What Do You Like More - Roto or Points Scoring?

[great gretzky]

well in straight up points, teams can be hopelessly out of it too.

in roto there is a finite line, so for the bottom team to get ahead he has to pull someone closer (in effect). so he gets poitive progress of himself and negative progress from his opponents. This is especially true in the picthing categories.

in points both teams are moving forward, so to make up ground you have have to jsut exponsentially exceed the output of the other teams.

I like the finiteness of roto.

[StlSluggers]

well in straight up points, teams can be hopelessly out of it too.

in roto there is a finite line, so for the bottom team to get ahead he has to pull someone closer (in effect). so he gets poitive progress of himself and negative progress from his opponents. This is especially true in the picthing categories.

in points both teams are moving forward, so to make up ground you have have to jsut exponsentially exceed the output of the other teams.

I like the finiteness of roto.

I believe there you are assuming that the points accumulate all season to a total-points winner. The points league that most of us are talking about is a league where the points start all over each week. You get a win or a loss for the previous week, and like real life, you sit X games ahead/back of first place each week. You are not really out as long as you can keep winning your H2H game each week.

Correct me if I misunderstood.

[John Bonzo]

I prefer roto in that balanced teams usually win and for its strategy.

[CubsFan7724]

Roto. Points just seems bland and boring. H2H is no fun without an IP min and max because if theres no max they will just start a ton of 2 start pitchers. I also dont like weekly lineup changes.

[Tavish]

It seems like you are asking two completely different questions Slugger.

Are you wanting to know peope's preference between category scoring (total R, HR, SB, etc.) and point scoring (award points for H, 2b, HR, RBI, etc)

or are you wanting to know the preference between roto-style competition (year long accumulation of stats) and head-to-head competition (weekly matchups)?

[great gretzky]

I consider that to be just h2h. The points I thought he was talking about are like 1 pt per single, 4 hr, 10 for a pitcher win, 1 pt per k.


I don't think the complete teams argument is particularly compelling in and of itself to me.

Don't get me wrong, I love the strategy and angling of roto.

But In real life, teams don't always go the "complete" route. some go pitchign heavy, some go big bats, some go blance and aother comibnations.

I like it how you can tweak your team to your preference.

I don't see how having 4 closers is that preferable to having one or none (or whatever)

not a big fan of h2h really. I like that for football, not so much for baseball.

[StlSluggers]

It seems like you are asking two completely different questions Slugger.

Are you wanting to know peope's preference between category scoring (total R, HR, SB, etc.) and point scoring (award points for H, 2b, HR, RBI, etc)

or are you wanting to know the preference between roto-style competition (year long accumulation of stats) and head-to-head competition (weekly matchups)?

That question right there shows how little I know about those types of leagues. I have always played H2H, points because I could just tell that's what I would like the best. I was under the impression that roto meant categorical. I have been enlightened. If I had to start this over again, I would ask about both.

Do you prefer points vs. categorical, and do you prefer roto to H2H?

[Tavish]

Do you prefer points vs. categorical, and do you prefer roto to H2H?

I hit the first part of the question in my first post. I like category scoring systems much more, simply because point systems allow owners to ignore different areas and not be hurt by the choice.

I prefer roto over H2H partly because it is the system I am much more comfortable with (10+ years exp vs 1). I would probably like H2H more if there wasn't a playoff system and the player with the best record at the end of the season won the title.

One thing I think both category scoring and roto competition are superior at is encouraging trades as the season winds down. Teams can look to improve in certain categories to help their standings (trading power for speed, pitching for hitting). These types of trades are basically pointless in the other styles.

[blankman]

I like Roto best of all of them. H2H probably the most realistic, but I don't like the idea of dominating a season, only to lose in the last week because your top players are resting for the real playoffs.

The problem I found with Pts was that it was too easy- there was only one type of player you needed to draft. Hitters- the power hitters were always the best and K pitchers dominated too. It made no difference what a pitcher's ERA was, as long as he struck out a bunch it made no difference.

Example:
No decision 6 ip 6 hits 5 er 1 bb 10 k's: by the scoring I've played, that's 16 pts, which is decent, when that is really a very bad game.

With hitters too, if you found a guy that went: 1-4 HR- 6pts, all the time he'd be a stud, even though his average sucks.

I've felt that Roto forces you to have a more balanced team than points

[john gardner]

For me, it's just a matter of which one "grabs" you first. I'm "addicted" to the ROTO style and feel (may be wrong) that the more I play, the better I get, therefore, I'm reluctant to consider a change.

Slightly off topic,I'm a numbers cruncher, and prefer the anonimity of a public league. I've been in a league where I can put faces with the Names. I'm probably a terrible poker player.