I'm telling you, if you're looking for another hitting category, try Doubles + Triples. CBS Commissioner service has this as a category, Yahoo (at least the free version) does not, but we've used Doubles + Triples (also known in some services as GAP) for years. Most other additional hitting categories (OBP, OPS) are based on categories already counted separately which just makes the hitters good in those categories even better but isn't tracking something new. Some HR hitters also hit a lot of doubles/triples but most don't. You'll be increasing the value of hitters that have good GAP power but don't typically hit the ball out of the park. You could add Walks but walks are dull. Things like Sacrifice Flys/Bunts are not significant enough to count as their own category (the league leader in Sacrifice Flys last year had 12 and you can't base an entire category on a stat where every MLB player has between 0 and 12 for the year).
etex211 wrote:I've played in 5x5 leagues for years. I am starting a 6x6 league this season, and I want for my sixth stats to address players that are often overloooked in the 5x5 leagues.
For pitchers, it is easy. The 5x5 leagues virtually ignore the middle relievers and setup guys, so holds is the natural place to go there.
For hitters, I've had a much greater time coming up with something. I want something that gives value to the team players that don't put up great stats in the other areas. The best thing I could come up with is walks + sacrifices, which I don't see as an option in any league. Right now, I've got OBP penciled in there. I am dead set against OPS, because it tends to favor the sluggers, and they already have stat categories that are exclusive to them.
Ya thats my concern also. I really dont want to give power guys more value than they already have. If anything id rather give a little more value to speed/top of the lineup guys.
HITTING: 1. OBP - the same reasons as stated above. The one criticism is that it really is may not be that differentiated from avg (although you might be surprised to find out how may .290-.300 hitters just never gets walked and how many 260 hitters and just walk machines). It adds a wrinkle, but maybe not as much as you'd like.
2. Total Bases - My crazy league (20-team, 20 stats) has doubles and triples and it really makes a difference (especially with triples since a team may only rack up 20-35 over the course of a year). Total bases lets you number crunch to your heart's contents and if you decide to go light on power, you might be able to make it up with speed or a guy like Markakis who is a doubles machine.
Bonus: Maybe change stolen bases to Net stolen bases. A guy who steals 20 and is only caught 5 times would be just as valuable as a 30sb/15cs guy, which is always a new wrinkle.
PITCHING: 1. Quality starts: I like it because some guys (like Cliff Lee last season) would look a whole look different if quality starts were counted and it really does measure a pitcher's effectiveness rather than a guy who might bailed out be a power hitting lineup behind him. Also, there've been times where I've cheated on wins by adding a reliever that vultures wins, but you have to earn those quality starts, lol.
2. K9: If you league is prone to streaming, K9 is a nice way to even some things up. It also brings the choice of RPs into play (do I compromise on ERA/WHIP to get a great K9).
Bonus: Losses is OK, but then it encourage people to pitch less, since you might be able to offset the reduction in wins with fewer losses than the average fantasy team. Not a huge fan.
a pitching category that takes into account of CG and SO and maybe roll them up with Wins. We used CG last year, and it was a real crapshoot. Someone won the category for 14 pts with something like 12 CG. That's placing a lot of points in the overall league score to each CG made. If we can adopt a system like a point system for this category only like W=1 + CG=4 + SO = additional 2 + No Hitter = additional 10, that would be awesome.
Not sure what you would call it. I guess I would call it "the dragon", because the formula is long but the value would be awesome!
I added a few catagories to our league a few years ago, and it made the whole league more challenging. So we are an 8x8 league. I added OBP, SLG%, and hits to the batting section, and originally added complete games, shutouts, and K/9 innings. after one year I got rid of shutouts and changed it to blown saves. The problem I have found with that is that some players are not picking up closers which means they will lose saves catagories, but always win or tie in blown saves. So Now I am looking at save %, holds, or relief wins to replace blown saves to get rid of the loophole.
I think cumulative categories are better than rate ones, especially for pitching. I'm not a huge fan of holds, though, but I'd consider simply IP. It gives value to simply taking the ball every fifth day. Back-of-the-rotation starters are bad in standard leagues because they drag down your percentages, and the few wins they get may not compensate (especially in a 4x4). Strikeouts is the obvious first step to redress this, but IP would likely be my next choice for a 6th pitching category. And if you cap number of starters, then the middle relievers get more room to shine: setup guys typically get a lot more IP than closers (although not necessarily Ks). Not as direct as holds, but still probably less fluky also.
Holds (and saves, or wins, for that matter) is biased in favor of teams that win more games, which is more a function of teammates than (certainly) the middle reliever himself.
Total bases is one I'd like, although that correlates well with HR, so I can see the appeal to GAP. With 4 offensive counting stats, low playing time isn't likely to be an issue, so you could have another rate stat. I agree OBP and BA overlap a lot, but replacing BA with OBP and then adding SLG as a separate rate stat makes a lot of sense. You could add OPS, but much of that is actually BA in disguise (it correlates well with both OBP and SLG separately, so when you add them you're sort of double-counting AVG again). If you want an all-in-one rate stat, consider Tom Tango's wOBA, which is like OBA in scale, but gives different weights to events somewhat similarly to SLG (at least in that for the weights HR > 3B > 2B > 1B > BB). That correlates very well with run creation.
mkultra wrote:I'm surprised no one has brought up K/9 or K/BB as pitching cats. They're great ratios for valuing not only elite starters, but elite relievers as well.
For offense, I like OPS. Or, you can swap out AVG for OBP and add TB.
I agree that K/9 and K/BB are good ratio categories, but I prefer cumulative categories where possible, because they encourage you to stay on top of your lineup and respond to injuries or demotions. If you have too many ratios (or, worse, negative categories), then it's often wiser simply to keep an injured ace in your lineup than to replace him with the best unowned starter, so you protect your ratios. That just feels very wrong to me.
Now as long as you have enough cumulative categories, it's not a concern. Punting one or at times even two categories could work, but not more than that.
If you like OPS, consider wOBA as an alternative. OPS is a decent quick-look overall summary of offensive skill, but you're adding two numbers that measure different things, and indeed have different denominators, so they're not even on the same scale. Either try wOBA, or consider OBP/SLG as separate. OBP and TB instead of BA is great - a better ratio category, and another good cumulative one, to boot!