Author Topic: Rule Change Discussion: Pitching Limits  (Read 1353 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Flash

  • *ProFSL Staff
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2010
  • Posts: 23232
  • Bonus inPoints: 319
    • :SFO:
    • :GS:
    • :SJ:
    • :California:
    • :UnitedStates:
    • :SF:
    • View Profile
Rule Change Discussion: Pitching Limits
« on: July 18, 2019, 12:45:27 PM »
As many of you know, MLB has begun to embrace the use of “openers” in a variety of instances.  While the practice of utilizing RPs to start games has not spread to all teams, it is nonetheless something that affects a variety of teams in FGM in that it directly impacts our weekly Pitching Limits Rule of 8 SP/65 IP.  Presently, we are guided by the following rules:

Section B- Pitching Limits
Item AIII B-1.0

Pitching Limits - 65 Innings Pitched AND 8 Games Started.  BOTH limits apply, so you have violated the rule if you have gone over EITHER limit.  It does not matter whether you have exceeded one limit and not the other.

Item AIII B-2.0
Penalties for Violations:

A.) 1st and 2nd offense for crossing the limits will result in a loss of any pitching   points over the limits.
B.) Third offense results in a loss of points over limits PLUS an additional 100 points for the week.
C.) Fourth offense and beyond will result in a loss of ALL pitching scoring for the scoring period.

These pitching limits rules have been a part of FGM since its inception.  In the past, Colby’s vision was to have rule changes discussed by a Rules Committee, but over the years, although some things have changed via executive decision, FGM has evolved to the point where change has mainly come about through a league wide discussion and referendum.  Therefore, I would like the league to have a chance to weigh in on whether it’s time to do away with our weekly 8 SPs limit and simply adhere to our 65 IP limit. 

As a point of reference, the abolition of the weekly 8 SPs per week rule was initially presented to me via PM by Jason S. (game162) during the off-season and at that time I said I would not support that rule change and would not bring it up for discussion.  Since that time, others have raised the issue with me privately, and with more and more MLB teams using openers, I believe everyone needs an opportunity to weigh in on this matter to see if there is enough interest to put forth a referendum for change.

Although any changes would take place beginning with the 2020 season, I think we should begin the discussion now, instead of waiting for the off-season, because we need as much input as possible—and there is more activity at the trade deadline than there is in the off-season.

This is an open discussion, so please feel free to post your thoughts on the matter. 

Note:  If we get at least 8 GMs to request a change, we can set up a vote on a referendum as prescribed in our rules.

“8.) Any GM in the league may propose a general referendum to be considered by the entire league if at least eight (8) member co-sponsor the referendum.  A referendum must receive at least 16 votes to be implemented—this would be a simple majority of 15 + 1.”
« Last Edit: July 18, 2019, 09:37:40 PM by Flash »
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
🏆 2021 FGM World Series Champion - :SF:
🏆 2017 WCB2 World Series Champion - :SD:
🏆 2021 BSN Football Mt West Champion :UNLV:
🏆 2021 BSN Football Big 10 Champion -  :Nebraska:
🏆 2021 BSN Football Pac-12 Champion :California:

Offline indiansnation

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Sep 2014
  • Posts: 20763
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :CLE-NFL:
    • :CLE-NBA:
    • :CLS:
    • :OhioState:
    • :CLS-MLS:
    • :CLE:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussion: Pitching Limits
« Reply #1 on: July 18, 2019, 01:10:56 PM »
I personally would like to do 65 IP. I feel its what is best for the league overall
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline RyanJames5

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2013
  • Posts: 9795
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :BAL-NFL:
    • :Blank:
    • :CAR-NHL:
    • :NorthCarolina:
    • :COL-MLS:
    • :BAL:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussion: Pitching Limits
« Reply #2 on: July 18, 2019, 01:17:53 PM »
I think the limitation on starts should be removed from the rule.  I think the league has done a great job of keeping up with the changes in the real game and the inclusion of the opener seems to be here to stay, at least for now. 
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
:STL: 2022 FGM Champions
:NYY: 2022 Armchair Champions
:LAA: 2021 Wild Card 2 Champions
:PIT: 2015 Wild Card Baseball World Series Champions

Offline papps

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Apr 2010
  • Posts: 8632
  • Bonus inPoints: 9
    • :PHI-NFL:
    • :PHI-NBA:
    • :PHI-NHL:
    • :Blank:
    • :PHI:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussion: Pitching Limits
« Reply #3 on: July 18, 2019, 02:13:05 PM »
I am in support of just an innings pitched limit.  I'd also be in favor of raising that limit to 70 IP.  We all know that pitching isn't as valuable as hitters in this league so I think that maybe bumping it up a few innings might make pitchers a little more valuable.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
🏆 - 2021 NFL Live Champion :TB-NFL:
🏆 - 2020 Bush League Champion :PHI:
🏆 - 2018 Franchise GM Champion :PHI:
🏆 - 2018 The League Champion :PIT-NFL:
🏆 - 2016 Moneyball II Champion :BOS:
🏆 - 2010 Agents vs GMs Champion :PHI:

Offline Paul S.

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 21961
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussion: Pitching Limits
« Reply #4 on: July 18, 2019, 02:54:37 PM »
I am in support of just an innings pitched limit.  I'd also be in favor of raising that limit to 70 IP.  We all know that pitching isn't as valuable as hitters in this league so I think that maybe bumping it up a few innings might make pitchers a little more valuable.
:iatp:
I agree with Papps.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline kidd5jersey

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Aug 2016
  • Posts: 2544
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussion: Pitching Limits
« Reply #5 on: July 18, 2019, 08:19:15 PM »
I agree to drop starts. Openers are ruining the game.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline dedreger

  • All-Star
  • ***
  • Join Date: May 2014
  • Posts: 1736
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :NYR:
    • :Illinois:
    • :BVB:
    • :WAS:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussion: Pitching Limits
« Reply #6 on: July 18, 2019, 09:53:31 PM »
I am in support of just an innings pitched limit.  I'd also be in favor of raising that limit to 70 IP.  We all know that pitching isn't as valuable as hitters in this league so I think that maybe bumping it up a few innings might make pitchers a little more valuable.

I also agree with Papps.

funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Online Brent

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Aug 2010
  • Posts: 15350
  • Bonus inPoints: 3
    • :NO:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :LouisianaState:
    • :UnitedStates:
    • :CHC:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussion: Pitching Limits
« Reply #7 on: July 18, 2019, 10:26:13 PM »
I am in support of just an innings pitched limit.  I'd also be in favor of raising that limit to 70 IP.  We all know that pitching isn't as valuable as hitters in this league so I think that maybe bumping it up a few innings might make pitchers a little more valuable.

I agree with Papps on both counts.  Remove to starts limit and raise the IP limit to 70.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
:SEA: 2023 Field of Dreams - League Champion
:NOP: 2022-23 Buckets of Dimes - Eastern Conference Champion
:NO: 2021-2022 NFL Live -  30-4 (4-2) 2X NFC Runner-up/1X NFC South Champs
:NO: 2018-2020 NFL Countdown - 37-11 (3-2) 1X NFC Runner Up/2X NFC South Champs
8 ProFSL Hosted League Championships 2010-2019
Proud Member of the Who Dat Nation!

Offline Thecliff

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 6762
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :DET-NFL:
    • :DET-NBA:
    • :DET-NHL:
    • :Michigan:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussion: Pitching Limits
« Reply #8 on: July 18, 2019, 11:05:55 PM »
More teams in MLB is taking a look at the new possible fad of starting a RP for the first inning. And even so it back fired on Hector who gave up 7 ER in 2-thirds of an inning in most cases it has been a success. And you can bet your last penny that more teams are going to follow suit starting in 2020. I believe in all leagues here at PROfsl will drop the start pitching ruling and go with just innings pitched with a cap. At fantrax, their software can be set at a # and when a team finishes a day play hitting or surpassing that # all pitching fp in following days if required to finish game period do not count. The problem is that fantrax does not stop on the max #, so teams will surpass the max #.

So, I think in fairness of the commissioner having to decide to cut fp over max # set by league, that the league agree to set max # of innings pitched per-game period at 65 and have that #65 max set at fantrax....and in any day that a team max 65 or more innings when fantrax will lock pitching fp, let the over innings pitched count on that day. The scoring is done at fantrax, let fantrax in complete control and if a team ends a day at 70 innings pitched for game period, let it stand. SP on average today is 6 strong innings maybe 7, and we do see less complete games by SP.

I will recommend this new ruling for WCB2 league in the off season. As moderator I do not want responsibility of having to cut back overage innings pitched at end of game period. I will let fantrax in complete control of scoring.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline Thecliff

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Posts: 6762
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :DET-NFL:
    • :DET-NBA:
    • :DET-NHL:
    • :Michigan:
    • View Profile
Re: Rule Change Discussion: Pitching Limits
« Reply #9 on: July 18, 2019, 11:17:12 PM »
ALSO REMINDER: ...at fantrax there is stat corrections feature where commissioner can set each game period at Wednesday at earliest lock after Sunday end of game period or let it go to the following Sunday as statistic rulings are changed on players (an error changed to single, etc).
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

 

Forum Search


Quick Profile

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

* Chat Room

Refresh History
  • Jwalkerjr88: Lol
    Yesterday at 04:53:59 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I get like that too Eric. My goal every offseason is to do at least 1 trade with every gm. Why not? Its fun
    Yesterday at 04:55:00 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Some guys just dont trade for whatever reason. But the guys who dont arent championship contenders.
    Yesterday at 04:55:47 PM
  • Daddy: They trade, about as often as real teams do. For people that love year round trading, being in one league, one sport, its going to be difficult.
    Yesterday at 05:38:13 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Not everyone trades. But agreed, for one sport folk like myself. It requires patience
    Yesterday at 06:10:32 PM
  • Alpha5: NFL LIVE is the most difficult league for me and it's not even close
    Yesterday at 07:22:33 PM
  • Daddy: Cant just trade because its fun. There needs to be a purpose behind trading. Get guys you believe in or need to keep improving.
    Yesterday at 08:44:03 PM
  • Daddy: NFL LIVE has the toughest GMs & football is the toughest fantasy sport for DYNASTY. Redraft will always be King of football.
    Yesterday at 08:45:00 PM
  • Daddy: Baseball, hockey, basketball guys struggle with NFL LIVE because its just so damn fast (football careers, roster turnover etc.)
    Yesterday at 08:46:19 PM
  • Alpha5: Limited assets
    Yesterday at 11:05:53 PM
  • Daddy: We all have the same assets
    Today at 12:14:51 AM
  • Alpha5: If a team has 2 QB1s another team has none. If a team in baseball has 2 1B it doesn't leave a team without one.
    Today at 09:09:33 AM
  • Alpha5: That's what I mean by limited assets
    Today at 09:09:53 AM
  • Brent: And that's why I haven't traded Carr yet.  Someone doesn't have a QB or thinks they'll get one in FA/draft and might be left wanting.
    Today at 09:12:28 AM
  • Daddy: @Alpha if a team in MLB LIVE has two starting 1Bs then there is also a team without one.
    Today at 10:30:34 AM
  • ldsjayhawk: @jwalker I make like 2-3 trades a year for each of my baseball teams, maybe.  I'll tell you part of the reason I don't trade.  Every trade discussion starts out with the other team wanting my top prospect regardless of what I am trading for.  I am not trading Jackson Holliday for your backup catcher who is going to play 20 games this year.
    Today at 10:56:16 AM
  • Alpha5: Nah cause position eligibility. 1B/OF, 1B,3B etc
    Today at 11:02:48 AM
  • Daddy: CB/S >> DE/LB >> Taysom Hill QB/TE
    Today at 12:06:43 PM
  • Daddy: Football is just harder. You can build a team and 3 years later its irrelevant due to injury, retirement, roster turnover.
    Today at 12:07:41 PM
  • Alpha5: @ldsjayhawk I get the frustration but you're gonna have to get over that man haha
    Today at 12:29:52 PM
  • Alpha5: And maybe you should trade Jackson Holiday lolol
    Today at 12:32:00 PM
  • Brent: In an offsite league, I inquired about Mason Miller and the guy asked for Jackson Holliday.
    Today at 12:39:24 PM
  • dbreer23: Is it like a 4 team redraft league? :rofl:
    Today at 12:40:30 PM
  • dbreer23: Cris, there is a reason that you are a good owner, bc you can discern a value deal vs. a BS deal. Not all owners are that savvy. They will eventually leave...
    Today at 12:42:49 PM
  • Brent: Nope, 32-team contract league.
    Today at 12:49:09 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: I don't have Holiday.  Just used him as an example since he was the #1 prospect
    Today at 12:56:05 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: @Alpha I do make trades.  I am just not giving up the entire farm to land a guy I can get out of the FA pool
    Today at 12:59:21 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: Trading should be a win-win situation for both teams.
    Today at 01:00:32 PM
  • dbreer23: Agreed. I think the Devers deal in FGM is a good example of that. Devers gives SD some now (and future) pop, giving up substantial pieces to get him (Mayo, Keith, and one other).
    Today at 01:03:48 PM
  • Brent: I had Holliday in FGM before I stepped away.
    Today at 01:24:07 PM
  • Brent: I am glad I cut back on leagues, I was spread too thin.
    Today at 01:24:25 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: @idsjayhawk i understand that. To be clear, i wasnt judging anyone. I just know in NFL Live, you cant just draft 1-7 rds every year and sign a few FAs and be the champion. It wont happen
    Today at 01:52:08 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Trading isnt easy. But neither is winning
    Today at 01:52:22 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: If you made a list of the most aggressive gms to have stepped foot in nfl live, you will notice the champions will be among them
    Today at 01:53:06 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: You arent gonna win every trade and you HAVE to have a plan. Ive made some horrible trades. I have every year
    Today at 01:53:50 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Carolina has kyren williams right now cause i traded him for a 2nd and a 4th. Id rather have kyren today lol
    Today at 01:54:28 PM
  • Brent: Agreed.  I have Amon Ra St. Brown and Aiyuk because I traded JJ.  I couldn't have acquired a player like ASB where I was picking in the 1st so I down tiered at WR to make a trio of Chase, ASB and Aiyuk instead of JJ, Chase and fill in the blank.
    Today at 02:09:02 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: That is probably even more true in baseball since your drafts don't payoff for 5 years or so.  And I will admit my conservatism may be the reason I only have one championship here at ProFSL
    Today at 02:10:04 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: jwalkerjr88 is right
    Today at 02:25:49 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: on that u havat trade a bit here and there
    Today at 02:25:57 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: although my last draft class and fa class kinda lead me to a run so it can happen
    Today at 02:27:21 PM
  • Brent: Yeah, it does help to have a big draft class and available cap.
    Today at 02:36:56 PM
  • Brent: I'm contemplating doing a complete tear down in NFL Live and rebuild.  Honestly, I probably should have postered for it to be this season.  I still might, but I would legit need to go into the draft with 3-4 top 10 picks/+ many others.
    Today at 02:38:21 PM
  • Brent: postured
    Today at 02:38:35 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Yea nailing drafts and some key FAs helps too. But if you remember BAB you traded alvin kamara for the rams 1-7 draft picks. So the extra picks helped you nail the 2023 draft the way you did
    Today at 03:13:02 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Its the combination of all three that is required is what im saying
    Today at 03:13:31 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: And brent a tear down with you assets would look interesting. Personally i just think you need break one big asset down into 3 good ones and move carr and go from there. But you have an A1 nfl mind so im sure you will nail whatever it is you decide
    Today at 03:14:39 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: *your
    Today at 03:14:50 PM
  • BayAreaBallers: very good pt yes i did gain lot of capital which propelled me to make more moves from that trade
    Today at 03:34:25 PM
  • Brent: Thank you.  Yes, I agree.  I do need to break one asset down to 3.  I did that with JJ, went from S tier to 2 A tiers.  Now I need to potentially go from an A tier to 3 Bs or something like that.  I've had some inquiries on Carr, but nothing worth moving him.
    Today at 03:48:17 PM