0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I, personally, would prefer to see a system that comes closest to accurately gauging the talent-level of each team. This system is way off. According to Bill James wins are factored approximately on 48% hitting, 36% pitching and 17% fielding, that should be a starting point, from there I think things would work best if we could somehow attribute a points system that weights factors similarly to such sabermetric measurements as Runs Created, FIP and Range Factor. I'm not sure how to do this but it's likely the only way to accomplish what you're setting out to do (if I understand what you're trying to do). Perhaps we can chat at some point and kick around some ideas. I haven't had an opportunity to do much research into how we're currently scoring and how we could optimally score. Head to head would be a huge plus too. I think it'd spur more active participation and the playoff format would be much better.
They are saying that FIP will be available in 2010 along with custom scoring category combos.
NS2 = SV - BLSV + 0.5*HLD, right?
I was thinking about devising some type of category like that even though it depends on the team's performance and the situation rather than the player. It is tough to find great cumulative pitching stats though.
2.4. Replacement Level Teams that do not accumulate enough playing time at a given position receive playing time from a “replacement level” player. This feature is meant to mimic the ability of MLB teams to promote players from their minor league system in the event of an injury to a starter or other need of playing time, an ability that Mendoza teams do not have.
At the end of the regular season, the six teams with the most rotisserie points qualify for the playoffs. Only teams whose pitching staffs have accumulated at least 1,300 innings during the regular season are eligible for the playoffs.