RotoGuru Baseball Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread


0 Subject: RIBC Straw Poll: potential rules changes for 2015

Posted by: Guru
- [330592710] Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 15:54

To all managers in any of the RIBC leagues:

We considered a few rules changes this year, but due to the timing and my perception of lukewarm interest, I decided to table those alternatives until next season at the earliest.

Rather than waiting until next season to gauge interest, I want to set up an informal "straw poll" now. Any manager in any of the RIBC leagues can vote.

Here are the proposals:
A. Eliminate "Wins" as a pitching category, and replace it with "Quality Starts". No other changes.
B. Eliminate "Saves" as a pitching category, and replace it with "Saves plus Holds". No other changes.
C. Make both changes.
D. Make no changes.


For more detailed discussion, you can review the RIBC: getting started thread. But I think I can summarize some of the thoughts as follows:

- Quality starts is a better representation of "good pitching" than wins, since a pitcher can win 9-8, but gets no win if the opposing pitcher outduels him in a classic pitching duel, or if the bullpen blows an otherwise solid start.

- Quality starts, however, is also flawed. Since a QS is defined as a start where the starter pitches at least 6 innings and surrenders no more than 3 earned runs, there are plenty of situations when a mediocre outing (e.g., 3 runs over 6 IP represents an ERA of 4.5) is rewarded, and a better outing (e.g., 4 ER over 10 IP) is not.

- Eliminating wins as a category hurts the value of middle relievers, because they cannot get a QS, but they can earn wins.

- This can be mitigated by making the "relief stat" equal to saves plus holds. This not only elevates the value of middle relievers, but also puts less of a focus on the scarce saves category.

- Even if wins are retained in lieu of switching to QS, the reliever change still warrants consideration. In fact, it would elevate the relative value of middle relievers even more, as a MR would now potentially contribute to all 5 pitching categories.

- Making either of these changes would make the standard "cheat sheet" rankings less relevant. Of course, that's already the case for hitters, where we use OBP and SLG instead of HR and BA.

Feel free to add more comments as you wish. Or just register your preference as A, B, C, or D.

This is not a binding vote for next year, but will certainly be a factor in considering any related changes for next year.
1Toral
      Leader
      ID: 2111201313
      Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 16:03
1.I would opt for "d", but add an intriguing middle-of the road option: Wins PLUS quality starts, Perfect compromise?

2.My experience with sayes + holds leagues is that they are somnolsent; Not as much fun as the idea might look. All that might work is making each seperate categories and adding a 6th hitting category.

Toral
2JeffG
      ID: 2654157
      Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 16:23
On A, I am not sold on QS replacing W. While both are flawed measurements I think MR get devalued if we flip to QS. Leaning no.

On B. Even if QS was agreed upon, I'd be a definite NO on changing saves to saves plus holds. Although it would certainly remove the need to overreach for a closer because of the scarce few players who accumulte saves, I am just not a believer in the holds stat.
3Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 16:46
Unfortunately, none of the primary hosting services offer wins + QS as a category option. So that's a non-starter, at least for now. They do offer holds + saves, however.
4holt
      Donor
      ID: 308491916
      Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 17:37
D
5Bean
      ID: 5292191
      Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 17:44
D
6Khahan
      ID: 16341313
      Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 17:59
D



Though I might also consider D. But in the end now that I think about it, I think I'd choose D.
7Seattle Zen
      ID: 3310162612
      Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 18:08
A

As the bannerman for quality starts, I will state once again that wins are a bad, bad joke. Some sabermatrician could look into this, but I feel that back in the 90's a starting pitcher who tossed 7 or 8 innings and gave up one or two runs had an extremely high likelihood of garnering a win for his effort. It sure seems quite a bit less likely now.

If ESPN and Yahoo add Wins+QS, I think that is a very compelling idea, but as Guru mentioned, it's not an option today.

I really don't like holds.
8blue hen
      ID: 4739168
      Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 18:23
D
9Uptown Bombers
      ID: 81262014
      Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 22:51
D
10mjd
      Dude
      ID: 501381415
      Thu, Mar 06, 2014, 22:52
D
11beastiemiked
      ID: 5911312710
      Fri, Mar 07, 2014, 10:05
D
12loki
      SuperDude
      ID: 4211201420
      Fri, Mar 07, 2014, 12:48
D
13Seattle Zen
      ID: 3310162612
      Mon, Mar 31, 2014, 14:14
Should I make this thread into a spot where I point out quality starts made by pitchers and ask the manager if they still want to vote against QS? I'm looking towards Guru with Ryu's 7 innings of shutout ball... :)
14 jdrenbarger
      Dude
      ID: 04035768
      Mon, Mar 31, 2014, 15:13
D
15Da Bomb
      Donor
      ID: 487112814
      Mon, Mar 31, 2014, 15:44
At least Ryu's effort helped in 3 other categories.
16Perm Dude
      ID: 431013412
      Mon, Mar 31, 2014, 23:52
A
17mailedfoot
      ID: 128391010
      Tue, Apr 01, 2014, 08:32
C
18Nerfherders
      ID: 161121811
      Tue, Apr 01, 2014, 11:19
I'm torn on this one. I've advocated for QS in the past in other leagues. I like the idea of all relievers being equal (all the good ones anyway), but I am not sure what that would do to the league dynamics. How many saves+holds do you need to win the category? How many relievers get a decent amount of both stats? I don't know.

It would be interesting to change up the league a bit after all of these years, however, so I am going to vote:

C
19kdl212
      ID: 231211918
      Tue, Apr 01, 2014, 12:13
D
20R9
      ID: 41219518
      Tue, Apr 01, 2014, 21:37
Not in the league but follow it every year and throw a team in every now and then when I have time.

Love the idea of Wins+QS. Not sure I like QS on its own in a league this deep, as it really devalues MR's. Balancing a pitching staff with quality MR's that can chip in has been a trademark of many deep leagues, and mirrors MLB itself.

Hate Saves+Holds. They are not equal. Saves are much rarer then holds. Something like (Saves*3)+(Holds) is more accurate, and returns some semblance of value to MR's if you switch to QS, but that's impossible to track too.

Another knock on switching to QS... closers chip in some wins too. If you switch to QS, closers go down in value as well. If you switch to both, skipping closers entirely until the much later rounds will be the normal strategy... which is fine if you want to change things up, but isn't the norm in either the rest of fantasy baseball nor real life MLB.

All that to say, the changes are fine if there is a desire for change and an acceptance of those things. But I'd vote:

D

with a strong YES if any service ever brings in QS+Wins.

Could also look at adding Holds as its own category and balancing that with a hitting category, but I'd probably be down on that too.
21mjd
      Dude
      ID: 501381415
      Sun, May 18, 2014, 17:36
I don't want to step on holt's trade talk, so I'll move my comments over here where they should have been in the first place.

To recap, my question concerned the timing of when was the freeze for same day transactions.

The RIBC and anyone else using ESPN use the first game of the day freeze.

Yahoo same day transactions don't freeze until the player's game starts which is how we do it in other fantasy sports. At least in football.

ESPN does have the option of same day transactions until the individual player's game.

I kind of like having that option especially if I'm thinking about streaming a guy who may or may not play in a Wednesday night game. But the freeze on Wednesday is always early due to getaway day in a M-T-W series. The ability to make late game transactions would be nice.

Any interest in considering this as a potential change next season?
22Guru
      ID: 330592710
      Sun, May 18, 2014, 20:07
I think the issue that has been raised is that if there is a player who has already locked for the day, then you can't even pick him up until he's unfrozen. You have to wait until the next day to initiate the transaction.

People who need to do most of their add/drop transactions in the evening objected to that limitation.
Rate this thread:
5 (top notch)
4 (even better)
3 (good stuff)
2 (lightweight)
1 (no value)
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.

RotoGuru Baseball Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread




Post a reply to this message: RIBC Straw Poll: potential rules changes for 2015

Name:
Email:
Message:
Click here to create and insert a link
Click here to insert a block of hidden (spoiler) text
Click here to insert a random spelling of Mientkiewicz
Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)


Viewing statistics for this thread
Period# Views# Users
Last hour11
Last 24 hours33
Last 7 days55
Last 30 days1312
Since Mar 1, 20072523887