Posted by: Guru
- [330592710] Fri, Jan 30, 2004, 13:30
Time to start planning for the inaugural RIBC, which will be run similar to the current Hoops Challenge. Before figuring out who to invite, I'd like to start some discussion on the format.
Some things are set: We'll do a slow draft at the forum. Each manager will be asked to provide a brief rationale for each pick, as was done for basketball. The draft will probably get started sometime in early March.
We'll use Yahoo as the platform. Most people have some familiarity with it, it is stable, and has worked out well for the RIHC.
We'll use a typical roto-scoring format, with rankings in each category. The actual categories are still to be determined.
We'll use players from both major leagues.
We'll have some sort of pitching limits - either starts, or total innings pitched, or both. I'll need to review the Yahoo capabilities. Maybe we'll have some game limits for hitting slots as well, although I don't think those are as critical.
Major items to be determined: Number of managers Roster configuration Statistical categories
Discussion Selection of managers will be by my invitation. Major factors considered will be GuruPatron status, demonstrated expertise in some form of fantasy baseball, and forum activity. Participants in the RIHC will not be eligible (except for me).
I'd like the player selection to be fairly deep, so there will be some interplay between the number of players on a roster and the number of managers in the league. At a minumum, we'll have 12 teams. But I'd like some feedback from those of you with experience in larger leagues.
Most of my experience is with 5x5 leagues, using W, S, K, ERA, and WHIP for pitching, and R, HR, RBI, SB, and avg for hitting. However, I'd like to be a bit more creative than this, and choose some more meaningful categories (if Yahoo supports them), like slugging pct or on-base pct (or even OPS). There is certainly no magic to 10 total categories, either.
Open for discussion. What are your thoughts?
Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
39
KrazyKoalaBears Leader
ID: 517553018 Sat, Jan 31, 2004, 19:47
MITH, the rule I've used in the past with regard to drafting unlisted players is that they're fair game for the draft. If someone drafts an unlisted player, they have full rights to that player as long as they leave an open roster spot for that player until they are available. If the manager fills that spot, the drafted player becomes fair game for all managers (prevents the manager from essentially having a free draft pick for that player). If the manager leaves the spot open, they are the only one allowed to pick the drafted player up. The commish has the ability to enforce this if need be.
Yes, it does take a bit of baby-sitting to start the season, but I've found that it adds a bit more interesting angle as people have to determine whether or not they want to let that "hidden gme" that's not listed make it through the draft or not. I've also never experienced any problems with this in any leagues I've been a commish of. If you have a good group of managers, like what I would expect for this league, they'll self-enforce it.
Lastly, you don't run into issues like Dominik Hasek in hockey where he wasn't listed for early drafts and essentially the last person that drafted got two 1st round draft picks because they had waiver priority to pick up Hasek as soon as he was listed.
40
Rogue Nine Leader
ID: 2624472 Sat, Jan 31, 2004, 20:16
Two years ago I was in a very active 16-team league which had a 1500 IP limit, and nobody came close. Not that I think thats a problem really, just that I don't think anyone will actually reach even 1400.
As far as catagories, I definitely like OBP replacing AVG, just to finally see walks have meaning. Nothing worse then watching your guy go up to bat and walk. Its good for HIS team, but does nothing for you... Not sure where I'd stand on SLG/HR. In principle I like SLG, since just like walks it would bring some meaning to 2B and 3B. With just HR, an infield single equals a gap-blasting triple. But StlCards brings up a good point in 25, as ratio catagories are hard to track. I don't think having both is an option either, as that seriously destroys the value of speedy-leadoff types. Juan Pierre's 1 HR and .373 SLG turn him into a goat pretty quickly if both are catagories. If the scoring was expanded to 6x6 then maybe both could be included.
I'd be very interested in getting into one more quality guru roto league, especially one that isn't a keeper league. I especially like the 'rationale posting' for each pick. Should make for some good conversation. Credential-wise I did pretty average last year in GB20, but won it all in WPFB and finished respectable in TSN Ultimate. I should be pretty fair competition if you'll have me.
41
wiggs Donor
ID: 4991311 Sat, Jan 31, 2004, 20:19
i would love to get in too. Sounds like a great league.
42
Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 217351118 Sat, Jan 31, 2004, 21:59
KKB 39 Agree with all.
43
Guru
ID: 330592710 Sat, Jan 31, 2004, 23:28
An alternative to slugging pct would be to count total bases. Simplifies anaylsis, but still gives partial credit for triples and doubles.
We'll have to see what options Yahoo offers.
44
blue hen
ID: 4300290 Sun, Feb 01, 2004, 04:00
I'm sure they offer total bases and I LOVE that idea.
45
Rogue Nine Leader
ID: 2624472 Sun, Feb 01, 2004, 08:39
Agreed, and Yahoo does have TB as a catagory. So Runs, RBI's, SB's, TB's and OBP. Looks solid.
The nice thing about Yahoo is that it will let you search players by the catagories your league uses. So if you have TB's, before the draft starts the FA list will have all the players sortable by runs, rbi's, TB's, etc. So nobody will have to look to far to find TB data. At least that was the way it was last year...
46
khahan
ID: 313111819 Sun, Feb 01, 2004, 09:11
Total bases (I assume instead of HR), seems like a pretty good compromise here. Will be very interesting to see a league with some of the base scoring categories changed up.
47
Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 217351118 Sun, Feb 01, 2004, 09:44
Not sure what I think of the Total Bases idea as a measure of power stats. I'd have to look further into this, as it changes the value of a number of traditionally high draft picks. Sosa and Bonds fail to make the top 25, falling behind the likes of Jay Payton and Dmitri Young.
MLB Top 25 HR
MLB Top 25 Slugging
MLB Top 25 Total Bases
J. Thome, Phi
47
B. Bonds, SF
0.749
A. Pujols, StL
394
A. Rodriguez, Tex
47
A. Pujols, StL
0.667
V. Wells, Tor
373
B. Bonds, SF
45
T. Helton, Col
0.63
T. Helton, Col
367
R. Sexson, Mil
45
J. Edmonds, StL
0.617
A. Rodriguez, Tex
364
J. Lopez, Atl
43
G. Sheffield, Atl
0.604
A. Soriano, NYY
358
A. Pujols, StL
43
A. Rodriguez, Tex
0.6
A. Huff, TB
353
F. Thomas, CWS
42
C. Delgado, Tor
0.593
G. Sheffield, Atl
348
C. Delgado, Tor
42
D. Ortiz, Bos
0.592
G. Anderson, Ana
345
J. Giambi, NYY
41
M. Ramirez, Bos
0.587
N. Garciaparra, Bos
345
S. Sosa
40
T. Nixon, Bos
0.578
C. Delgado, Tor
338
G. Sheffield, Atl
39
J. Thome, Phi
0.573
M. Ramirez, Bos
334
J. Bagwell, Hou
39
R. Hidalgo, Hou
0.572
B. Boone, Sea
333
J. Edmonds, StL
39
J. Guillen, Oak/Cin
0.569
R. Sexson, Mil
332
R. Palmeiro, Tex
38
F. Thomas, CWS
0.562
J. Thome, Phi
331
A. Soriano, NYY
38
A. Huff, TB
0.555
M. Ordonez, CWS
331
M. Ramirez, Bos
37
S. Sosa, ChC
0.553
P. Wilson, Col
322
A. Jones, Atl
36
V. Wells, Tor
0.55
J. Bagwell, Hou
317
P. Wilson, Col
36
R. Sexson, Mil
0.548
J. Lopez, Atl
314
B. Boone, Sea
35
M. Ordonez, CWS
0.546
C. Lee, CWS
311
A. Huff, TB
34
G. Anderson, Ana
0.541
L. Gonzalez, Ari
308
V. Wells, Tor
33
G. Jenkins, Mil
0.538
J. Payton, Col
307
M. Lowell, Fla
32
D. Young, Det
0.537
A. Jones, Atl
305
R. Sanders, Pit
31
P. Wilson, Col
0.537
D. Young, Det
302
J. Burnitz, LA/NYM
31
B. Boone, Sea
0.535
E. Chavez, Oak
302
48
khahan
ID: 313111819 Sun, Feb 01, 2004, 09:58
changes the value of a number of traditionally high draft picks. Well, any change to the traditional 5x5 stats has some kind of effect on high draft picks, even going from BA to OBP. Looking at your chart I see that some of these changes are more drastic than most would think, but a league with 'changes' isn't so bad. I'd look forward to a different game.
49
Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 217351118 Sun, Feb 01, 2004, 10:06
Yeah, I guess it's a matter of taste. Looking at this small sample, I think I like slugging best. I'd have to look at a much larger model to decide for sure.
50
Guru
ID: 330592710 Sun, Feb 01, 2004, 13:42
A better power alternative might even be "total extra bases", but I doubt if that is available. Essentially, it would be defined as total bases minus total hits.
Bonds, of course, is hurt by his high number of walks. But then, that helps him a lot in OBP.
51
Ref Donor
ID: 539581218 Sun, Feb 01, 2004, 14:21
I don't remember Yahoo having a games started limit for pitchers but could be I've just never been in a league that used it. Got to have a max innings as it adds a great deal of strategy--esp. important when an owner has no closers and kicks that cat and loads up on W/K and even WHIP at times. I'm also not a fan of slugging % but I absolutely love OBP. A guy that draws a walk regularly can be huge--esp when he can steal a base and score a run too. I never knew how much diff. OBP was until we used that in our 20 team league. Also can take away the power hitters that can't get on base or reward the guys like say Piazza who can.
52
blue hen
ID: 331038201 Sun, Feb 01, 2004, 17:22
Bonds also had too few plate appearances. He even falls short of Pujols in RC.
I would be interested in joining this league, if a slot were available.
54
Ref Donor
ID: 539581218 Mon, Feb 02, 2004, 11:30
I like having the OF rather than a specific OF position if I were voting.
55
Chuck Donor
ID: 169212110 Mon, Feb 02, 2004, 12:11
LF/CF/RF would add a bit of a twist to the game for sure. I have a personal preference of just "OF", but I see where having left/center/right would give a distinct advantage to those who are willing to do the research. If you are going for "reality" here, that might be the path to go. It would certainly make some people work through their draft sheets for sure.
56
Species Leader
ID: 7724916 Mon, Feb 02, 2004, 14:45
I wholeheartedly support KKB's suggestion in post 39. LOVE it.
The Hasek example was a good one, but Guru can remember in our first Keeper League year (that *I* won! ;-) I had to draft last......but Ichiro was a "rookie" that year and not in the draft database, so I purposely held off drafting my 2nd good OF knowing I'd have Ichiro off of waivers.
LF/CF/RF is okay, as long as Yahoo can sort by that and we can see position eligibility before the draft. The only "problem" there is making up lost games if you have a short bench of 4 like has seemed to have been proposed.
I'm more into HR and OBP myself. I don't like how Total Bases skews things.
57
ProudestMonkey
ID: 39136219 Mon, Feb 02, 2004, 21:07
Major factors considered will be GuruPatron status, demonstrated expertise in some form of fantasy baseball, and forum activity.
I'd love to throw my name into the ring: -I'm a donor, but I'm on my wife's computer right now. -Can't prove baseball experience, but I've played the TSN game for ~3-4 years and I joined a competitive 4x4 roto league last season. I can provide a reference from the commissioner if that would help! -I've mostly been a lurker around here, but I've been following the boards for 3+ years. I'd post regularly as part of the league.
58
smartone @work Donor
ID: 29452720 Tue, Feb 03, 2004, 15:16
Total Bases is a great idea
Would love to join the league ... I'm working on a pretty heavy applications for a roto-baseball league (I have developed a similar one during this year's Guru-qualifier Hoops and it seems to help a lot) and it would be a great place to test its effectiveness
59
Slackjawed Yokel Sustainer
ID: 52347519 Tue, Feb 03, 2004, 22:24
it hasn't gotten you to the top yet, smartone ;-)
and I'd also like to be considered, guru
60
smartone @work Donor
ID: 29452720 Thu, Feb 05, 2004, 11:01
Slackjawed Yokel, your previous post was just in time... ;-)
61
Guru
ID: 330592710 Thu, Feb 05, 2004, 12:35
I've been working on the list of invitees. I've now got it down to a "short list" of only 52 names. Ugh...
Obviously, a lot of good candidates will not get invited. Please don't take it personally!
I'm sure that all invitees will be GuruPatrons. (All of those on my short list so far are, so that seems like an easily satisfied criteria.) In addition, I would like to have some international representation. If you are a GuruPatron who lives outside the U.S. and you are interested, please speak up now. I already have several possible international candidates identified, but I may have overlooked someone obvious - or not realized a foreign connection for someone.
62
Chuck Donor
ID: 169212110 Thu, Feb 05, 2004, 13:18
Uhh... I live in Northern Minnesota. We're practically our own country up here... :-)
63
Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Thu, Feb 05, 2004, 15:03
Je vis en dehors des Etats-Unis. Loin, loin parti, dans une nation appelée le "Canada". Nous parlons même une langue étrangère !
Toral
64
deepsnapper
ID: 2110582311 Thu, Feb 05, 2004, 15:14
If it comes down to BA vs OBP category, I prefer the former. THey don't award the triple crown for OBP. ;)
Sandbox uses game limits on pitchers, but I don't recall it in Yahoo.
Baseball feva anyone?
65
blue hen Leader
ID: 710321114 Thu, Feb 05, 2004, 16:20
Two leaguemates from West Hartford, Connecticut? Hmm...
66
R9 Leader
ID: 2624472 Thu, Feb 05, 2004, 16:33
Canadian here as well. Just for the record though, we're not all transaction freaks like Toral. ;)
67
ProudestMonkey
ID: 4310361717 Thu, Feb 05, 2004, 18:14
I'm moving to Belgium at the end of this month. I'll be living there for 6-12 months and then I'll live in Germany for another 6 months.
68
Caper Donor
ID: 1535108 Thu, Feb 05, 2004, 19:44
I am Canadian as well
69
Caper Donor
ID: 1535108 Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 08:24
For the record, I would love to play if there is a spot. If there isn't, no problem. I certainly take more from this site than I give.
70
Toral Sustainer
ID: 2111201313 Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 12:58
You know, with 52 names, you could have 3 14-team leagues (assuming 10 or so don't accept the invite): Guru RIBC Majors, Guru RIBC AAA, and Guru RIBC AA, all drafting at the same time with explanations, with the bottom two or three Majors teams being "relegated" to Guru AAA next year, and replaced by the top 2 or 3 teams from there. A way to assuage the hurt feelings of those who don't make the first cut ;) (Or maybe not.)
Toral
71
wiggs Donor
ID: 4991311 Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 13:04
great idea toral.
72
Tree Donor
ID: 599393013 Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 13:05
Toral - i've always thought an idea of relegation in a long-term fantasy league would be cool. obviously, a keeper-style league wouldn't work with that many teams, but dang, that rocks.
73
Farn Sustainer
ID: 451044109 Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 13:05
re #70.
We have that going for hoops. Just one extra league but its going fine right now.
74
GolfFreak Sustainer
ID: 1730209 Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 13:07
Guru, if you are going to do torals idea, I would be willing to head up one of the league. Just let me know.
76
wiggs Donor
ID: 4991311 Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 13:24
farn 73
actually dont we have 2 other leagues for hoops? You and I arent in the same league are we?
77
smartone @work Donor
ID: 29452720 Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 14:21
yep, there are the Farn Qualifiers League and the Stuck Qualifiers League though I am not sure if it was "officialy" determined how many teams will qualify to next year's RIHC from each division.
78
Farn Sustainer
ID: 451044109 Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 14:22
it was never official. Guru runs the main league. Our leagues were just set up at as a way to get everyone involved and if Guru thinks somebody is worthy from one of our leagues he is welcome to take them for next year.
79
Mike D Sustainer
ID: 41831612 Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 16:06
smartone, nice links. Damn I had a nice draft. Why'd I trade all those guys?
80
JeffG Sustainer
ID: 1584348 Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 17:17
Just throwing in my 2 cents based on my Yahoo experience since I have been in Yahoo ROTO baseball leagues with collegues the last 4 years, and am set to play with them again this year - not that I was one of the 50 names anyway ;)
- My league does OBP and SLG instead of AVG but this gives us 6 offensive categories. Can't give up homers! SLG took care of our debate about using total bases as a stat. These categories give you another reason to stay up and root for walks and extra base hits at 1 AM with the Satelite dish. 6x5 does not skew things to much towards the good hitting teams.
- Yahoo has the 'commish' set an inning limit for pitchers, but you get all the stats for the day you cross the inning threshold. The last 2 years, I held one inning back while all my opponents crossed the threshold mid-September, then wait for a good day, and fill my team with everybody availible who is starting that day filling all of my active pitcher spots. You can get 50 extra innings out of this strategy, good for a few extra wins and lots of K's which can make the difference, I actually moved from 4th to 2nd overall on the two seaons ago doing this. Informed all of my competitors about it last year. We have a real low inning limit (1200), this year I am proposing that being raised higher to lessen the benefits this loophole and to force teams to use a larger group of starters. With a low limit, you can sit your starters against poor match ups, or to give your stud a few more of the innings your team has to use. If the innings total is low, closers give you better WHIP and ERA and burn less innings, while you can be selective with when to start your starters. Another argument that a higher innings threshold puts more relevence to your entire pitching staff.
- When a player is not listed on Yahoo!, it is a first-come-first-serve as to who picks that player up when Yahoo decides to add them. It benefits the guy who can get on the comp at 7AM eastern time. Many I know have emailed Yahoo! asking that it be changed to a waiver priority, hope they do.
- I would almost like to see the catcher position abolished, but would suggest considering having a lower games limit on that position if only we had the ability to limit games by position. There is little incentive to put your second catcher in on days your #1 catcher is off since your backup catcher can drain your average categories. Again, just adds to the strategy of the draft and maintaining a team.
- We have never used the LF CF RF approach, but it sounds more challenging, especially with a large league like you guys are going to have.
- You need a mix of counting stats and ratio stats (as Guru put it) and more of the counting than the ratio. Otherwise someone with good early ratio categories plays too conservative with starts which kind of defeats the simulation of a season.
Can't think of any other Yahoo quirks. Just be sure you draft early and in the forum, because these have always been big helps to me seeing how others approach the process when I am prepping for my draft. Of course, if my office league ever falls through, this forum would be the first place I looked for another one.
Hey all. I'd be interested in taking part as well. I like the deep leagues, and some of the category changes would be interesting as well. The promotion/relegation idea sounds pretty cool. Maybe the top and bottom 3 or 4 teams move?
I'm currently living in New Zealand and will be travelling through Thailand for much of April and May before returning to Canada in June. I'm sure I'll still be able to keep half an eye on my team while away though. Internet cafes-a-plenty everywhere you go now.
Let me know... Matt S
82
KrazyKoalaBears
ID: 7121616 Sun, Feb 08, 2004, 23:46
Just wanted to raise my hand as being interested in the league in case I wasn't on the short list.
83
Peter N.
ID: 51122220 Thu, Feb 12, 2004, 19:43
I don't like the idea of replacing SLG% or HRs with Total Bases. Between HR and SLG%, I lean more towards SLG%(gives value to doubles and triples). I also like OBP over BA.(gives value to walks).
As far as inning maximums and minimums, I'd say 1400IP would be more than enough. I'd even suggest something closer to 1350IP. I also believe there needs to be a minimum IP number.
With regard to starting pitchers and closers, I don't believe there needs to be designation between SPs and RPs. However, I do think having to draft a LF, CF, and a RF instead of just 3 OFs would add an interesting wrinkle of strategy.
I'm also interested...I've been in fantasy sports for 5 years now (including basketball, 1 year in hockey and baseball), and have played in 4 winners league...Baseball is my forte, so i'm really hoping i get an invitation from the best of the best and a chance to compete and see where i stand. It would really be an honor to receive a formal email inviting me to such a league; i've been waiting for so long...oh joy!!
85
Peter N. Donor
ID: 257161713 Thu, Feb 12, 2004, 21:00
Forgot to mention. In regard to post 19, I don't think that is too deep at all. I like it. I also think 9 pitcher slots and a 4 deep bench would work well.
OH international....3 to 4 months a year i live in symi a small Greek island in the aegean....that's pretty cool, considering Orioles owner Peter Angelos has created a Baseball Team for the 2004 Olympics to represent Greece...I will definently catch that, but i didn't know this was a criteria people...
87
smartone Donor
ID: 29452720 Fri, Feb 20, 2004, 18:16
what do you guys think of using less traditional categories such as Net Wins (W-L); Net SB (SB-CS) and Net Saves (Sv-BS)? Moreover (or, alternatively), why not to make it a 6x6 league by adding a Loss category and a power hitting category?
This will require more work in the draft preparations, as most cheetsheets are geared towards the traditional 5x5 leagues.
88
Baldwin
ID: 560191911 Fri, Feb 20, 2004, 22:42
I would love to participate.
Ask the old timers in the Political Guru Yahoo League if I am a strong manager.
Rate this thread:
If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time.
If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating.
If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here.