I don't get it. This is a very interesting trade, and one that will generate all sorts of different opinions, but a veto seems ridiculous. It may well be a deal that turns out to be one-sided, but at this point, there is no way of telling which side will win. (By the way, if all three players live up to their potential, which of course is unlikely, I think you lose - El Duque's potential is huge).
At any rate, the point is that there can be lots of takes on this deal. You and the person you're trading with obviously have divergent opinions on how these players will perform over the rest of the season. As another owner, I'm certainly entitled to my opinion, but I don't have the right to claim that my subjective view is worth more than that of another.
More on this a bit later, but I strongly feel that this trade should be allowed to go through, in the interest of the entire league.
This scoring is crazy. Load your team with Big bats and closer and stay way away from average to low end starters they will kill ya.
Look a HR is worth 6 points with zero minus
If a pitcher pitcher 6 innings and walks or gives up 6 hits (that is a nice WHIP 1.0) they don't get the win and give up only 2 earned runs in 6 innings (that would be a 3.0 ERA...very respectable). Most would consider this a nice outing.
Points 6*2 (innings) -.5 (6 hits/bb against)-2 ER =7 points
For a batter to get 7 points all the would need to do is go 1-4 with a HR (4), RBI (1), Run (1) & a walk.
The moral of the story is Trade for big bats and closers and lay off the Starting pitching.
Love zpalm's post! This is just the way to go about analyzing (and being succesful) in h2h leagues. I'm drawing different conclusions from the data at the moment, but I admit I haven't thought this through all the way. Any further input would be appreciated.
First of all, looking at last year's stats, Mariano Rivera posted such dominant numbers that he would have earned 726 points (mainly by racking up 50 saves). However, a starter like Schilling would have beaten him by more than 100, with 841 points. Two points for an inning pitched is pretty big. If 566 is the reference point for this year, a starter would only need to post numbers similar to what Vazquez put up last year to surpass that mark (and his era and whip were both higher than the pitcher in the 7 points example). I think there will certainly be some starters this year who equal the points total of the top closers.
There is another point that gives starters an edge over relievers. Let's say team A has nine closers, each of whom put up 500 points in a season, while team B has nine starters who also each earn 500 points. Team A can maximize its points by activating closers whose teams have the most games in a given week, but the benefit of this will be rather small. Team B, however, will have numerous opportunities (about every third week for every pitcher, assuming 35 starts per sp) to insert pitchers with two starts in a week, giving this team not 3500 points as could be expected from 7 active starters, but over 4000 points. That's like having an extra active slot, which makes starters a much better value than closers. The more starters you have on your bench, the greater this effect becomes.
I'd also be interested in looking at how the top hitters at the other positions stack up. With a player such as Beltran this close to Sosa, it might be worth going after power hitters in the middle infield and at catcher before of's and 1b's.
I might be missing or misinterpreting some factors in this scoring system, however. Any other thoughts?
At any rate, none of this changes the fact that this veto doesn't make sense. Hopefully, the commish will overturn it.
Closers don't get nearly as many IP's as starting pitchers, and usually don't get as many K's either. I think we're talking about Sportsline here... although this thread is starting to confuse me a little...
Here's the top 10 NL-pitchers, projections (from pre-season):
1) Randy Johnson - 878
2) Curt Shilling - 717
3) Greg Maddux - 644
4) Trevor Hoffman - 634
5) Armando Benitez - 629
6) Kevin Brown - 627
7) Rob Nen - 612
8) Jon Lieber - 612 (bad projection here, IMHO)
9) Roy Oswalt - 580
10) Javier Vazquez - 572
Note that only one hitter was projected above 800, and that's Helton at 802. Bagwell, Bonds, Sosa, come in at 753, 742, 735, respectively. True, these are preseason projections, but they were based on previous stats, and I didn't find many of the projections to be particularly unreasonable. Seems that it's not as unbalanced as you say it is.