RC Vote on Changing from IP to GS LImit

[rcankosy]

Guys,

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)

I did not pose 9 GS as an option, because I think it would lead to too many IP for the week.

Thanks,

Roy

[Colby]

Guys,

Please vote on one of the following three options:

1.  Keep the 65 IP limit.
2.  Institute 7 GS rule.
3.  Institute 8 GS rule.

I did not pose 9 GS as an option, because I think it would lead to too many IP for the week.

Thanks,

Roy

1) Yes.
2) No.
3) Yes.

I voted for the 8 GS rule rather than the 7 GS for two reasons.

A) Realistically, it allows for the idea of 8 games player per week which happens in MLB when there are make-up games via double headers.
B) With our teams being fantasy franchises, the schedule of our starters has some volatility.  One week, we may only have 5-6 starts whereas another week we have 8-9 starts from our pitchers.  A team with 6 starters one week and 8 starters the next would average 7 starts per week @ the 8 GS rule, but only 6.5 starts per week @ the 7 GS rule.

[Dan Wood]

8 starts in 2013, 7 starts in 2014 as Howe had suggested

[VolsRaysBucs]

I vote #3

[shooter47]

8 starts in 2013, 7 starts in 2014 as Howe had suggested

 :iatp:

This is the best option in my opinion.

[rcankosy]

To clarify, option # 2 and # 3 is 65 IP limit PLUS 7 GS (option # 2) or 8 GS (option # 3).  Option # 1 means 65 IP W/O a specific GS limit.

I am voting for # 3.  I agree with Colby that we should be flexible to allow for rainouts and double-headers.

[h4cheng]

I am also going to agree with Howe and vote on 65IP + 8GS in 2013, 65IP + 7GS in 2014.

[rcankosy]

This tally is 3-3 with 3 teams voting for 8 GS + 65 IP and 3 in favor of 8/7 + 65. 

[Colby]

This tally is 3-3 with 3 teams voting for 8 GS + 65 IP and 3 in favor of 8/7 + 65.

We need a 2-1 approval or better, right?

[Dan Wood]

We all voted #3, but 3 of us think we should go to #2 in 2014. Can we tentatively agree on #3, and reconvene after we see how it plays out?