A save nets the same amount of points as a win (doesn't a good closer get about 3x the amount of wins as a pitcher)? And, walks and ERs (two things closers theoretically don't give up) are minus points?
The one thing that I think helps swing it to the SP's side is 2 points per inning pitched.
Let's say they pitch 7 innings, give up 3 runs, walk 2 batters, give up 6 hits, and strike out 8 (a typical day for Johnson/Hamels).
That means they score: 7*2 = 14 - 3 = 11 - 4 = 7 + 8 = 15
That's being a bit generous though. Walks/Hits/Runs negatively affecting the SPs is a big deal, since that would affect them much more than a closer. A closer theoretically doesn't give those things up, and rather just gets K's.
So a typical line for Wilson could be 1 IP, 2 K's, 1 hit, SAVE.
2 + 2 - .5 + 10 = 13.5
Closers pitch more often than SPs too. I don't know. I can't decide if SPs or closers come out better in this scoring system.
Sorry for my random thoughts. I'd keep Hamels definitely. Up to you on Johnson or Wilson. I think there are more pitchers out there like Johnson than there are Brian Wilson actually (which goes against what some people previously said). But, I don't think there is a wrong decision here.
(In reference to an Aaron Hill for David Price swap)
mpieco wrote: You're my new hero if that gets accepted.
Well in our league like I said closers and starters are pretty close scoring wise. Last year 4 of the top 10 scoring pitchers were closers, 2 of them in the top 5. I've typically preferred going with starters as they seem to be a bit more reliable and easier to predict.
With those (weird) settings, I'd keep Wilson. Sure, closers are easy to find, but Wilson showed he was for real for real last year...I think you'll get more value out of him than Hamels -- I'd actually think about keeping Hamels over JJ, though...