Standard 5x5 is unrealistic

[fantasyfiend]

almost anything is better than "Wins", and QS presents a safe alternative that doesn't throw off the balance, IMO.

[bigh0rt]

Aren't you the one that compiles all the blog feeds, too? =D

Anyway, what do you think of taking BB/9 out, and putting WHIP back in?

Pitching: IP, K/9, WHIP, ERA, SV

I'm opposed to having 20% of your pitching categories go towards IP in general. I understand your reasoning, I just feel it is better suited to use something else.

A category you may want to investigate using is K/BB. Then you could replace BB/9 or WHIP with something like SLG Against, if that's available for use. Then you're rewarding high rate K pitchers, pitchers who may not K as many batters but don't BB even fewer, the K/9 still helps boost relievers then, as well.

0rt, i enjoy the feedback, but can you tell me why you're against 20% of pitching-scoring going to IP?

I think IP is a very important "skill". Durable, effective, efficient pitchers rack up IP totals pretty quickly. THe best pitchers in the game lead the league in IP, I think it's works in that regard, and also helps balance the rate stats.

If i'm using K/9, SLG%, ERA, SV, an owner can just meet the minimum IP requirement, and never start a non-Closer pitcher again.

thanks for the continued feedback.

IP is already taken into consideration in all of the rates, in that the rates are weighted heavier, the more IP that they are drawing from. In that respect, I think it's a waste, especially if you're ensuring you stay at 5x5. I don't think you need to have IP as its own category, when it will be weighted appropriately in K/9, BB/9, WHIP, ERA, K/BB, or whatever other ratios you have as pitching categories. Sure, the amount of IP in terms of value is dropped drastically, but I think in 5x5, it ought to be. Furthermore, in a Roto league you are going to have your IP Limit anyway, so it would be a silly cat to have -- I'm still not a fan of it for H2H, either.

[fantasyfiend]

I get what you're saying, and it's something that i've considered, but, if I'm having a problem with Middle Relievers being overvalued, wouldn't "IP" help combat the problem?

Also, wouldn't a pitcher like, Joe Blanton who threw 200 IP last season, have some value in a league that uses "IP", even though he probably does more harm than good to the "Ratios" e.g. ERA & K/9

Blanton is an awesome control pitcher, though, who piles up innings quick. He'd help immensely in IP and BB/9, but hurt a team badly in K/9.

You've proposed using SLG% against, what about just, Batting average against? What would your "4 or 5" pitching categories be, if you're trying to mix it up, but keep things balanced and fun?

[Grounded Polo]

If I wanted realism, I'd play sim leagues but lets be honest, those suck.

5x5 is just fine.

[Neato Torpedo]

As was said before, any 5x5 is unrealistic. If you want realistic, count defensive metrics as well, which are largely unavailable to fantasy baseball services. If you want REALLY realistic, count intangibles as a stat.

You said you want to avoid making it 7x7, 8x8, etc because you want to avoid complicated stats, but keeping it to 5x5 is doing just that. The less stats you count, the less room you have to balance value between speedsters and sluggers, relievers and starters, etc, so you're forced to rely on stats like ISOP and whatnot.

[pjalst]

Found this in an article on line, Although it's a coiuple years old ,I thought it was interesting:

The Value of a Steal
Last season’s total HR and SB totals were as follows:

AL HRs: 2506
NL HRs: 2952
MLB HRs: 5458

AL SBs: 1647
NL SBs: 1456
MLB SBs: 3103

This means that in the AL there was a SB for every 1.52 HRs and in the NL this ratio was one SB for every 2.03 HRs. The total for MLB was a 1.76:1 ration.

The above was not a single-season phenomenon. In fact, a review of historical statistics would result in very similar data over the last 15 years. One obvious conclusion can be drawn from the above: a SB is more rare than a HR in today’s game.

As any rotisserie league participant knows, in most leagues HRs and SBs are categories of equal weight, i.e., in a 12-team league the leader in SBs gets the same 12 points for leading the category as the leader in HRs.

Since we can prove that a SB is a less common occurrence than a HR, we can also infer that a SB is more valuable. For example last season Alfonso Soriano had 43 steals this represented 43/1647 or 2.61% of all the steals in the AL. Jim Thome hit 49 jacks, 49/2506 or 1.96% of the total homeruns that were hit in the AL. Thome had more HRs than Soriano had SBs, however, Soriano had a higher percentage of the league’s total SBs.

I’m not advocating that you should automatically take Soriano over Thome in your league this season. What I do state is that players that hit 15-20 home runs are a dime a dozen and cannot really help your team. However, players that can grab a handful of steals can move your team up a number of spots in the standings.

[AquaMan2342]

If you want REALLY realistic, count intangibles as a stat.

With the first pick of the 2009 Perfect Category Fantasy Baseball League (PCFBL), AquaMan2342 selects:

[neoforce]

... One obvious conclusion can be drawn from the above: a SB is more rare than a HR in today’s game.

As any rotisserie league participant knows, in most leagues HRs and SBs are categories of equal weight ...

Since we can prove that a SB is a less common occurrence than a HR, we can also infer that a SB is more valuable. ...

Isn't the counterpoint to this argument that in standard 5x5 a HR adds to three counting stats (HR/R/RBI) and helps a ratio stat (AVE) while a steal only helps SB? (A steal does marginally help R, giving the runner a better chance to score. But not every steal equals a new R, while every HR does.)

I'm not saying that steals aren't valuable. I'm just saying that the article is flawed because it doesn't look at the contribution to RBI/R.