Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

Skating Tripods · 02-24-2012, 08:08 PM

So, we have 13 without Parrill and lindeman. Looking at 15 with those two, if they both sign up. So we'd have to go with 16 unless someone wants to back out.

lindetrain · 02-25-2012, 12:46 AM

Ahh my bad, didn't know the sign-up was time-sensitive.

Probably gonna pass if it's more than 12. Not that I don't want to play, just not sure I'm interested in a league that deep. And, the only non-ESPN league experience I've had in the past few years was a very frustrating one, so I have quite the preference to playing there.

Thanks for the invite though...

Skating Tripods · 02-25-2012, 12:55 PM

(02-25-2012 12:46 AM)lindetrain Wrote: Ahh my bad, didn't know the sign-up was time-sensitive.

Probably gonna pass if it's more than 12. Not that I don't want to play, just not sure I'm interested in a league that deep. And, the only non-ESPN league experience I've had in the past few years was a very frustrating one, so I have quite the preference to playing there.

Thanks for the invite though...

Wasn't really "time-sensitive". Just that guys were signing up as they got the emails. Draft's still a month away so it's anything but time-sensitive.

If you reconsider, we'll make a spot for you.

The Posse · 02-29-2012, 02:19 PM

Still have an uneven number of teams. Do we have a final participant?

Skating Tripods · 02-29-2012, 02:19 PM

RyanParrill still hasn't signed up. He also molests collies.

**spanishredeye** · 02-29-2012, 02:43 PM

Maybe posting some pics of collies will get that weirdos attention.

[Image: CollieRoughSasha2YearsOldPurebredDog.jpg]

Skating Tripods · 03-08-2012, 12:39 PM

Parrill finally signed up.

On to the next step. Let's determine categories.

1. 5x5, 6x6, or other? Whichever you vote for, select that number of categories in questions 2 & 3.

2. Pick 5 (or 6): AVG, OBP, OPS, H, R, RBI, HR, AB, SB, TB (total bases), XBH (extra base hits), K, other (specify other)

3. Pick 5 (or 6): Appearances, IP, W, L, CG, SHO, SV, ER, HR, BB, K, HLD (holds), ERA, WHIP, K/BB, K/9, RW (relief wins), QS (quality starts), other (specify other)

Majority decision on all questions wins. Will have separate votes for any tied categories. All posts due in by March 15 (one week from today) so we can get everything finalized over the 12 days before the darft.

**spanishredeye** · 03-08-2012, 12:47 PM

1. 6x6
2. AVG, H, R, RBI, HR, SB
3. W, L, SV, K, ERA, WHIP

illadelphia · 03-08-2012, 01:33 PM

1. 7x7
2. AVG, H, R, RBI, HR, SB, XBH
3. W, L, SV, K, ERA, WHIP, CG

JSpauny · (This post was last modified: 03-08-2012 01:41 PM by JSpauny.)

1) 6x6
2) AVG, R, HR, RBI, SB, OPS
3) W, K, ERA, WHIP, SV, either Holds or QS

For 3 I'm fine with adding Holds if we want to make RPs more valuable or QS if we want to make SPs a little more valuable and so they don't get as screwed over by blown saves and bad offenses. Either one I'm cool with.

I think Wins and Losses is a terrible, terrible idea though. So if a pitcher throws 9 IPs of 1 run ball and gave up 3 Hits, 3 BBs (aka 1.00 ERA and 0.66 WHIP), and K'd 10 but his offense sucks so his team lost we are basically going to punish that pitcher in Wins (since he didn't get one) and Losses because his offense was terrible? That just doesn't seem right.

Wins is already such a "luck" category due to the many circumstances that can affect a W without the SP contributing one bit (like a blown save). I think adding Losses just adds another "luck" situation seeing how a loss can be erased when the SP isn't even in the game. I'm cool with one or the other, but I really would hate it if we included both.

And already 2 votes for Wins and Losses =(. This isn't good.

**spanishredeye** · 03-08-2012, 02:00 PM

I picked what I picked because they're basic. I have no idea what holds means.

JSpauny · (This post was last modified: 03-08-2012 02:08 PM by JSpauny.)

Let me add one thing: in fantasy sports you want the categories to be stats that your player more or less controls. This eliminates most of the luck factor.

Wins and Losses are only affected by the SP for 6 or 7 innings. Anything can happen in those last 2 or 3 innings by players who aren't your pitcher that can hurt or help your fantasy team. I for one don't like that. I prefer stats that the guy I drafted directly controls.

Like I said, I'm fine with one, but I think both is a bad idea.

(03-08-2012 02:00 PM)spanishredeye Wrote: I picked what I picked because they're basic. I have no idea what holds means.

Understandable. I get wanting to keep it basic, but there's a reason the standard 5x5s and 6x6s usually include only Ws.

Holds mean the RP basically came in in a save situation and didn't allow the other team to tie the game.

Might I recommend QS instead of losses. QS means the SP went at least 6 IPs while giving up 3 runs or less. It is a much more controlled stat.

**spanishredeye** · 03-08-2012, 02:25 PM

Im okay with QS over Loses.

JSpauny · 03-08-2012, 02:41 PM

(03-08-2012 02:25 PM)spanishredeye Wrote: Im okay with QS over Loses.

Thanks for at least considering QS.

I'm not trying to force what I want onto this league, but I've done enough leagues to know which cats work and which ones can lead to trouble. Both Wins and Losses is one that in my experiences have led to trouble.

illadelphia · 03-08-2012, 03:59 PM

(03-08-2012 02:41 PM)JSpauny Wrote:
(03-08-2012 02:25 PM)spanishredeye Wrote: Im okay with QS over Loses.

Thanks for at least considering QS.

I'm not trying to force what I want onto this league, but I've done enough leagues to know which cats work and which ones can lead to trouble. Both Wins and Losses is one that in my experiences have led to trouble.

You convinced me as well. I am good with QS in lieu of L and/or W

The Posse · (This post was last modified: 03-09-2012 12:57 AM by The Posse.)

(03-08-2012 01:41 PM)JSpauny Wrote: For 3 I'm fine with adding Holds if we want to make RPs more valuable or QS if we want to make SPs a little more valuable and so they don't get as screwed over by blown saves and bad offenses. Either one I'm cool with.

I think Wins and Losses is a terrible, terrible idea though. So if a pitcher throws 9 IPs of 1 run ball and gave up 3 Hits, 3 BBs (aka 1.00 ERA and 0.66 WHIP), and K'd 10 but his offense sucks so his team lost we are basically going to punish that pitcher in Wins (since he didn't get one) and Losses because his offense was terrible? That just doesn't seem right.

Wins is already such a "luck" category due to the many circumstances that can affect a W without the SP contributing one bit (like a blown save). I think adding Losses just adds another "luck" situation seeing how a loss can be erased when the SP isn't even in the game. I'm cool with one or the other, but I really would hate it if we included both.
And already 2 votes for Wins and Losses =(. This isn't good.

Pretty much completely agree with this (especially the dislike of having losses as a category). Just so my vote is tallied:

1) 6x6
2) AVG, R, HR, RBI, SB, OPS
3) W, K, ERA, WHIP, SV, QS

(03-08-2012 12:39 PM)Skating Tripods Wrote: Majority decision on all questions wins. Will have separate votes for any tied categories. All posts due in by March 15 (one week from today) so we can get everything finalized over the 12 days before the darft.

I have one separate request I'd like to make separate from categories. I've always liked knowing my draft position in advance as opposed to finding out 30 minutes before the draft. One league I've been in for years uses the following: http://www.net-commish.com/tools/random/index.php. Thoughts?

Regarding Trade Review- I really dislike league votes for trade review. Everyone is going to have their own unique opinion as to what's a fair trade and what isn't. Sometimes what appears to be one sided ends up being very fair or even the opposite of what was the predicted outcome. Some managers reject trades because they don't want other teams to improve or possibly become dominant. I've always felt if managers agree to a trade that it should be allowed unless there's collusion or it's obviously ridiculously unfair (for example: a middle relief pitcher for a top starting pitcher). I think trades should be reviewed by the Commissioner with all being approved (unless there's a need for an inquiry). Just my two cents.

JSpauny · 03-09-2012, 01:20 AM

(03-09-2012 12:40 AM)The Posse Wrote: I have one separate request I'd like to make separate from categories. I've always liked knowing my draft position in advance as opposed to finding out 30 minutes before the draft. One league I've been in for years uses the following: http://www.net-commish.com/tools/random/index.php. Thoughts?

Regarding Trade Review- I really dislike league votes for trade review. Everyone is going to have their own unique opinion as to what's a fair trade and what isn't. Sometimes what appears to be one sided ends up being very fair or even the opposite of what was the predicted outcome. Some managers reject trades because they don't want other teams to improve or possibly become dominant. I've always felt if managers agree to a trade that it should be allowed unless there's collusion or it's obviously ridiculously unfair (for example: a middle relief pitcher for a top starting pitcher). I think trades should be reviewed by the Commissioner with all being approved (unless there's a need for an inquiry). Just my two cents.

I like The Posse's first thing. Knowing draft position early could drastically affect one's strategy going into the draft. Might not be a bad idea to set a draft order early. I'm behind the idea.

On trade reviews, couldn't agree more. I used to think that league votes were the best option, but in the last few years I've found Commish approval to be far superior. As long as the Commish (or an appointed trade "guru" of sorts) can rule objectively and understand that player value can be subjective (like The Posse mentioned), it's a much better option. Posse laid out the negatives of league voting. Plus, voting leads to activity issues if only a handful actually vote on the trades.

Skating Tripods · 03-09-2012, 11:22 AM

Fair on both counts. Setting a draft order is fine along with changing trade veto power to Commish Only. Valid reasoning that I don't think anyone will disagree with.

TheHandicaper · 03-09-2012, 04:34 PM

6 X 6

1. AVG, H, R, RBI, HR, SB
2. W, K, ERA, WHIP, SV, IP

JSpauny · 03-09-2012, 06:05 PM

Also, we need to decide if there will be a yearly or weekly starts or innings limit. Or we can decide to allow streaming pitchers, but I for one would prefer if we didn't allow people to stream.

I have no preference between yearly or weekly limits (they've both worked fine for me in years past), but if we decide to disallow streaming, we need to set some kind of limit.

Twitter

Mailing list