rotisserie vs points

[orangecrushv]

have some guy in my league complaining about rotisserie scoring, quoted as follows:

This rotisserie scoring is pretty much worthless. I said from the beginning that I had never played in a league that wasn't point based and I never will again. The top four teams have had exactly the same point totals since June. It's like batting average. This late in the season, going 5 for 5 isn't going to make a dent in your numbers. What is the incentive for managers to stick out the entire season when there is no chance to mount a comeback? I went from 7th to 2nd in the last month of our hockey season with a scoring frenzy. Here, my entire roster would have to go on a tear in 11 different categories to have a minimal impact on the standings. That said, props to all but three teams in this league for seeing this through to the end. If you guys want to start a POINT BASED head to head football league, count me in.

What does everyone else think about the different types of scoring out there?

-Rich

[Pogotheostrich]

I like roto better because you have to have a balanced team.

[great gretzky]

I disagree. I think both are fun, but I like rotisserie a little better overall. I like points because you don't have to have a balanced team. You can get your poitns from wherever you choose msotly, and I find that fun. In real life you can try nd skimp on pitching and win with hitting, and vice versa. You can't do that in roto. But if you do weant to make a comeback in roto, I think you can do it quicker. In points based leagues the elader is still accumulating points so you are always after a moving target. In roto, you can directly take points away from people while claiming yourself. So you are moving towards your opponents, but also pulling them backwards. I like that element of it myself. It seems like a points based league could have an insurmountable lead.

[Madison]

I prefer Roto over points leagues. Points are too easy. Roto takes more work and a balanced team.

[Guest]

Points all the way. I am in a roto league and a points league. I think head to head points is more exciting and fun. While roto is kind of boring. Points are especially fun b/c it is more than just 5 catergories by 5 catergories. In my points league things like pick offs, caught stealing, loses, complete games, shut outs, doubles, triples, and hitting for the cycle all count for positive or negative points. While there may be more luck involved in head to head it is much more entertaining but it remains challenging.

[pkarr5000]

roto requires more strategy

[demoflauchy]

Points keeps the league a bit more balanced when you don't have all the owners with the same enthusiasm...

Roto tends to favor those with occupations that allow for lots of hours spent mulling over stats and possibilities.

Points

[eftda]

roto requires more strategy

and luck

[Madison]

roto requires more strategy

and luck

I disagree. H2H and points leagues are affected more by "luck" than a roto league. I've played them all for many years.

[DieHardCubbie]

Roto is definately better than points..and H2H for that matter....