Elimination of Defense in Scoring?

[Colby]

Finding a way to fix the lineup problems via defensive adjustments should be the priority here.  One thing we could do is eliminate the positional-based scoring for defense and replace it with positive points for putouts and negative points for errors.  All this does is reflect fielding percentage which will generally be worse for infielders.  Thoughts?

[Daniel]

Sounds good, but since defensive stats won´t be position-dependent, assists should also be part of the scoring system so that MI's don't lose value due to the high amount of errors and small amount of POs that they usually post. Also, whoever is playing UT should not have defensive points.

[lp815]

Sounds good, but since defensive stats won´t be position-dependent, assists should also be part of the scoring system so that MI's don't lose value due to the high amount of errors and small amount of POs that they usually post. Also, whoever is playing UT should not have defensive points.

Agreed.

[Colby]

Sounds good, but since defensive stats won´t be position-dependent, assists should also be part of the scoring system so that MI's don't lose value due to the high amount of errors and small amount of POs that they usually post. Also, whoever is playing UT should not have defensive points.

Good idea....  A + PO - E = ?

[BHows]

Good idea....  A + PO - E = ?

This will be across the board for all positions and players with multiple positions can be switched throughout the scoring period,right?

[Colby]

This will be across the board for all positions and players with multiple positions can be switched throughout the scoring period,right?

I can guarantee it would be across the board and players can be switched between positions if we do it for UTIL.  If we don't do it for UTIL then there may be issues switching between UTIL and a position.  However, I think Fantrax's issue was only if you switched players mid-week between C, CI, MI, and OF.  I was able to switch a player between a position and UTIL without a problem.

[BHows]

I was hoping that if all positions used the same defensive stats it wouldn't matter where they play as long as they qualify. Personally, having the versatility to move players around is the only reason I would change or eliminate defensive ststs

[Colby]

I was hoping that if all positions used the same defensive stats it wouldn't matter where they play as long as they qualify. Personally, having the versatility to move players around is the only reason I would change or eliminate defensive ststs

I believe this is where our discussions are headed.  I can dig up the old defensive stats spreadsheet that the RC used last year - it is here on the board.

[Daniel]

I never had any problems switching players with the UT position either, so that shouldn't be a problem. That formula sounds ok, but I would propose PO plus A minus 10 times the errors (to make a significant difference between someone who makes 1 error and someone who makes 20).

[Colby]

I never had any problems switching players with the UT position either, so that shouldn't be a problem. That formula sounds ok, but I would propose PO plus A minus 10 times the errors (to make a significant difference between someone who makes 1 error and someone who makes 20).

I have taken a statistical approach to this problem.  We have three basic defensive stat modifiers - errors, assists, and putouts.  Our current scoring system does a very good job of splitting these up per position.  I am running a simulation using three random multipliers times three weights (for example, a high negative weight is given to errors).  I am then measuring the correlation between the current top 100 players' defensive fantasy points against this simulated system.  Whatever gives the highest correlation could be a very good replacement for our old defensive scoring system.