I'll piggyback on this thread because it's a similar situation...

I have a 5x5 H2H league that's been together awhile. We finally decided to go to 7x7. It was going to be 6x6 but these are the pitching cats I wanted: Wins, Losses, K/9, ERA, WHIP, Saves, Holds. After enough badgering I finally got my way.

Now that we got that straightened out we're having some trouble agreeing on the hitting categories. Everyone is in agreement on OBP, SLG, HR, RBI, R, SB. The disagreement is over BA. Some people want it because they can't fathom fantasy baseball without it and others don't like it because they feel it's redundant.

So for those of you who have similar leagues what hitting cats do you use?

Maine has a good swing for a pitcher but on anything that moves, he has no chance. And if it's a fastball, it has to be up in the zone. Basically, the pitcher has to hit his bat. - Mike Pelfrey

TheYanks04 wrote:Do yourself a favor and stay with standard 5x5 Roto. Holds? Come on. I just finished drafting a Holds league and you get into stunning debates over the value of Ray King, Steve Kline, Antonio Alfonseca and JC Romero among others. If that rocks your boat then by all means. Putting 4 MRs on my roster for no other reason but for Holds is something I find absolutely silly.

Amazinz, combine OBP and SLG, add BA, and then add in some other category. Total bases? Negative strikeouts maybe for hitters? And for your pitching, you should probably just combine Wins and losses to Wins-losses, and then throw in K/BB. This will give you ultimate disencouragement of spot starting.

The problem with adding holds is that it devaules pitchers even further behind hitters. Adding holds every pitcher still remains at most a 4 category stud while adding another offensive category allows hitters to contribute heavily to 6. SLG% against is a decent pitching category if I was forced to add one.

RE: Amazinz

I would probably just try and combine the W and L pitching category into W minus L. You aren't really going to find any new hitting categories that do not overlap the ones you already have.

The value depends not only on the number of categories a player contributes to, but also on the variance in the contributions, so I'm not sure that adding holds reduces relative pitcher values. It would be interesting to look at auction values on that.

Even so, I have no problem with having hitters valued more. It's clear that in real baseball hitter contributions have more value than pitchers, because:
A. offense and defense are roughly equal in the effects on winning.
B. hitters are basically 100% responsible for offense, while defense depends on both pitching and fielding.
C. So, hitters are at least 50% of the win equation, while pitchers are certainly less than that.

GotowarMissAgnes wrote:The value depends not only on the number of categories a player contributes to, but also on the variance in the contributions, so I'm not sure that adding holds reduces relative pitcher values. It would be interesting to look at auction values on that.

It doesn't change much how pitchers are valued amongst each other, although it could make the top MR more valuable than the top Closer. What I said was it changed the value between hitters and pitchers which it abolutely does.

Even so, I have no problem with having hitters valued more.

When it comes to making real baseball evaluations I have absolutely zero problem saying hitters are more valuable. But when it comes to the fantasy baseball game, I completely dislike the idea. To me it makes for a rather boring draft when there is little debate needed on whether the best hitter is worth more than the best pitcher. There still isn't a ton of debate in my mind with a 5X5 setup, but it is much closer than in a 6X6 with holds.

Tavish wrote: It doesn't change much how pitchers are valued amongst each other, although it could make the top MR more valuable than the top Closer. What I said was it changed the value between hitters and pitchers which it abolutely does.

I don't see how that can be true, Tavish, but would be interested in hearing the evidence. Adding a pitching category almost by necessity must change relative pitcher values.

But with respect to pitchers and hitters your statement, I think, was that it reduced pitcher values because pitchers were now only 4 category contributors. So, I'd like to see evidence not just that it changes pitcher/hitter values, but that it reduces pitcher values and does so because of the fact that almost no pitchers contribute to all 6 categories.

My point (and I have no hard evidence either) is that the valuation of a player depends both on the number of categories and the distribution of outcomes within that category. Assume a really silly example to see this---let every player with 100% certainty have the exact same result for all categories., including two categories where pitchers make no contribution. Every player will have the exact same value because they all contribute equally to the outcome.

So, it's not just the number of categories, it's how outcomes are distributed both across and within categories. I'd agree with your point if the distribution of results was the same within each category. But, each category's distribution leaves each player's statistical contribution that is different at the margin. The addition of holds, changes the distribution of within each pitching category, and I don't think you can say for sure how it impacts pitcher versus hitter value.

GotowarMissAgnes wrote:But with respect to pitchers and hitters your statement, I think, was that it reduced pitcher values because pitchers were now only 4 category contributors. So, I'd like to see evidence not just that it changes pitcher/hitter values, but that it reduces pitcher values and does so because of the fact that almost no pitchers contribute to all 6 categories.

My point (and I have no hard evidence either) is that the valuation of a player depends both on the number of categories and the distribution of outcomes within that category. Assume a really silly example to see this---let every player with 100% certainty have the exact same result for all categories., including two categories where pitchers make no contribution. Every player will have the exact same value because they all contribute equally to the outcome.

Players will not contribute equally to the outcome. Hitters have the chance to contribute equally to the hitting categories that apply to them and pitchers have chance to contribute equally to the pitching categories that apply to them. What I have said twice now is that there is an increased difference between hitters and pitchers, not between hitters and hitters or pitchers and pitchers.

For an example suppose you split BA into SLG and OBA and add holds to give you a 6X6 league. The top hitters such as Bonds, Pujols, Helton, etc. now will help your team win in one additional category and increase your overall point total. By adding holds how much more value does Santana or Gagne gain?

Its not the addition of a category that changes the dynamics, its the addition of a specialization category for pitchers and a category that applies to all hitters.

Tavish wrote:Players will not contribute equally to the outcome. Hitters have the chance to contribute equally to the hitting categories that apply to them and pitchers have chance to contribute equally to the pitching categories that apply to them. What I have said twice now is that there is an increased difference between hitters and pitchers, not between hitters and hitters or pitchers and pitchers.

For an example suppose you split BA into SLG and OBA and add holds to give you a 6X6 league. The top hitters such as Bonds, Pujols, Helton, etc. now will help your team win in one additional category and increase your overall point total. By adding holds how much more value does Santana or Gagne gain?

Its not the addition of a category that changes the dynamics, its the addition of a specialization category for pitchers and a category that applies to all hitters.

I think I understand what you are saying, but I don't think it's as simple a connection as you seem to think. I've played with the USAToday custom values and I don't see the effect happening that you think happens.

Yes, adding the category gives Bonds value in two categories, rather than one. But, it also means that some guys with high BA, but below average OBP and SLG lose value in two categories. Yes, Santana gains nothing by holds, but adding holds adds tremendous value to some pitchers, and its effect on other pitchers depends on how the addition of those holders into the pool impacts the distribution of the other categories.

So, I don't see how you can generally conclude that adding holds increases the difference in value between pitchers and hitters.