Replacing wins with quality starts and runs with OPS

[kab21]

I would be very, very careful replacing a quantity stat (R's) with a ratio stat (OPS). OPS is good stat but there is a very good balance in 5x5 that too many feel the need to attempt to improve. It's even more important not to replace K's with K/9 because there would be 3 rate stats, wins and saves.

Even though QS's are a better stat than W's, I personally prefer W's in fantasy baseball. QS's are unbelievably boring and will prove to also be frustrating. Too many pitchers get a pulled during the 6th inning for matchups, pitch counts or because the sky is blue.

[Toaster Oven]

I look at it this way. Runs Scored are a "symptom" of getting on base, and Runs Batted In are a "symptom" of hitting for power, generally speaking. So, if I wanted to replace R and RBI with stats that are more lineup-independent, I would replace them with a getting-on-base stat and a hitting-for-power stat respectively. So, perhaps BB in place of R (especially good since walks aren't already accounted for), and Total Bases, or Slugging Percentage, or Extra Base Hits in place of RBI (actually, I would love to see Isolated Power more widely available as a roto stat, since it doesn't include singles as TB and SLG do).

One approach, as has been suggested, is to simply replace AVG with OBP, but although I love OBP as a stat in general, for roto purposes I would rather just add BB as a category to supplement AVG. Hitting for average and drawing walks are two different "tools," as it were, and isolating different tools is the spirit of roto scoring, as I see it. That's why I don't like OPS as a roto stat: even though it's a good measure of a hitter's overall ability, it's just too comprehensive, and as such makes most of the other categories redundant. In roto, get as many different "tools" represented as possible (which is why I'm a big fan of adding BB as a category), but keep them separate as best you can. Just my two cents.

[Toaster Oven]

As for Wins, the main thing I don't like about them for roto purposes is that relievers can vulture them. At one point late last season, I was actually rooting for my closers to blow saves so that they could possibly get me some much-needed wins. That's just downright perverse (though, granted, that's always going to be an issue in roto: "dangit, my guy hit a home run! I need steals--he should've hit a single instead!"). So anyway, I would have less of a problem with Wins if only starters' wins counted towards your total.

[CBMGreatOne]

Of all the redundant stats available in custom Roto leagues, I really don't think OPS is one that stands out. Plenty of hitters with poor averages have good OPSs and plenty of players with good counting stats have pedestrian OPSs. If anything what OPS does is devalue the stolen base specialists, albeit not that significantly. I've always felt that in 5x5 roto, the categories that receive too much weight relative to their worth in real life are SBs and SVs. This is because only certain players can accrue them while plenty of top players won't get a single hash mark in either column.

Roto is pretty balanced as 5x5 and I too think adding too many more categories gets too fancy and unintelligible, but I do like to balance the rare categories like SBs and SVs with some overarching performance stats like OPS and K/BB. Neither one is likely to significantly affect the outcome of the league unless they are totally ignored, but they ensure a little more quality control in terms of player performance.

As for replacing Rs or RBIs with other stats all I can say is: Really? What kind of fantasy baseball league doesn't count Rs? What kind of fantasy baseball league doesn't count RBIs? Really? I can't think of a less appealing idea than doing away with such traditional stats as these. Where's the fun in that? That's taking this quality stat idea waaaaaaaaaay overboard.