In points-based leagues, you can easily compromise to include both elements. I like IP getting in on the action for points based leagues as well. With W, IP, QS all having value you have a fairer, all-around, representation of points given actual performance.
In Roto I'd say you are better off stick with Wins. If you want to tinker with it just use net wins. This stat allows great season long strategy, giving middle releivers a place in fantasy as well. Going to QS in Roto would require adding holds to keep middle releivers relevant. Since they are relevant in the actual game, I feel they should have a place in fantasy as well.
In H2H leagues QS gain more momentum imo because it is weekly. I'd still stick with Wins, but the fact you can have a dominating pitching week but end up with no Wins to show for it and lose that cat for the week is frustrating at times. I'd want to see holds added if you went to QS.
I like the creation of a single relief cat that combines Saves + Holds + relief Wins - relief Losses - BS. not sure what you'd call it, maybe something like relief pitching efficeincy or effective relief pitching. This would reduce the value of closers in general and make the relief pitchers who are the best at getting batters out the most valuable regardless of what role or inning they pitch. We don't create a stat for hitters' AVG w/RISP after the 7th inning. Yet that is similar to a save opp or hold for a hitter.
cwrtlm wrote:I am thinking of bringing this up in our league as well. Maybe 5 points per QS and 5 points per W? Something along those lines, right now it is 10 points per W and nothing for a QS.
We do that in my points league now. A QS is worth twice what a W/L chimes in at.
Of course, neither are worth much compared to IP (or outs). A pitcher scores way more points in my league by just getting outs. The other stats are more descriptive of the quality of the outing itself.
I wished that I could use QS in my leagues over W. W is completely random and QS would boost the value of starting pitchers more (especially good ones) which makes sense given how volatile pitching is to begin with.
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." ~George Carlin
6IP and 3ER is a 4.50 ERA... not something too spectacular.
A win is a win and if you're worried about "bad" teams, then build that into your valuation of pitchers. I also think "W minus L" is making an even bigger problem out of the situation because as much as bad pitchers can get a win in a high scoring game, a pitcher can have a fantastic game and still get pegged with a loss if his team gets shut out or held to only a run or two.
tmlfan4ever wrote:I also think "W minus L" is making an even bigger problem out of the situation because as much as bad pitchers can get a win in a high scoring game, a pitcher can have a fantastic game and still get pegged with a loss if his team gets shut out or held to only a run or two.
Sure, but the benefits are that it penalizes and thus discourages churning or even acquiring questionable pitching and thus makes you think about who you're starting instead of just throwing someone up there because they have a start. Also there's a fair share of mediocre pitchers who might go 12-10 (or 2 net wins), but it's pretty rare for a mediocre pitcher to be able to finish with a record around 18-5 (13 net wins). So it rewards the truly great pitching; you can't equal one ace with two journeymen which is true in real baseball as well.
Not saying it's perfect or even the best but I've found it to work pretty well so far.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
tmlfan4ever wrote:I don't like the QS stat at all.
6IP and 3ER is a 4.50 ERA... not something too spectacular.
A win is a win and if you're worried about "bad" teams, then build that into your valuation of pitchers. I also think "W minus L" is making an even bigger problem out of the situation because as much as bad pitchers can get a win in a high scoring game, a pitcher can have a fantastic game and still get pegged with a loss if his team gets shut out or held to only a run or two.
That line is not spectacular but that is the worst possible scenario for getting a QS.
Compare that to two different scenarios for a W: A - 5 IP, 5 ER B- 9 IP, 0 ER
Would you say that A and B equally deserved the W?
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." ~George Carlin
Also, I would reiterate that if I was playing in a 1X1, the argument for QS over W or W-L is much greater. But given that it's placed in the context of also accumulating other stats, it's not as persuasive (to me). So it's not just the merits of one stat versus another... it's how does it fit within the entire system.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by Matthias » Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:39 am 
/schroeder.gif){kind=small}
