ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Franchise GM: History Books => Franchise GM => MLB Leagues => Franchise GM: Archives => Topic started by: h4cheng on June 12, 2012, 02:04:19 PM
-
Week 10:
:OAK: 76.1IP, 677.06 points. Adjustment = (76.1 - 65) / 65 * 677.06 = -115.62 points
:BOS: 66IP, 581.97 points. Adjustment = (66 - 65) / 65 * 581.97 = -8.95 points
Week 12:
:PIT: 65.1IP, 509.69 points. Adjustment = (65.1-65)/65 * 509.69 = 0.784 (tough break)
Week 13:
:OAK: 75.1IP, 583.64 points. Adjustment = (75.1-65)/65*583.64= - 90.69
:TOR: 67IP, 521.64 points. Adjustment = (67-65) / 67 * 521.64 = -15.57
-
bump
-
Week 13:
:ATL: 74.1IP, 621.61 points, adj = -87.025
:NYY: 72IP, 571.24 points, adj = -61.518
:OAK: 69.2IP, 561.26 points, adj = -136.26 (-100 for 3rd offense)
:PIT: 68.2IP, 494.34 points, adj = -24.33
:PHI: 65.1IP, 529.44 points, adj = -0.81 points
-
Total violations as of Week 13:
:OAK: 3
:BOS: 2
:PIT: 2
:TOR: 1
:ATL: 1
:PHI: 1
-
Total violations as of Week 13:
:OAK: 3
:BOS: 2
:PIT: 2
:TOR: 1
:ATL: 1
:PHI: 1
boston is listed with 2 violations should only be 1 first week that is it
yankees should have 1 from period 14
-
boston is listed with 2 violations should only be 1 first week that is it
yankees should have 1 from period 14
Thanks for noticing, will be corrected in the upcoming post.
-
Week 16:
:NYY: 86.2IP, adjustment = 659.4 * (86.2-75)/75 = - 98.47
Total violations as of Week 16:
:OAK: 3
:NYY: 2
:PIT: 2
:BOS: 1
:TOR: 1
:ATL: 1
:PHI: 1
-
Week 16:
:NYY: 86.2IP, adjustment = 659.4 * (86.2-75)/75 = - 98.47
The inning pitched limit is 65 innings not 75. This calculation needs to be redone.
Also the formula used to calculate the adjustments is incorrect. The denominator should be the innings pitched and not the innings limit. For example the yankees formula should be:
659.4 * (86.2-65)/86.2= -164.85
You formula calculates the total as 659.4 * (86.2-65)/65 = 219.8
If you do the calculation to get the adjusted total you can see that the first formula is correct.
659.4 * (65/86.2) = 494.55
659.4 - 494.55 = 164.85
This can be found by simplifying the calculation to get the adjusted total.
659.4 - (659.4*(65/86.2))= X
if you factor out the 659.4 you get
659.4 *(1- (65/86.2)) = X
This can further be simplified to
659.4 * (86.2-65)/86.2 = X =
Therefore in the future the equation used should be
TP * (IV-65)/IV = Adjustment
Where:
TP = Total points for week
IV = Innings Violation for week
The formula used so far over stated the adjustments for teams and took more points away then should have been. Previous weeks calculations should be redone to make sure the standings are correct.
-
good catch, I will correct this shortly.
-
Great catch Bob. While this will have no little to no effect on my Pirates since they barely went over twice, at least we are catching critical errors.
-
Week 17
Pirates 67.1
Rangers 65.2
Nationals 67
Week 18
Red Sox 66.2
Indians 67
Yankees 68.1
-
Total violations as of Week 18.
Athletics 3
Yankees 3
Pirates 3
Red Sox 2
Blue Jays 1
Braves 1
Phillies 1
Rangers 1
Nationals 1
Indians 1
-
This is terrible guys, we need a buffer, I got into Sunday with like 11 innings left and one start how many RPs do u start? It just seems like there needs to be some give here. Idk maybe im asking for too much. To me 68 IP is one thing but if u r doing 80 or something like that then thats another.
-
I think we should consider going with a game start cap next year so this issue doesn't pop up again.
-
Whatever we r gonna do lets do it, Im tired of making moves based on the rules then the rules changing and hurting the moves I made. There no way Im the only one that has happened to.
-
Perhaps giving a buffer zone to impose penalties (other than the deducted score of course)? Like only penalizing those that go over 70IP.
-
I am considering 3 options for next season.
1. We do nothing since I think we have changed the IP rule the last two years.
2. GS limit.
3. An IP buffer.
I think the current rule was well intentioned, but it is still too early for teams with deep pitching staffs to pass the 65 IP limit unintentionally. For example, I had 57.2 IP coming into today, and I chose to sit a SP for fear that he would go 8 IP. I have the same dilemma tomorrow and I am already down 3 SP from the beginning of the year. It happens a lot when I have a lot of 2 start pitchers in the same week.
-
I vote #2...my argument with the buffer, is the same argument people were making with deadlines. So if we are going to be strict then we are going to be strict. 65 IP is the limit, end of story. It isn't a guideline, it isn't a loose interpretation, it is the number. Just because it is the limit doesn't mean that you have to reach it. Everyone seems to miss that point. A limit is a lot different than a requirement.
If we buffer it to 70, then people will push it to 70, making that the new limit. Once they start crossing that, then it will have to be moved to 75. Wash, rinse, repeat. There is no way any MLB team can start 11 guys in a week, it just isn't possible, but here it is. And it dilutes the value of SPs even further because you can throw as much crap against a wall and see if that sticks. I think this league NEEDS a START limit.
And unfortunately for this league, we are the trend setters for other leagues on this site, so we get to beta-test what works and what doesn't work. The IP limit was far too high last year. IMO 65 IP is a fine ceiling. Just because one has a ceiling doesn't mean you have to touch it. That will be my argument until the end of time. But when trying to squeeze out every last point you run the risk of going over, it is called being greedy. If you want that potential 11 points that a reliever can give you on the last day, then you also run the risk that he throws 2 innings and costs you a penalty.
Once the 65 IP penalties were put in place there was a lot less teams crossing the threshold... Kind of curious don't ya think?
-
Dan your absolutely right when you drop innings down like we did that quick is little unfair for teams who where set up slightly pitchIng heavy due to trying to compete within the rules. Innings limit drop was great this year but buffer would have been fair I help teams adjust to the huge drop then go to next year to full all out violation penalty so all teams had full yet to learn to adapt to the limit on how to avoid going over and also adjust team to the rule changes.
-
I think you did not understand by what I meant by the buffer. IP limit is 65 and only 65 would be scored. I mean a buffer regarding the penalties for going over the IP limit. I for one was against such a low inning limit because no one here can predict how many innings a pitcher is going to go. Say you head into Sunday and have 40IP and three starters set to go. You could bench all your RPs and still have all three pitchers throw a combine 25 and a third innings pitched. If we were able to predict that we would all go to a betting site and become rich. Fantasy ball needs certain flexibility. The cap is set at 65 and only 65 IP would be scored, but the buffer would offer penalty flexibility for those who just go over *does not have to be to 70, it could be 68 or whatever.
I am sure many do not intend to go over the cap and do so unknowingly. i.e. It happened to me once when a couple of RPs were switched to SP and I had a busy week so I did not realize I had more starters than the usual. Almost happened last week and I barely managed to log in time to bench my starters. The penalties for going over are very harsh in my opinion, so the buffer could help those who go over without intending to do so.
-
I think you did not understand by what I meant by the buffer. IP limit is 65 and only 65 would be scored. I mean a buffer regarding the penalties for going over the IP limit. I for one was against such a low inning limit because no one here can predict how many innings a pitcher is going to go. Say you head into Sunday and have 40IP and three starters set to go. You could bench all your RPs and still have all three pitchers throw a combine 25 and a third innings pitched. If we were able to predict that we would all go to a betting site and become rich. Fantasy ball needs certain flexibility. The cap is set at 65 and only 65 IP would be scored, but the buffer would offer penalty flexibility for those who just go over *does not have to be to 70, it could be 68 or whatever.
I am sure many do not intend to go over the cap and do so unknowingly. i.e. It happened to me once when a couple of RPs were switched to SP and I had a busy week so I did not realize I had more starters than the usual. Almost happened last week and I barely managed to log in time to bench my starters. The penalties for going over are very harsh in my opinion, so the buffer could help those who go over without intending to do so.
I agree with you 100%.
-
Should we start voting on a proposal for next year?
-
IP Violations in week 19.
Rangers 66
Blue Jays 66.2
Total violations through Week 19.
Athletics 3
Yankees 3
Pirates 3
Red Sox 2
Rangers 2
Blue Jays 2
Braves 1
Phillies 1
Nationals 1
Indians 1
-
*PRELIMINARY*
IP Violations in week 20.
Rangers 65.2
Total violations through Week 20.
Rangers 3
Athletics 3
Yankees 3
Pirates 3
Red Sox 2
Blue Jays 2
Braves 1
Phillies 1
Nationals 1
Indians 1
Modify message
-
Can someone remind me what the argument was against just saying if you exceed 65, you stop scoring points for every IP pitched from there on that week? Why would we need a penalty for exceeding that, if we just have a hard limit and you can't really exceed it (if your team did, those statistics would just not count)?
I'm guessing this was discussed last year but I wasn't around as much and don't remember.
-
Hard cap doesn't work in Fantrax.
-
Any chance we could get them to fix it? Seems like a request that would benefit many leagues and not be too difficult to implement.
-
Any chance we could get them to fix it? Seems like a request that would benefit many leagues and not be too difficult to implement.
I requested it a couple years ago.
-
This is not something unique to Fantrax. Yahoo also has a soft cap.
-
This is not something unique to Fantrax. Yahoo also has a soft cap.
Really? All my years of playing on Yahoo and I didn't realize that.
-
I am not aware of any site with a hard cap. My understanding is that it would be a programming nightmare, because it would involve real-time site maintenance. We always considered saving our SP starts until the last day to be part of the overall strategy in my other leagues. IMO, we badly over-reacted to a non-issue here.
-
Roy, you have an excellent point. Can we move back to a soft cap of 65IP?
-
Or we could go to a start limit. Increasing the value of both good pitching and relievers. Just saying.
-
Money ball has a soft cap of 75 IP and 9 GS and works well
anything lower than 75 IP will just make it a hitters league
What ever the final rule is it should be established before FA
-
Please see here for the final decision for 2013:
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=73469.10
Roy will probably update the rulebooks soon.
-
It says 8 GS and 65 IP
Are these soft caps or is there a penalty?
-
The RC approved a hard cap with penalties. Please see the following post.
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=60725.0
-
Can these posts be put in the rules?
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=60725.0
Since the league moved to a 65 innings pitched limit this offseason, it has become clear that there is a loophole in the scoring system. In order to rectify the situation the RC has taken the following steps.
1. Howe and Corey will be monitoring the final weekly tallies for IP.
2. 1st and 2nd offense for crossing the 65 IP threshold will result in a loss of any pitching points over 65 innings pitched.
3. Third offense results in a loss of points over 65, and an additional 100 points for the week.
4. Fourth offense and beyond will result in a loss of ALL pitching scoring for the scoring period.
http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=73469.10
Please vote on one of the following three options:
1. Keep the 65 IP limit with NO GS limit
2. Institute 7 GS rule PLUS 65 IP - whichever happens first (like Moneyball)
3. Institute 8 GS rule PLUS 65 IP - whichever happens first (like MB)
Option # 3 wins by a margin of 5-3. Therefore, our new rule will be 8 GS plus 65 IP.
-
Boston with 67 IP in week 3.
-
Miami also violated the GS and IP limits in week 3
-
Mets violated GS in week 5. They hit their limit on May 3rd, so the points for May 4th and 5th need to be subtracted. May 4th= 0 pts/ May 5th= 10.81 pts. Mets were credited with 1255.64 pts for the week and the Rays with 1246.35.
1255.64-10.81= 1244.83, or 1245 pts. The Rays should have been credited with the win due to this violation. Please verify that this is indeed the case. Sorry for just now being able to figure out what happened. :toth:
EDIT: Please disregard this post, in looking again at fantrax I realize that the error was on my part, not the Mets. Congrats on a well deserved win Corey
-
It looks like Miami went over the IP limit last week although it may not matter as they laid a whipping on me! :koolaid: