RotoBaller's Nick Mariano looks at why fantasy owners are best served not paying full price for closers in their 2017 fantasy baseball drafts.

This isn’t the hottest of takes here, as the SAGNOF (Saves Ain’t Got NO Face) school of thought has had a steady stream of followers for quite a few years now. It’s a little more complicated than that of course, as this isn’t simply about the straight up value of taking a closer early on.

There’s the opportunity cost of the starting pitcher or batter that you passed on in order to secure that closer and get those precious saves. Look, I know, closers aren’t the only ones who get hurt or lose their jobs, but boy howdy if they don’t lead the charge with it relative to the amount of closers you start the year with (we’ll say 35, accounting for a few “battles”).

Editor's note: Make sure you bookmark our 2017 fantasy baseball rankings dashboard. Our rankings assistant tool combines all our staff's ranks in one place. You can easily filter and export all sorts of rankings and tiers - mixed leagues, points leagues, AL/NL only, top prospects, dynasty ranks, and more.

What You Lose When Paying For Saves

Perhaps you think that this is more of a reason to pay for those top flight closers, and get yourself an Aroldis Chapman, Craig Kimbrel, or Kenley Jansen type of guy. There is validity to that strategy, but the opportunity cost of doing so can really leave you behind the eight ball when it comes to hitting categories if you pass on a top-flight bat. I'd rather tangle with the FAAB and Waiver Wire crazes and attempt to get out ahead of the next great situation (skills over roles), rather than trying to build up a top hitter out of that same player pool.

Looking at last year in the middle of March, right in the thick of draft season, we still had Glen Perkins and Ken Giles as very respectable mid-tier options. We know these scenarios didn’t play out so well for those who bought in on them. These are just a few examples.

When all was said and done last year, Jeurys Familia led the league with 51 saves, followed by Mark Melancon, Kenley Jansen and Zach Britton with 47. Close behind were Sam Dyson with 38, and Alex Colome and Jeanmar Gomez with 37 each. None of Dyson, Colome or Gomez were the closer heading into the year, but it wasn’t long before they took over and ran away with the role.

Then there were guys like Roberto Osuna who, while drafted, emerged as a top flight RP with 36 saves and is now a top 10 RP in 2017. There was Ryan Madson who had 30, and Jeremy Jeffress who had 27. Out of the 30 teams in the MLB, over 10 experienced major closer upheaval at some point during the year in 2016.

Now it would be foolish to expect any supreme amount of consistency in exact closer turnover rate, as hindsight bias and gambler’s fallacies could drive us into oblivion if we rely too much on any one piece of information. That said, the volatility of the closer position is undeniable, and while you might not want to go place bets in Vegas on how many closers will lose their jobs by the end of the year, there is a great chance that the number will be in the double-digits.

Know (and Minimize) the Risks

The truth is that the closers and relievers that you’re going to snag late in drafts will have plenty of risk to them. Whether that be related to their job security, performance on the mound, injury history, and so on, there will be risk. The point is that now instead of drafting Wade Davis, you can get a Chris Davis or Matt Carpenter. Instead of Osuna or Kimbrel, you can get Hanley Ramirez or Mark Trumbo.

Move down the ADPs futher. Instead of Ken Giles or Cody Allen, you can take a shot on Jose Bautista or Danny Salazar. Replacing a mediocre closer is usually much easier than replacing a solid corner infielder. This is only one strategy of course, but it is an extremely valid one that requires diligence and savvy speculating on those “next men up” relievers. Do not read this as a "you should punt saves" piece, but there is a strong case for not ponying up with top or even mid-round picks, and at least not more than once. Build a solid foundation, and leave the riskiest position for your picks that cost the least.

Understandably, it isn’t as palatable in leagues with shallower rosters as carrying a few relievers who could enter the ninth in the near-future can really hamstring you in the present. This doesn’t invalidate the disadvantage you can give yourself in missing those mid-round positional players though, which goes double for the elite guys where you’re passing up hitters or starting pitchers in the top 100.

Also, don't discount the elite RPs who are slated to be setup men, like Andrew Miller and Dellin Betances.  Miller, Tyler Thornburg, Dan Otero, Nate Jones and Ryan Dull are all examples of RPs who should be rostered in deep leagues, whether or not holds are a category. The sparkly ratios they can produce make them as valuable as most mediocre closers, and if the guy in front of them goes down, they become elite closer options.