|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on May 21, 2018 12:20:42 GMT -8
I've noticed some teams struggling to satisfy the games started minimum requirement over the last few weeks leading to forfeiting ERA, WHIP and K/9 in weekly matchups.
The intent of this rule is to force teams to make difficult decisions to fill their rotations and not just cruise by on their studs that won't have a complete meltdown. I for one would basically punt quality starts if there wasn't a games started minimum because of the impact a good bullpen can have in this format.
For example last week I had to put Clayton Richards into my rotation to guarantee that I could meet the 4 game minimum. It worked out for me, but more often than not I won't be so lucky.
I realize that even with a full rotation, this rule might not offer any injury tolerance - 2 pitchers going down in a week can forfeit the 3 categories if there are no 2-start matchups among the other 3 starters.
Because of this I see a need to revise this rule. Options I see are below:
1. Keep the games started minimum at 4 per week. Update the constitution to note that failure to meet 4 games started due to mid-matchup injury will not result in 3 category forfeiture if the owner can prove to a commissioner that they were in line to meet the minimum prior to the unforseen injury. For example: Rich Hill develops another blister prior to his scheduled Tuesday start and is placed on the DL, causing my Cubs to only accumulate 3 games started for the matchup. I message the commissioner, who reviews my roster, determines that I was in line for at least 4 starts prior to the injury, and over-rides the games started forfeiture in Fantrax (I have confirmed that this is an option)
2. Reduce games started minimum to 3 per week.
3. Change from K/9 to total Ks as a category. My thinking is that this will offer better incentives to maximize innings pitched.
Let me know your preferred option and thoughts below. I think either options 1 or 2 could be implemented mid-season, but option 3 should probably wait until the offseason as it does affect strategy a fair bit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2018 12:29:15 GMT -8
I'm undecided yet but I think option 1 should also include rainout. I know I'm probably going to struggle to meet four starts this week and only got there last week cause Mengden had two starts, on paper I'll get there this week too but if a Phillies game gets rained out I won't. Hopefully Kershaw gets back next week so I have four healthy SP at least. Having Walker and Ramirez go out for the year, Miley out right after I signed him and Kershaw miss a couple weeks haven't helped considering I was thin as is (started the season with six viable SP). Also doesn't help that some teams have like ten SP's and are just hoarding depth lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2018 13:15:16 GMT -8
Option 2 makes it too easy to manipulate starts. Honestly, I even think 4 starts with an injury grace makes it pretty simple. Under that scenario, I can run Sale, Porcello, and Skaggs out there most weeks and hit my 4-game minimum since there is a high probability at least one of them will have two starts a week. While I can empathize with the injury scenario, I think there should be a premium on building rotation depth.
I didn’t vote above because my vote is for a combo of 1 and 3. I’m fine with the injury thing providing a pass but changing K/9 to K will at least reward the strongest rotations / pitching staffs weekly through both QS ad Ks.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2018 13:24:24 GMT -8
In a 24-team league it's near impossible for all but a few teams to build rotation depth - or really depth at any single position. If you have 150 SP (30*5) in MLB at any given time, the median most teams here would have is 6-7 and you pretty much have to have that going into the season or you're basically out of luck trying to get in-season FA pickups to fill depth. Some teams will wind up with more out of luck/good planning, others will wind up with less from the opposite or injury issues. I had 6 going into the season that turned into 4 by the end of April.
That said I voted for 4 starts with the injury (and rainout?) grace but am not sure just how many other teams besides me are on the razor's edge.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2018 13:31:12 GMT -8
I'm pretty sure I said I supported option 1 - I just wanted to add a twist to it to reward acquiring pitching.
While I empathize with your current situation, if you're down to your 7th and 8th starters, you probably aren't winning the ERA or WHIP categories anyway.
EDIT: Generally speaking, I'm leery of creating a situation where a team with one of the Big 4 can get by too easily by rolling them out for a 2-start week during a big week. And I say this as an owner of one of the Big 4.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2018 13:41:52 GMT -8
I generally agree with the latter statement unless you have a good bullpen and a RP that's SP eligible.
|
|
|
|
Post by Detroit Tigers (Matt) on May 21, 2018 18:06:15 GMT -8
Putting in injury forgiveness is fair to me AS LONG AS THE PITCHER IS QUESTION IS PLACE ON SOME KIND OF DL (which may go agains't curtis's scenario)
As to having the need for a team to have depth, I completely agree with Jason. I think pitching depth (depth of any kind) should have a high value. That's why you join a deep league like this one, to be able to sink your teeth deep into the sport and go up against owners doing the same. Lack of pitching depth should motivate a guy to go out and get depth, I know it did that for me.
As for thr K's I'm really on the fence about that. I worry that could tip the balance to far in SPs favor and detract from the value of a good RP who only gets 1 or 2 or 3 batters, but strikes out a lot of them....but doesn't see the number of batters that a Justin Verlander would. Idk maybe someone has pondered the math on that and if I'm wrong could explain it to me.
My most important worry with any move as to the scorring minimum is that we need to at least make it a little difficult for guys to just intentionally dive. So I would ask my self the question "Does this make it harder or easyier for a guy to intentionally dive just to get better draft position?"
And please keep the QS!!!!! To me that is really the best stat to grade a SP by. And if you take it out then the scoring categories would be unbalanced. (But full disclosure, I'm a can of an American league team with a DH)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2018 18:32:21 GMT -8
I have no issues with a GS minimum of 4.
However, I missed the relief appearance minimum for 2 weeks straight. I voted for total K option in favor eliminating - or reducing - the relief appearance minimum.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2018 18:47:05 GMT -8
I would think it would be easier to hit the RP game minimum, even if you just have four active, healthy relief pitchers you should be able to get to 10 most weeks and it's easier to find RP filler in FA than any other position, but I don't see the point of a game minimum since you only hurt yourself by not having relievers pitch, and there's already a rule in the Constitution against starting fewer than five active RP anyway. I get why only starting relievers would help the ratios so there has to be a minimum for starters, but don't see the point of the double whammy on relievers since they only marginally affect ratios compared to SP and you lose out on the save/hold categories.
I guess if one team loaded up on a lot of dual eligibility guys and had a ton of SP in RP spots not having a RP minimum could be an issue but QS is the only 'volume' stat for SP anyway and there aren't a lot of dual eligibles that matter. So it'd probably be better to keep K/9 instead of just having total K to avoid that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2018 20:38:19 GMT -8
I would think it would be easier to hit the RP game minimum, even if you just have four active, healthy relief pitchers you should be able to get to 10 most weeks and it's easier to find RP filler in FA than any other position, but I don't see the point of a game minimum since you only hurt yourself by not having relievers pitch, and there's already a rule in the Constitution against starting fewer than five active RP anyway. I get why only starting relievers would help the ratios so there has to be a minimum for starters, but don't see the point of the double whammy on relievers since they only marginally affect ratios compared to SP and you lose out on the save/hold categories. I guess if one team loaded up on a lot of dual eligibility guys and had a ton of SP in RP spots not having a RP minimum could be an issue but QS is the only 'volume' stat for SP anyway and there aren't a lot of dual eligibles that matter. So it'd probably be better to keep K/9 instead of just having total K to avoid that. I figured the same thing but my 4 relievers got me 7 appearances last week - Peacock/Rondon/Winkler combined for 4. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2018 20:50:52 GMT -8
I have been in general having a hard time filling out 3 much less 4 starters healthy at one time. I tried to accumulate 8 starters before the season and 4 or 5 of them are hurt. While one didn't sign. I've been just in general struggling with health all year no matter of position, but that's part of fantasy. I have no problem with lowering the SP requirements, but I agree with the K/9 should stay. Total K's would devalue relievers, while increasing the value of a starter. While starters in general are really expensive and are of limited quantity in this league. I don't know if that's the motive of changing the K rule.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seattle Mariners (Robin) on May 23, 2018 21:52:13 GMT -8
I think 4 starts in a week is completely fair is a requirement of the league since it started. Some teams have been building rotation depth to allow for possible injuries or other issues that may come up with starting pitching. I understand there are only 150 SP pitchers out there give or take, and this is a deep 24 for team league, but to all who referenced the limited available SP this isnt a 30 team league meaning there should be enough SP for everyone to find 4 healthy starts per week with 5 SP spots. I understand the injury situtation, but if you have a full 5 SP filled and a guy gets injured you will still meet you 4 start minimum. It is highly unlikely you will lose two SP in a week without warning(I know it can happen), but if you do, tough break squeek, take the penalty for the week and replace the injured starter the next week if you have depth, or go out and get another SP. There are 5 teams at least with extra SP looking to make deals on the trade block as we speak. Injuries will crush you in this league, we all know that, but we cant be changing rules midseason in my opinion becasue guys are thin and players get hurt.
|
|
|
|
Post by Detroit Tigers (Matt) on May 24, 2018 5:55:53 GMT -8
I agree with robin, we would never want to change rules just because guys want to keep competing without making trades if they have to. Its all part of competing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 24, 2018 6:16:28 GMT -8
I would hope nobody is vying for a mid-season scoring minimum change. That could be disruptive. I think any changes should be applied to the following season, so we can go into the offseason with a solid understanding of what roster changes we may need to address.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on May 25, 2018 14:13:13 GMT -8
I am implementing the injury/rainout forgiveness as follows, effective immediately:
Each team must accumulate at least 4 games started and 10 relief appearances in order to qualify as meeting the minimum pitching requirements for each scoring period. If these requirements are not met the team will get an automatic loss in both ERA and WHIP for the scoring period. If factors outside of the GM’s control (mid-week injury, rainout, etc) cause their team to accumulate less than 4 GS or 10 relief appearances over a scoring period (when otherwise projected to meet the minimum requirements), they may request Commissioner review of the violation. If the Commissioner deems that the team did have what projected as a valid lineup at the start of the scoring period, they may override the forfeiture.
We can discuss a reduction of the 10 relief appearances minimum in the offseason
|
|
|
|
Post by Detroit Tigers (Matt) on May 25, 2018 18:33:13 GMT -8
I am implementing the injury/rainout forgiveness as follows, effective immediately: Each team must accumulate at least 4 games started and 10 relief appearances in order to qualify as meeting the minimum pitching requirements for each scoring period. If these requirements are not met the team will get an automatic loss in both ERA and WHIP for the scoring period. If factors outside of the GM’s control (mid-week injury, rainout, etc) cause their team to accumulate less than 4 GS or 10 relief appearances over a scoring period (when otherwise projected to meet the minimum requirements), they may request Commissioner review of the violation. If the Commissioner deems that the team did have what projected as a valid lineup at the start of the scoring period, they may override the forfeiture. We can discuss a reduction of the 10 relief appearances minimum in the offseason Does this mean that violators no long lose out on k/9? Its just era and whip they are penalized in? |
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on May 25, 2018 19:39:02 GMT -8
I meant to look into that - the option that is toggled in Fantrax only mentions "averaging stats (ERA, WHIP, etc...)" which ii take to mean that I was mistaken in believing that K/9 was also affected. I'll provide an update later.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on May 26, 2018 12:34:09 GMT -8
K/9 IS forfeited by not meeting the 4 GS minimum. The Constitution (new wording above) will be updated to reflect this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2018 16:34:19 GMT -8
I may need that exemption this week now that Hernandez got shifted to the bullpen mid-week. Not sure how I'm gonna meet the four-start minimum going forward though with Kershaw on the shelf too unless one of my three left has a two-start week. Wish I'd have been able to claim Steven Wright on DFA but I was cap squeezed at the time (that was a week before my Cervelli trade) and he wasn't exactly a sureshot starter at the time. I'll otherwise run out whatever lineup I can within the rules but I'm not gonna make a foolish trade of a 2nd rounder to get a rental pitcher with my spot in the standings.
|
|
|
|
Post by Detroit Tigers (Matt) on Jun 6, 2018 18:09:20 GMT -8
I thought it was just for injuries and rainouts....... And Smith is in your staring rotation?
I gotta watch this one closely cause I'm trying to wrap my head around how I'm gonna protect one of my rule 5 draftees.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2018 18:20:03 GMT -8
Yeah I only had four healthy starters to begin with, after Kershaw went out again last week. Smith was just to fill out the numbers for some relief appearances and maybe a cheap hold somehow. I know this (pitchers getting shifted to the pen) wasn't discussed before but it seems like whatever crap can happen to me does this year. It sort of should fall under the same perview as injury since both involve missing a start due to unforseen circumstances beyond your control midweek since Hernandez was in the rotation as of Monday and supposed to start this week and now he's out of the rotation on Wednesday.
Not that I should really bother to care since it's probably gonna benefit me to lose in the long run, but just putting it out there in case it matters to someone later on since I might actually win a couple ratios or at least am leading them so far.
On my own rule V note at least my injuries are allowing me to seamlessly protect Dubon, who of course got hurt himself and is out for the year just before he was about to be called up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Detroit Tigers (Matt) on Jun 6, 2018 19:01:00 GMT -8
hmm interesting, I know early on in the season I got burned a couple times with that. (Idk what MIL is thinking sometimes, one day they say Woodruff has the stuff to be an ace, the next he's in the bullpen) But now I make sure the next start is pretty much confirmed and guaranteed before I put them in..... but hey, makes things more interesting which I enjoy.
But if the rule were to encompase your Idea, then I would love to exploit that, I would be able to take so more risk
|
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs (Curtis) on Jun 18, 2018 7:05:33 GMT -8
I wanted to share that the Fantrax "Live Scoring" page is misleading when it comes to the forfeiture of K/9, ERA, and WHIP due to not meeting the minimum games started / relief appearances.
It shows that the forfeiting team loses K/9 (since higher is better) but wins ERA and WHIP (where lower is better, my guess is that the script reads "-" as "0").
However I have verified that the cumulative team records on the "Standings" page do reflect the intended forfeiture correctly.
For example, taking a team that I know has forfeited a few weeks due to injury issues, the Giants Live Scoring totals (going back week by week) would indicate a record of 55-66-11, however the correct record of 47-74-11 is reflected in the Standings page.
|
|
