An Iconic Fantasy Baseball Community
Moderator: Baseball Moderators
fantasyfiend wrote:bigh0rt wrote:fantasyfiend wrote:Aren't you the one that compiles all the blog feeds, too? =D
Anyway, what do you think of taking BB/9 out, and putting WHIP back in?
Pitching: IP, K/9, WHIP, ERA, SV
I'm opposed to having 20% of your pitching categories go towards IP in general. I understand your reasoning, I just feel it is better suited to use something else.
A category you may want to investigate using is K/BB. Then you could replace BB/9 or WHIP with something like SLG Against, if that's available for use. Then you're rewarding high rate K pitchers, pitchers who may not K as many batters but don't BB even fewer, the K/9 still helps boost relievers then, as well.
0rt, i enjoy the feedback, but can you tell me why you're against 20% of pitching-scoring going to IP?
I think IP is a very important "skill". Durable, effective, efficient pitchers rack up IP totals pretty quickly. THe best pitchers in the game lead the league in IP, I think it's works in that regard, and also helps balance the rate stats.
If i'm using K/9, SLG%, ERA, SV, an owner can just meet the minimum IP requirement, and never start a non-Closer pitcher again.
thanks for the continued feedback.
Neato Torpedo wrote: If you want REALLY realistic, count intangibles as a stat.
pjalst wrote:... One obvious conclusion can be drawn from the above: a SB is more rare than a HR in today’s game.
As any rotisserie league participant knows, in most leagues HRs and SBs are categories of equal weight ...
Since we can prove that a SB is a less common occurrence than a HR, we can also infer that a SB is more valuable. ...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest