Innings Pitched (IP)
Complete Games (CG)
Holds (HLD) (gives you a reason to use the middle rps)
Earned Run Average (ERA)
(Walks + Hits)/ Innings Pitched (WHIP)
Walks (BB) (maybe get rid of this and replace with one of the below.)
Stats considering using:
Strikeouts per Walk Ratio (K/BB) (would this be better to use than walks?)
Strikeouts per Nine Innings (K/9)
Home Runs (HR) (would really make you not want a Rockies pitcher)
Shutouts (SHO) (there a reason to use this as well as complete games?)
My league use to run categories like you plan to a few years back, but decided to limit them because most just overlap each other. That's why you see the traditional 5x5 leagues so often. But, either way, to each their own. Now, my league uses 6x6 with OPS and K/B (thanks to some opinions I recieved in the cafe last week; thanks guys). One thing that sticks out to me is that you want to use holds as a category. I think that by using only 10 teams there will be enough closers to make it competative, rather than giving middle relief as much value as closers in a small league. JMO
I've never been a big fan of holds. Others might view that differently though. I have no problem getting a dominant middle relief guy that will help in many of the categories when all other options are limited, like to balance out an unstable closer or what not. The thing is, if you include holds, then those guys become just as valuable as the dominant closers, starters, etc. I wouldn't include them in my league, but then again, I wouldn't want my advice to piss off everyone else in your league. Try getting their opinon on it, then everyone will be happy. That's what makes the best league anyway.
My league used holds last year, and I liked the stat enough to include it this year. With the volatility between who closes and who sets up in many clubs, I found that the holds category rewarded managers who were more active in watching the league. Another interesting twist is that many good candidates for holds end up closing, which could mean your team suddenly doesn't have enough set up men and too many closers. IMO, scouting for holds pitchers requires more insight and patience than scouting for closers.
kvillantz18 wrote:I've never been a big fan of holds. Others might view that differently though. I have no problem getting a dominant middle relief guy that will help in many of the categories when all other options are limited, like to balance out an unstable closer or what not. The thing is, if you include holds, then those guys become just as valuable as the dominant closers, starters, etc. I wouldn't include them in my league, but then again, I wouldn't want my advice to piss off everyone else in your league. Try getting their opinon on it, then everyone will be happy. That's what makes the best league anyway.
We do a 6x6 with the traditional categories and holds. I think there are way too many categories in this league anyway (IP?), but I had one question for you. Why is it a problem if holders have as much value as closers and starters? In real life, holders are often more valuable than closers. In measures of runs prevented, holders occupy 2/3rds of the top 30 spots, indicating that in many cases holders are much more valuable than closers.
I don't like categories like CG, jsut because there is no way to predict them. It seems more like luck to me. You can draft pitchers who do it more often, but so much is dependant ont he game, the manager and the score as to be almost a lucky bonus.
jebatzel wrote:I think everyone in my league has an understanding of holds and wants to use them.
If it makes them follow baseball more than I will be glad.
I don't want to make it too hard though.
What about the other stats though?
K/9, K/B, and walks?
which one should I use?
I would dump things like CGs, IP, and L
You are already counting BB and K. In fact, you are counting BB twice. Why do you want to add more categories?
I think there are two things to consider.
1. What things do you think really measure good pitching?
2. Would you rather use counting stats or rate stats or a mix? (one big issue here is that counting stats give starters more value, while rate stats generally give relievers more value.
I would say that if you really think certain things are such an important part of pitching, then you would want it covered in two or more categories. I think the research clearly shows that the things that pitchers have the most control over are K, BB, and HR. Since you already have BB covered in two categories, you might argue for adding HR and K/9 rather than K/bb.
So, I would go with W, SV, HLD, ERA, WHIP, K, BB, K/9, HR if you want to have a lot of categories and want to "double count" BB and K. I guess this also balances the value of starters and relievers.