Critique my leagues scoring system..Please

[Mike_nyc]

Points Based League

Have i undervalued pitching, thats my main question. If so, how can i fix it?

Batters:
1b 1
2b 2
3b -3
HR 4
R 1
RBI 1
BB 1
HBP 1
SB 2
CS -1

Pitchers:
BBI -1
BS -2
CG 5
ER -2
Hit Allow -1
Hold 4
Inning 3
K 1
Loss -3
QS 4
Save 6
Shoutout 5
Win 5

[chipper]

Save's higher than wins?

Holds are high in relation to wins as well.

[StlSluggers]

He has QS, too.

You giving 1 pt for 0.1 IP?

I'm sure that you didn't mean for a triple to have negative value.

[The Big Stick]

why -3 for a triple? I guess guys like Reyes, Sizemore and Crowford worth nothing in a league that penalizes for doing something rare.

If anything a triple is worth more than a HR.

[Mike_nyc]

Typo..theres no logic behind -3 for a triple....saves and holds where they are because starters get points for innings, wins, quality starts

I upped holds and saves to value the closers and mr more.

3 points per inning logic: its an even number; pitcher gains points for lasting longer in the game...if he gives up any combo of 3hits/walks in an inning he gains nothing; gives up runs in addition to that hes penalized

[StlSluggers]

Assuming that 3 pts per IP also means 1 pt per 0.1 IP, here's your breakdown:

Top 250 Hitters Avg - 439 points
Top 250 Pitchers Avg - 282 points

Try adding (AB-H) = -0.5 pt. Doing that gives you the following averages:

Top 250 Hitters Avg - 266 points
Top 250 Pitchers Avg - 282 points

That's not quite perfect, and people will still argue about relational values of the events, but it should give you a good starting point from which to begin tweaking.

Important Note: This is a generic comparison assuming you start the same number of pitchers as hitters in a 12-16 team league. If one of those does not apply to your league, this comparison will not be useful.

[Mike_nyc]

The actual ratio is 12:10 hitters to pitchers started. Not a huge difference, but I do feel the batters naturally should havea slightly higher pt advantage then the pitchers, though as you pointed out it is too high now.

Cant really do much with the hitters without taking too much off them. In terms of the pitchers i think the closers are accurately weighted. I went back the last 5 years; last year was a weak sp year and 4 closers are in top 30 pitchers based on last years numbers; 05 numbers only had 2...so i think im ok there

[StlSluggers]

The actual ratio is 12:10 hitters to pitchers started. Not a huge difference, but I do feel the batters naturally should have a slightly higher pt advantage then the pitchers, though as you pointed out it is too high now.

At 12:10, you would want to look at the top 200 pitchers, who averaged 313 points last year.

As to purposefully skewing scoring in favor of hitters, you are dictating strategy in your league if you do that. Teams will all fight over the best hitters, and teams that focus on pitching will be frustrated that they didn't win despite having lots of good pitching. You already force owners to give hitters more consideration by weighting the number of starters. Skewing the point distribution will only cause headaches.

[Mike_nyc]

I disagree, I'm not purposefully doing it, rather, its the norm. Batters are more valuable.

If they were even why are batters consistently drafted ahead of pitchers


Because they play more regularly than pitchers hitters are naturally more valuable (as a whole)

I'm trying to close the rather large gap i have now, the fact of the matter is the 10th best hitter for example (say a Miguel Cabrera) has more value to a team then the 10th best pitcher (say a peavy type)


If their valued the same why do drafts continually preach to wait on pitching?

[StlSluggers]

If their valued the same why do drafts continually preach to wait on pitching?

You're getting caught up in details. Never mind draft position or auction value, look at categories. In any categorical league worth it's salt - Roto or H2H - you have an even number of categories for pitchers and hitters.

I'll ask you: Why do you think that is?