Urban Cohorts wrote:TheRock wrote:I think you have to keep it as is.
So the problem was when you went to last in ERA and WHIP, the teams below you in one or both of those cats gained points but the teams who were already ahead of you did not, correct? Well, it kinda sucks for those teams who did not gain, but as is the teams who were below you were already being penalized. The reason you decided not to just pick up more starters was to try and maintain good ratios right? So if you had logged more innings presumably your ratios would have been higher. So the teams below you were cheated in effect out of a proper placement in those cats. So they should be rewarded when you fail to meet the minimum.
I agree with this in theory, but I think you also have to consider the actual statistics a bit more.
In this type of scenario, you could probably have added 3-4 random pitchers, gotten your 20 innings, and met the IP requirement. This probably would have hurt your ratios. That said, a team would be cheated out of points only if that team had a reasonable chance of overtaking your team in ERA/WHIP had you met the minimum. If ERA and WHIP were tight, then teams would have been cheated out of points as the Rock said.
However, I think the guy sitting in 9th place in ERA/WHIP will most likely unfairly benefit from you not meeting the IP. He would gain points due to lack of oversight from the commish and manager involved. The same would hold true if there was a large gap after your team in ERA/WHIP. You could have added a couple of scrub starts and most likely not have dropped all the way down in the standings. Though I would imagine it would be rare for a team to win the league while having an uncompetitive ERA/WHIP.
So it really comes down to the gap in the stats IMO.
I know you said you didn't realize you were going to miss the IP requirement, but I agree that you should be penalized and not win any money. Had you known what you were doing, you could have very well chosen which manager you wanted to win (by either missing the IP requirement, or adding guys to meet the IP). And I think that scenario is the bigger issue here.
I agree with what you're saying here, but there's really no easy way to handle the situation aside from the way it was handled. It's not the responsibility of the league or the commish to determine what Sticky's ERA and WHIP might have been if he had picked up x, y, or z pitchers. So yes, the only teams that should benefit from him being dropped would be those that normally would have beaten him in those categories. But that is impossible to determine, so all teams beneath him will benefit, but benefit equally. Assuming his ratios were pretty good, this may affect a good number of teams, but really should just be setting things back more or less where they would have been.