Need help understanding pitching scoring

[Canada8999]

Any changes to the scoring system should be considered a MAJOR change, and should absolutely not be made mid-season.  If there's a strong push to review the scoring, I would definitely push to have it only take effect in 2012 or even later.

Saying our system is broken is a bit of an exaggeration, I think the league is in pretty good health.

[Dan Wood]

I really don't think the system is broken. Can is use a few tweaks, maybe, and it is an argument I have made in the past. But we are going into our (a good majority of the GMs) second year, we should all have some concept of value by now. Ks and GBs good, HR and BB bad. I do agree that line drives should maybe play a role in our scoring, as should FB. But, that being said, the formula that we use in this league is FIP, and it does not use any of those stats to calculate. GB hits are definitely reliant on defense. I'm sure Yankee pitchers give up more hits to the left side than Texas does. Also, as Ben and I discussed last year, it has been proven that LD% is not a tell tale sign of pitching performance. Even more still if we wanted to break down HRs, then we have to start getting into park factors, weather, if Jose Canseco is your right fielder, etc. I think it is best we leave it the way it is, as I said earlier, value has already been established, which  I think is key going forward. The sooner that we all know the value of what every player brings to the table, then the salaries will follow suit. Again just my opinion.

I also think that maybe the stats we have been using to evaluate pitchers prior to this should be what needs to be tweaked.

[h4cheng]

The other thing I dont like about our scoring system is that the pitching scoring is completed inconsistent from the batting.
For example, if a pitcher allows a GB, and it goes through for a single, both the pitcher and batter are awarded points.

[Canada8999]

There will be exceptions to any system put in place, but if you take a look at the top 20 the list of names in our league (this year, 2010, 2009, etc.) is pretty similar to what you might 'expect'. 

I personally don't think our innings limit is realistic (MLB teams throw about 1440 IP over 24-25 weeks ~= 55-60IP/week, compared to our limit of 85), which devalues the good SP's since you don't need to optimize your rotation you just throw out anyone that nets positive points (a team with Halladay/Oswalt/Hamels/Lee in their rotation would be no better than a team with 10 scrub SPs).  I also don't like how an SP with RP eligibility has so much value, for the same reason as above.  That said, in my opinion the scoring itself is just fine.

[Dan Wood]

I personally don't think our innings limit is realistic (MLB teams throw about 1440 IP over 24-25 weeks ~= 55-60IP/week, compared to our limit of 85), which devalues the good SP's since you don't need to optimize your rotation you just throw out anyone that nets positive points (a team with Halladay/Oswalt/Hamels/Lee in their rotation would be no better than a team with 10 scrub SPs).  I also don't like how an SP with RP eligibility has so much value, for the same reason as above. 

 :iatp:

[BHows]

There will be exceptions to any system put in place, but if you take a look at the top 20 the list of names in our league (this year, 2010, 2009, etc.) is pretty similar to what you might 'expect'. 

I personally don't think our innings limit is realistic (MLB teams throw about 1440 IP over 24-25 weeks ~= 55-60IP/week, compared to our limit of 85), which devalues the good SP's since you don't need to optimize your rotation you just throw out anyone that nets positive points (a team with Halladay/Oswalt/Hamels/Lee in their rotation would be no better than a team with 10 scrub SPs).  I also don't like how an SP with RP eligibility has so much value, for the same reason as above.  That said, in my opinion the scoring itself is just fine.

If I'm not mistaken that aspect was voted on this winter and teams built their staffs on that rule. I hope there isn't any consideration for changing.
As far as tweaking points for Outs,GBs,Ks, etc., I'll leave that to the mathematicians to figure out. Pitching in this league is underemphasized but that really doesn't bother me, I prefer a scoring system that favors offense.

[Canada8999]

If I'm not mistaken that aspect was voted on this winter and teams built their staffs on that rule. I hope there isn't any consideration for changing.
As far as tweaking points for Outs,GBs,Ks, etc., I'll leave that to the mathematicians to figure out. Pitching in this league is underemphasized but that really doesn't bother me, I prefer a scoring system that favors offense.

I understand your point, but I think it goes both ways - if you can't change the IP limit, you certainly can't change the scoring...

[bravesfan4]

There is no doubt the scoring needs to be adjusted. Pitchers are getting points because a batter hit a hard ground ball down the line for a double.

Mike comparison of Nieman and Price is a perfect example, that our system (which is not bad) just needs a minor tweak.

[Canada8999]

There is no doubt the scoring needs to be adjusted. Pitchers are getting points because a batter hit a hard ground ball down the line for a double.

This is consistent with the premise of how Colby defined the league, in that scoring will only reflect what an individual player can control.  A pitcher has some effect on whether the ball is his in the air or on the ground, but after that he has no control with what the defense does.  Hitters do have control, and thus whether it becomes a hit or an out does matter for their scoring.  There are some studies out there on hard hit balls using things like PitchF/X, but we obviously don't have access to use that with Fantrax.

I guess I'm missing why this is such a huge issue, even if it were an inconsistency (as opposed to intentional, which it is).

[Canada8999]

Mike comparison of Nieman and Price is a perfect example, that our system (which is not bad) just needs a minor tweak.

His comparison is an example of one pitcher who got lucky with poor peripheral stats and one who got unlucky with better peripherals ... this is a pretty common argument against things like FIP, tERA, xFIP, etc., but there's just so much data out there on luck and pitching that you can't ignore it.  Again, this is part of the premise of the league...