We only only allow weekly changes meaning you set your lineup for the week on monday. (hence no daily changes)
Recently i got into a debate whether we should allow SP at the RP position. Considering that starting a SP at the RP position helps you in W, CG, SHO, OUT and K (5) and hurts you in SV and L (2).
I have argued that since we dont allow daily changes we should move to only allowing rp at the rp position. Allowing sp at the rp position (while only have weekly changes) creates a disparity and thus making rp useless and even the most marginal starter (with rp eligibilty) more valuable than a closer.
I have argued for allowing daily changes or only allowing rp at the rp position.
I'm assuming you mean guys that are listed as SP/RP, like Zach Greinke (in yahoo at least)?
I personally don't have a problem with it...maybe in your scoring system I could see why you might get upset...you have stats like "shutout" and "complete game" and you don't have "holds" for RPs, so you have more stats favoring SPs and this is what happens.
I suggest that if you want to change the rules it should be done for next season and not changed for this season.
My stance is that I really dislike it because it creates additional value in mediocre players just due to their eligibility. There is additional skill in being able to play 2B in addition to the OF that not all OF'ers have and all hitter stats are fungible, i.e. every hitter is going to get 4-5AB's a game or so whereas starting pitching vs. relief pitching is not a skill per se given the right time and conditioning and the stats which they accrue differ markedly depending upon what role they're playing.
My solution is to either have very strict eligibility policies, that pitchers can only be used in the role in which they're being used at the beginning of that period, or just to abolish the distinction altogether and use only Pitchers. Then people are free to scramble and create their own mix of starters vs. relievers. And if no relievers are used, well, then, maybe you have a problem with your categories, but at least you don't have some crappy starter shooting up eight rounds in value because he happened to be a MR guy last year.
0-3 to 4-3. Worst choke in the history of baseball. Enough said.
At least in Yahoo, there are so few guys that fit this situation (Hanrahan comes to mind), that I have zero problem with it. If you go to all "P," which is a viable option, you are changing strategy significantly.
...but at least you don't have some crappy starter shooting up eight rounds in value because he happened to be a MR guy last year.
I get your point, Matthias, but is there really anyone that fits this category? Like with Hanrahan, if he keeps the closer gig, I suspect that he will not be eligible as an SP in 2009. if not, it just goes back to my point that this is really no big deal, if a commish wants to keep the roster settings at distinct SP/RP spots.
I don't think you can limit it based on how they are being used currently, since that changes for some pitchers on a weekly basis. Guys like Sarfate this week, who started one game and then went right back to the bullpen would be useless, since you never know a week in advance what position they would be. (I know sarfate is worthless anyway, just the first example).
I would say tighten up your eligibility standards for next year, say 20 appearances to qualify as a reliever. That should severely limit the crossover.
In our league, only 10 of the top 30 RPs have made 10+ starts this year, and only 5 have made 20+ starts. All of the top-5 RPs are starters now (Billingsley, Dempster, Greinke, Sanchez, Duchsherer), but only 2 of the next 10 are starters now (Joba, Wellemeyer). This league doesn't use holds, so if it did, it'd be closer for actual relievers. It's just not common enough to start chagning rules over. Let the dual-eligible guys play RP if they want.