greenandgold wrote:make me discount the opinion. What does this mean anyway - hitters are more valuable then pitchers? In 5x5 there are 5 catagories for pitchers and 5 for hitters. For a majority of hitters I can find a pitcher worth more.
exactly... HOWEVER, a starting pitcher doesnt contribute to the category "saves," which makes hitters like pujols, beltran, soriano, etc.. far more valuable then ANY starting pitcher.
A starting pitcher may not contribute saves, but you could also look at it this way: in a standard league, a position player is only responsible for 1/9 of your games, whereas an ace SP is responsible for between 1/5 and 1/6 of your total innings pitched. So in that sense, an ace SP carries actually carries more weight than an elite hitter.
Also, there's the fact that Ryan Howard doesn't contribute to SB. Does that make him any less valuable than Jason Bay? Of course not - he contributes a lot in the categories that he does contribute in, and that's what gives him value. So it doesn't matter if Santana gets 0 saves - as long as he's putting up elite numbers in ERA, WHIP, wins and K's, then he's capable of being as valuable as any hitter out there.
where did i say anything about ryan howard? and ur math made no sense at all..
greenandgold wrote:make me discount the opinion. What does this mean anyway - hitters are more valuable then pitchers? In 5x5 there are 5 catagories for pitchers and 5 for hitters. For a majority of hitters I can find a pitcher worth more.
exactly... HOWEVER, a starting pitcher doesnt contribute to the category "saves," which makes hitters like pujols, beltran, soriano, etc.. far more valuable then ANY starting pitcher.
A starting pitcher may not contribute saves, but you could also look at it this way: in a standard league, a position player is only responsible for 1/9 of your games, whereas an ace SP is responsible for between 1/5 and 1/6 of your total innings pitched. So in that sense, an ace SP carries actually carries more weight than an elite hitter.
Also, there's the fact that Ryan Howard doesn't contribute to SB. Does that make him any less valuable than Jason Bay? Of course not - he contributes a lot in the categories that he does contribute in, and that's what gives him value. So it doesn't matter if Santana gets 0 saves - as long as he's putting up elite numbers in ERA, WHIP, wins and K's, then he's capable of being as valuable as any hitter out there.
I also think it is streaching it to say that Soriano and Beltran (.280) contribute to Average.
If you are going to talk about a guy's value, I think you almost have to factor in the concept of replacement level. What statistics are readily available on the wire, and which guys are easier to replace than others.
As the season moves along, a plethora of pitching develops. Not so much hitting.
Not only that, give me more than one starting pitcher that has lived up to the high expectations that you have had for him the past few years in the bigs. They are far too unpredictable.
Without doing the complex math, I'd say a hitter is more valuable.
RynMan wrote:If you are going to talk about a guy's value, I think you almost have to factor in the concept of replacement level. What statistics are readily available on the wire, and which guys are easier to replace than others.
As the season moves along, a plethora of pitching develops. Not so much hitting.
Not only that, give me more than one starting pitcher that has lived up to the high expectations that you have had for him the past few years in the bigs. They are far too unpredictable.
Without doing the complex math, I'd say a hitter is more valuable.
As would I. Santana is far above any other pitcher, but I still wouldn't take him top 5. Late first round I would grab him, but I just prefer to have a first round quality hitter over Johan if I get a top 5 pick.
RynMan wrote:If you are going to talk about a guy's value, I think you almost have to factor in the concept of replacement level. What statistics are readily available on the wire, and which guys are easier to replace than others.
As the season moves along, a plethora of pitching develops. Not so much hitting.
Not only that, give me more than one starting pitcher that has lived up to the high expectations that you have had for him the past few years in the bigs. They are far too unpredictable. Without doing the complex math, I'd say a hitter is more valuable.
I'll second that thought. Remember in 2005 when Jason Schmidt was a late first/early second round pick following his fantastic 2004 season. Granted he has bounced back, but I imagine he burned many managers in 2005.
I think we need to step back and look at what we are debating - there seem to be two arguements in this thread relating to the value of pitchers:
1) Pitching makes up half of your stats. A good SP will throw ~200 innings which is ~1/6 of the total innings in standard leagues. A hitter will play 1 position out of 9, so he is using ~1/9 of your total games.
2) Pitchers that are drafted high seem to bust often because of injury or bad years.
These are two different issues and we should make sure and seperate the two. From what I can tell there are several reasons people don't draft pitchers early:
- they "bust" more then hitters
- there are always good pitchers on the WW but not good hitters
- a hitter helps in more catagories then a pitcher
- a team needs more hitters then pitchers
The arguement that a hitter helps in more catagories is, in my opinion, unfounded for the reason next to (1), I think a good pitcher will always help your team more then a good batter just because of those numbers. The thing is, how do you get a good pitcher, and will a good pitcher stay good throughout the season?
The real problem is that it is difficult to find good pitchers in the draft but easier to find them on the WW. I wonder if raising the IP limit in standard ROTO leagues to 1500 (~9x160) and having bigger rosters would change these dynamics.
greenandgold wrote:The thing is, how do you get a good pitcher, and will a good pitcher stay good throughout the season?
The real problem is that it is difficult to find good pitchers in the draft but easier to find them on the WW.
I think that's it right there. It's hard to predict which pitchers will do well. That's why I do value hitters more than pitchers - it just seems that they're more consistent year-to-year.
make me discount the opinion. What does this mean anyway - hitters are more valuable then pitchers? In 5x5 there are 5 catagories for pitchers and 5 for hitters. For a majority of hitters I can find a pitcher worth more.
exactly... HOWEVER, a starting pitcher doesnt contribute to the category "saves," which makes hitters like pujols, beltran, soriano, etc.. far more valuable then ANY starting pitcher. thumbs.gif
A starting pitcher may not contribute saves, but you could also look at it this way: in a standard league, a position player is only responsible for 1/9 of your games, whereas an ace SP is responsible for between 1/5 and 1/6 of your total innings pitched. So in that sense, an ace SP carries actually carries more weight than an elite hitter.
Also, there's the fact that Ryan Howard doesn't contribute to SB. Does that make him any less valuable than Jason Bay? Of course not - he contributes a lot in the categories that he does contribute in, and that's what gives him value. So it doesn't matter if Santana gets 0 saves - as long as he's putting up elite numbers in ERA, WHIP, wins and K's, then he's capable of being as valuable as any hitter out there.
where did i say anything about ryan howard? and ur math made no sense at all..
I'm just using Howard as an example of a hitter who's worth a lot even though he doesn't contribute to all 5 categories. However, if you were trying to say that you value 5-category hitters in particular over SP, then I would repeat what greenandgold said - Soriano and Beltran aren't really positive contributers to average...not to mention that it's not too hard to understand the idea that a player who contributes more in fewer categories can be worth as much or more as a player who contributes less in more categories.
As for my math not making sense...I'm not sure I see how. An ace pitcher is responsible a greater proportion of your innings pitched than a hitter is for games played, and there are an equal number of hitting and pitching categories. So an ace pitcher is responsible for a greater proportion of your potential roto points than an elite hitter.
That's not to say that pitchers are automatically more valuable or that I'd even personally value them higher - there are other factors to take into account too, like consistency. But I just wanted to show that to say that hitters always are worth more because they can contribute to more categories just isn't true.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by dcskater619 » Thu Dec 21, 2006 7:41 pm 
