Need New Scoring System

[haseloff]

Make it a one year transition then.  Those of us who took over Craptty rosters and are just rebuilding will be just as happy.  I was saying 3 years to appeal to those who have created dynastic level teams at the expense of our previous owners.

[Jss0062]

My only problem with the Fangraphs scoring is that it greatly diminishes the closer role which isn't real baseball.

It is quickly becoming real baseball.  Over the last 4 years only 31.6% of the top 10 save leaders returned to the list the next season.  Rosenthal and Uehara took over the closer role as the 3rd options last season.  Mo and Kimbrell to a certain extent are exceptions. 

http://www.faketeams.com/2013/12/17/5218750/fantasy-baseball-2014-the-closer-carousel-continues

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/story/2012-02-21/MLB-closers-turnover/53199238/1

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/more-closer-turnover-002100906--mlb.html

http://www.deepleagues.com/2013/02/15/closer-debate-buy-buy/

[kerr]

We can't wait three years.  The scoring in here is absurdly bad so changing that has to be a priority.  I'd like to do it this year but I just don't think it would be fair to owners.  Making it known now gives all owners a year's warning which I feel is plenty of notice.

This would be really great for the league so long as we know specifically the scoring settings we should begin to adjust for.

[chrisetc21]

If the role were diminished there would be three guys per team with 10+ saves each because with it being a diminished role you could put your most valuable reliever in the most crucial role rather than the closer role.  When middle relievers make what closers make, that will be an indicator of diminished role. 

[Lindner]

If the role were diminished there would be three guys per team with 10+ saves each because with it being a diminished role you could put your most valuable reliever in the most crucial role rather than the closer role.  When middle relievers make what closers make, that will be an indicator of diminished role.

I disagree.  The Fangraphs settings reflect how well a player performs.  Putting such a heavy emphasis on something as unpredictable as the closer carousel is poor policy, imo.  Teams also used to payout tons of money to players because they accumulated a lot of RBIs/Runs.  The times are a-changing and that's why advanced fantasy leagued don't give much merit to the "luck stats" (Wins, RBIs, Runs, Saves, etc.).

[chrisetc21]

I disagree.  The Fangraphs settings reflect how well a player performs.  Putting such a heavy emphasis on something as unpredictable as the closer carousel is poor policy, imo.  Teams also used to payout tons of money to players because they accumulated a lot of RBIs/Runs.  The times are a-changing and that's why advanced fantasy leagued don't give much merit to the "luck stats" (Wins, RBIs, Runs, Saves, etc.).

You're free to run your team how you like.  Again, closers make much more than middle relievers and it's not because they have a diminished role.  You can't cherry pick some parts of data over two years to make claims contradicted by other sets of data like salary.  If the closer role were diminished, it would be a carousel within the season.  Managing payroll and dropping older closers like Mujica for arbitration pitchers like Rosenthal doesn't equate to a diminished role for the position, especially when the younger, cheaper closer is just flat out better.

And if you read particularly the pitching breakdown of the fangraphs scoring you will see that by their own admission, non-pitcher performance
plays a factor in the scoring.  BTW, those stats aren't luck.  They're team dependent stats much like home runs, obp, and era are park dependent stats. 

[Lindner]

You're free to run your team how you like.  Again, closers make much more than middle relievers and it's not because they have a diminished role.  You can't cherry pick some parts of data over two years to make claims contradicted by other sets of data like salary.  If the closer role were diminished, it would be a carousel within the season.  Managing payroll and dropping older closers like Mujica for arbitration pitchers like Rosenthal doesn't equate to a diminished role for the position, especially when the younger, cheaper closer is just flat out better.

And if you read particularly the pitching breakdown of the fangraphs scoring you will see that by their own admission, non-pitcher performance
plays a factor in the scoring.  BTW, those stats aren't luck.  They're team dependent stats much like home runs, obp, and era are park dependent stats.

If the league wants to give closers a prominent role, I'm fine with it.  I just think players should receive points based on how well they perform, not by how many times they luck into a save opportunity. 

[soiytenlee]

I know I am one of the new guys here, but here is my take on a few things:

1. I think that the transition period to whatever new scoring system can be done in one year and still be fair to all parties, both the built and the building, just as long as the parameters are set in detailed stone. This is something that probably should be settled BEFORE free agency begins. Maybe push back the start date to FA as an option.

2. While middle relievers are not getting what closers are getting contract wise, the gap between the closer and those who pave the way for his save opportunity has closed considerably recently. The has happened for two reasons, first the argument has been heard that the 7th and 8th inning guy is almost as important as the closer, so their contracts have been raised in value as such. Second, the closer's salary has fallen on average recently and teams are much more reluctant to sign a closer to a monster contract, except the elite of the elite. Alot of teams would rather let that closer walk in FA and bring up the cheaper kid with the electric fastball and serviceable offspeed offering. The school of thought is spreading that if that closer is not a Mo or Kimbrel, then they can be replaced.

I said all that to say this, the save is a stat. The save matters and should have value since in some instances it is a 1 run game in the 9th and that closer has to face the likes of Trout, Pujols, Hamilton or Miggy, Prince, and Vmart with Austin Jackson's speed sitting on 2nd. But there is a bit of luck to it also where the closer comes in with a 3 run lead and faces the 7th,8th, and an ice cold PH off the bench. If there is a way to specify the in game situation in the scoring, weighing each save than that would be optimal. I have not seen this yet, and I am unfamiliar with the scoring features available with our chosen site. If that is not an option than the value a save represents should be lowered slightly but still kept around.

Also, I am a huge fan of defensive metrics and think they are becoming a focus of today's game more and more. While the voters of awards have not totally come around to this yet, it certainly does matter and should be represented in league as realistic as this. Just my thoughts.

[chrisetc21]

If the league wants to give closers a prominent role, I'm fine with it.  I just think players should receive points based on how well they perform, not by how many times they luck into a save opportunity.

I know what you're saying but a lot of these stats are dependent on something.  If you have bad infielders you give up more hits.  If you play in Coors you give up more hits.  If you play at Wrigley you give up more home runs.  If you pitch at Dodger stadium, you give up fewer hits.  If this and that, you get x.  If you pitch against certain teams you give up certain types of stats more often.  That's part of the game.  As far as the prominence of the closer role, in these stats a save is 20% more than a hold.  I think that's out of whack from their importance in baseball.  It might break down value wise with sabermetrics but that's not how teams overwhelmingly value those stats.  Jim Johnson gets $10 million a year and a good middle reliever doesn't get half that.  As much as there may be a belief that closer carousels will be a continuing trend, middle relief carousels have always been the case.  So I think saves should be valued more than 20% of holds to reflect how teams actually value those players.  And if it changes over time and it might, then we can update the scoring to reflect what is happening in baseball.  This might be fantasy baseball but the key word in that is baseball.  I mean we can play a game of WAR and pitching independent stats and stuff like that but the tradition is to measure home runs and rbi and strikeouts, etc.  That's the tradition.  Maybe in 20 years baseball cards will note WAR and those are the stats that will get cited most often.  Then we can play Fantasy WAR Baseball or something.  Miguel Cabrera was the MVP and if baseball tradition were about the sabermetrics then Mike Trout would have won in a landslide.  We can mix the old with the new but let's not throw tradition out the window as irrelevant.     

Offense
At Bat:  -1
Single:  5.6
Double:  8.5
Triple:  11.3
Homerun:  15
Walk:  3
Hit by Pitch:  3
Stolen Base:  1.9
Caught Stealing:  -2.8


Pitching
Inning Pitched:  7.4
Hit Allowed:  -2.6
Walk Allowed:  -3
Hit by Pitch:  -3
Strikeout:  2
Homeruns:  -12.3
Save:  5
Hold:  4

[chrisetc21]

I don't want to delay free agency.  We can continue to discuss and hash this out.  I would like to have something set in stone prior to the start of the season so that people will have a full year to plan for the changes.  If we delay free agency we put the start of the season in jeopardy.