POLL: Let's vote on how we want to adjust pitching scoring.

[Colby]

I did another audit on the test league.  Pitching totals 42% of points, defense is 20%, and offense is 38%.  We need offense to be 46%, pitching to be 38%, and defense to be 16%.  One more tweak is needed to pitching.

[Corey]

I did another audit on the test league.  Pitching totals 42% of points, defense is 20%, and offense is 38%.  We need offense to be 46%, pitching to be 38%, and defense to be 16%.  One more tweak is needed to pitching.

The test looks good. offense + defense = 58%.  So position players are 58% of the scoring. Pitching 42. if we 46 and 16 Then we just keep making position players so much more valuable.

The only way to have good FA class, not as many inflated contracts or overpaying, is to make it so pitchers have value.

Im not on RC, I know that, but I still think other opinions should be heard.

[h4cheng]

This is going to be my focus now that trading is over, i will come up with some tweaks in the next couple of weeks.

[Dan Wood]

I haven't been paying attention to this thread for awhile now since it seemed we were chasing out tales. My main sticking point is IP. Both as a scoring category and our inflated limit. I will argue this until the end of time, and it seems like more and more GMs are starting to agree, but the IP limit is too high. By making each start more worthwhile you will increase the value of good starters since IP will have to be something that is conserved, and not spent recklessly on the 6th starter wonders of the world. I also think rewarding IP as a category is kind of rewarding the pitchers line-up, or the fact that that pitcher isn't on a pitch count, or is Felix Hernandez who throws 200 pitches an outing. Just my two cents.

[h4cheng]

There are two issues here, one is the scoring system itself (I think many owners were not happy that a SP that threw a no hitter got outscored by some scrub) and the other issue the inning limit.

The scoring system involves a lot of testing, the IP issue does not. Not sure which one should be looked at first though.

[Dan Wood]

I think the IP limit is easiest. we have all seen what happened this year, and that our current IP limit is much too high.

[Colby]

I think the IP limit is easiest. we have all seen what happened this year, and that our current IP limit is much too high.

and Fantrax has a soft cap rather than a hard one.

[Dan Wood]

Espn does as well...load up on pitchers who pitch on sunday

[VolsRaysBucs]

I just thought this was an interesting piece that kind of tied into our old conversation.  Not even sure if this a metric that can be "scored" or not, but if it can, it appears it would better reward those pitchers who are "effective" (FIP) at what they do.

http://www.espn1040.com/includes/blog/index.php?action=blog&blog_id=12&post_id=3161

[Brewers GM]

I just thought this was an interesting piece that kind of tied into our old conversation.  Not even sure if this a metric that can be "scored" or not, but if it can, it appears it would better reward those pitchers who are "effective" (FIP) at what they do.

http://www.espn1040.com/includes/blog/index.php?action=blog&blog_id=12&post_id=3161

Need to be an Insider to read.