"2*W - L" really helps out those pitchers on good teams, like Red Sox, Yankees, Braves, Giants, Mariners, etc. Since their net wins might not be much (14-10 season = 4 net wins), they get more improvement over regular pitchers since they got those 14 wins (28-10 = 18 modified net wins). If you're in the late rounds and need pitching grab the middle relievers on these teams as well, since they'll vulture a few wins and they'll count more than they regularly would. I'd avoid pitchers on bad teams (Detroit, Pitts, etc) like the plague, since they'll kill you in modified net wins.
Thanks, Makes perfect sense. As for Base count - I believe it means BB+2b+3b. Is that correct? That stat would hugely increase guys like Bonds (BB) , Helton (2bs) No?
I like OPS as a sixth hitting category too. It's the least reduntant and most comprehensive of the others such as H, OBP, SLG. I don't like erknjerk's setup because he doesn't have BA, OBP or OPS. I think you need at least one ratio category in hitting.
For pitching I think the extra category should relate in some way to the hitting category added. If it's a ratio for hitting, I think it should be a ratio for pitching, likewise if one is a quantitative stat, make the other the same. For OPS, I kind of like K/BB.
First the easy part, Pitching:
HOLDS is the best 6th cat because it opens up the rosters to all those non-closer relievers, Donnelly, Cormier, Mota, etc. This makes for a better distribution of pitchers overall.
As for Hitting: I hate walks as a category, make the hitter do something. I prefer Batting Average to Hits as it is a more universal gauge of performance.
Runs, HRs, RBIs, and SBs are pretty much a lock.
Given R, HR, RBI, & SB, I'd add BA & Total Bases (though OPS has a lot of appeal.
3andOut: Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.
CBMGreatOne wrote:I like OPS as a sixth hitting category too. It's the least reduntant and most comprehensive of the others such as H, OBP, SLG. I don't like erknjerk's setup because he doesn't have BA, OBP or OPS. I think you need at least one ratio category in hitting.
For pitching I think the extra category should relate in some way to the hitting category added. If it's a ratio for hitting, I think it should be a ratio for pitching, likewise if one is a quantitative stat, make the other the same. For OPS, I kind of like K/BB.
Actually, in 5x5 you have two rate stats (ERA and WHIP) in pitching and only one (BA) in hitting. That's why I like my league's addition of OPS and holds. It balances rates and counting stats in hitting and pitching, and brings those middle relievers into the pitching mix.
Or hit batsmen, that'd be another cute one. Or blisters (might devalue Josh Beckett too much).
A lot of leagues seem to use CG or SO. SO are a little too rare for my taste. Seems like you'd end up with 5 teams tied with 2 or so. CG, though, are plentiful enough that there should be some diversity between the top teams. Winner would probably end up with about 10 or 12. Admittedly, most of the leagues I've seen using CG are H2H leagues.
awesome set up because you dump batting average which is overrated and punishes certain hitters. The saves plus half holds cat is great because it refuses to give saves and holds equal weight which is how it should be. Also strikeout to walk ratio rewards pitchers with great command.
awesome set up because you dump batting average which is overrated and punishes certain hitters. The saves plus half holds cat is great because it refuses to give saves and holds equal weight which is how it should be. Also strikeout to walk ratio rewards pitchers with great command.
I actually prefer your batting stats to my league, but can't get some of the traditionalists to agree. But...
I'd argue your holds and saves weighting should be reversed, if you want to represent the true importance of relievers.
Most people seem to misunderstand which situation is more important to a team. But, the fact is, it's more important to come in with two men on in the seventh and get an out or two than it is to come in at the start of the ninth and get three outs.
There's a measure some stat guys use to look at what they call "high leverage" situations. A good "holder" comes in for a lot of these high leverage situations with multiple men on base where a hit can mean you lose the lead, where the typical closer has half or more of his saves of the "cheap" variety, where they come in with a 2 or 3 run lead and no one on.
As a result, if you measure how many runs relievers prevent (by comparing their performance to the average reliever, given the types of situations they pitch in), you'll find that two-third or so of the relievers who lead the league in runs prevented are holders, not closers.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by swarmee » Fri Mar 19, 2004 2:24 pm 
