1. Players (like Alex Gordon) who aren't currently in the Rotohog 'universe' will be added shortly after drafts end at a price determined by the Rotohog staff to be 'fair'.
2. The folks at Rotohog have been very careful NOT to answer my questions about the spread and other details of the trading and pricing mechanism. We're just going to have to wait and see. If I had to guess, I would think the spread will be larger on highr priced players, but obviously my strategy depends on it not being too large. That said, I think there will be lots of trading opportunities to make money, so some variation of my strategy should work regardless.
Now, onto a couple things that somebody said in the comments yesterday that I think may represent common misconceptions:
Had there been a pitcher whose cost was $100, the cost per anticipated point would be points/100. Each start should account for approximately 3.5% of the year's production. (It's obviously not a smooth curve, but over the course of the season...) For the second game, if there were no change in the price, the value would be points (.965)/100.
That's not right. At any given time, the total value of all players in the Rotohog universe by definition is equal to the total amount of Rotohog dollars. Since you don't get bonus points for having money at the end of the season, there's no reason to 'hoard' money. You spend whatever you have to get productive players. So all else being equal, player values would be the same at the end of the season as at the beginning. Of course, all else is not equal, because each time there's a transaction some money will disappear from circulation forever (the transaction fee/spread)...so there will be some deflation, but not as extreme as what happybooker is implying, and I believe it will have the least impact on star players...if anything their prices may increase as more people become aware of the strategy of rotating players.
The other part of his comment that I wanted to address is this:
If a top performer, say Santana, has a great opening game, the price should fall the day after. If he has a normal deviation relatively weak start, the price should stay the same or rise marginally.
That's not how things work. If you project Santana for a 2.50 ERA for the season and he get bombed for 10 runs on opening day, you don't assume he'll now pitch 2.20 ERA baseball for the rest of the season to get him to 2.50 for the season. You have to assume that he'll pitch 2.50 ERA ball and end up somewhere around 2.80 for the season. To give an example of the same principal...when you flip a coin and it comes up heads three times in a row, is it more likely to come up heads or tails on the next flip? His comment suggests that he might say 'tails, since it needs to end up 50/50 overall'. That would wrong though - its still 50/50 on all future flips.
By the way, I now know who I will selecting with the first pick in the Rotohog draft. If you've been reading this blog carefully, you should know too. If not, I'm willing to let you know if you send me an email at firstname.lastname@example.org telling me that you'd like to be added to my blog mailing list (which is for this blog and my other blog The Waiver Wire. Let me just say that if you're drafting next Monday at noon Eastern and you end up in my draft, you're going to have to be very, very fast with your first pick if you want the same player I do. So you may want to steer clear of that time for your draft.