ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
ProFSL Front Office => Franchise GM: Archives => Franchise GM: History Books => Franchise GM => MLB DYNASTY GM HOME => Franchise GM: FGM Commissioner News & Tid Bits => Topic started by: Dan Wood on October 15, 2011, 07:19:56 PM
-
OK fellas, with the new scoring system it seems we can do both an IP limit and a start limit...we seem to be settled on a 65 IP limit...do we want to do a start limit? And what should it be... I think 7 should be good enough... discuss
-
I thought we settled on this already, limit innings not starts. We all agreed on 65.
-
That was before it was made aware to us, that you can do both with the ProFSL scoring system. I was under the impression it had to be either or.
-
I vote for 65 IP.
-
I will still vote for 65IP and no start limit
-
I'll go 65 + 7 start limit
-
I'll go 65 + 7 start limit
:iatp:
-
I prefer the 65 + 7 start option as well.
-
I dont like the 7 start limit restriction. It makes the 65 IP limit almost redundant.
Suppose each team uses up 7 start per week and the average start is 6 innings. Then, there are 65 - 7 * 6 = 23 IP for RPs.
Each team usually carried 6 RPs, that's 23 / 6 = 4 IP per RP. Extrapolate this to a whole season, thats 4IP * 24 weeks = 96 IP for a RP which almost never happens.
-
Not on the rc, but dan and colb thats a great idea.
-
I dont like the 7 start limit restriction. It makes the 65 IP limit almost redundant.
Suppose each team uses up 7 start per week and the average start is 6 innings. Then, there are 65 - 7 * 6 = 23 IP for RPs.
Each team usually carried 6 RPs, that's 23 / 6 = 4 IP per RP. Extrapolate this to a whole season, thats 4IP * 24 weeks = 96 IP for a RP which almost never happens.
Howe, I do agree it is a little redundant, but I think we are all in agreement here that our main goal is to limit streaming. I think the best way to do that is to do a start as well as an innings limit cap. It is the closest thing to weekly set line ups that we can get. Since we are also all in agreement that it is necessary to keep daily line up changes for our hitters, I think this is the best we can do to achieve the best of both worlds.
-
I am not comfortable with the impact of this change.
Assuming each start averages 6 innings and each RP pitches 2.5 innings on average, that's only 57 innings. Our cap last year was 85 innings. That's a 33% drop.
It was brought up in the pitching scoring discussion that any change should have limited impact. That principle should be applied to here as well.
Lastly, I am not here to protect my own interest. I only have 4 established SPs on my team.
-
Yeah but with the numbers that you are throwing out, without a start limit, you can still throw 10 starters and still be under the limit...That is the classic definition of streaming
-
Dan, I understand your concern but you have not addressed the 33% impact of this proposal.
Another drawback of limiting starts is that what happens in one night can affect your team for a week. Imagine you have 2 starters exiting early on Monday, you might not be able to recover for that entire week. This is very different than real life where if a team has one bad night, it can always recover for subsequent games.
-
Comes down to managing your bullpen just like Managers do...And I understand about the 33% decline, but 85 was a grotesquely large number to start with. But since we didn't have a point of reference it was better to start higher than lower, and then trim the fat.
And if one of your pitchers goes to pot, that is just bad luck. A batter can go 0 for the week. But how often does an ace really crap the bed? This also adds value to better pitchers, instead of tossing out the Jo Jo Reyes's of the world.
-
Comes down to managing your bullpen just like Managers do...And I understand about the 33% decline, but 85 was a grotesquely large number to start with. But since we didn't have a point of reference it was better to start higher than lower, and then trim the fat.
And if one of your pitchers goes to pot, that is just bad luck. A batter can go 0 for the week. But how often does an ace really crap the bed? This also adds value to better pitchers, instead of tossing out the Jo Jo Reyes's of the world.
If the intent is to go to a lower limit, I would suggest maybe limit the # of starts to 8 or 9 this year before dropping to #7. This proposal will also significantly increase the value of swing men. So instead of throwing JoJo Reyes out there, teams will just be throwing out Luis Perez.
-
But under normal circumstances a team would throw out a Luis Perez if their starter didn't go deep into a game. A team wouldn't throw JoJo Reyes esque players out 8-9 times a week. Swing men should have value, it's why Miguel Bautista is still pitching. The way we currently have it set up, RPs have almost zero value...limiting starts to 7 - and if you have a horse or two, chances are they are going 7...then you have another 5 starts left. Then if you have a decent pen, a team should have no worries.
We have been playing in this league for the past two years by throwing as much crap against the wall as possible, with no thought involved, and let the chips fall where they may. The new way of doing it (Ben would still be the tie breaker) puts more thought into constructing a staff. Raises the value of good RPs, and excellent starters. Starters will generally outscore RPs because they pitch more innings...therefore limiting the starts, in my mind is a necessity. And this argument was brought up last year, teams don't generally play more than 7 games a week. Making it nearly impossible for a MLB team to pitch 8 starters.
-
Your arguments are pretty persuasive. I am at least more comfortable with the 7 start + 65 innings cap proposal but I still prefer the 65 ip for this year only to limit impact.
-
I missed my calling as a Lawyer.
-
I cant read and actually be interested in the whole conversation, I may try again later. Has this been decided? We voted on this already...can we stop beating the drum. I am against an adjustment. IF we adjust scoring to handicap pitching why should we limit starts and IP. This is bad strategy. Not all teams can start guys with names like some teams. Instead of one Sabathia it is helpful to use jair and karstens. We have set 40 man rosters. The option to carry an extra starter has implications here as well.
-
I think my standing policy is that unless a change is either a no brainer or there is a significant problem, I am going to vote against. In this case we have a new limit, lets see how it works before we keep making changes.
-
I think my standing policy is that unless a change is either a no brainer or there is a significant problem, I am going to vote against. In this case we have a new limit, lets see how it works before we keep making changes.
I understand not wanting to do anything, BUT IF we HAVE to do something...please do it BEFORE free agency. That is all.
-
I understand not wanting to do anything, BUT IF we HAVE to do something...please do it BEFORE free agency. That is all.
:iatp:
-
I just thought about this; we put so much emphasis on hitting and limit the effect of pitching, like 70/30...well; how come the 2011 Red Sox fell apart? If hitting would account for 70% of win? Just food for thought?
-
Is it time for the RC to officially vote on this? In my opinion, we should give the RC 7-10 days to vote on this and put this to bed.
-
I think we are deadlocked 3-3
-
Me, Vols, Colby for 7 starts/ 65 IP
Roy, Howe, Ben for 65 IP...
Colby how do we do a tie breaker?
-
What was the final decision on this? It affects how I bid on SP as well as other positions.
-
Eff it, I'm changing my vote - 65 IP...pass it