Alex sounds like he's saying Team B's limit is $50 because of his freeze list ... which is something Team A knows ... so if Team A is Alex (or has Alex-like wisdom :-), then Tex's question comes into play ... and I think he's proposing that that be Stage 9? :-)