|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Apr 13, 2013 18:34:45 GMT -5
I see that hitting doubles or triples are not rewarded in the scoring system on ESPN. They are essentially treated as just hits.
I'm sure this has been discussed before, but I propose that a new category be added: SLG %.
Since OBP is already on there, which I'm glad it is, I think it makes sense that SLG % be added. I just don't think that doubles and triples should be treated merely as hits. They need to be signified somehow, and I think adding a SLG % category does that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 18:45:28 GMT -5
I'm fine with that, but Cigar has spent a vast amount time planning out his roster for now and the future and has executed a series of detail oriented roster moves considering the current scoring system. And slugging percentage would just screw everything up.
I'm of course referencing a thread from a few months back where a change to scoring total bases was brought up and Cigar didn't want to for above reasons.
|
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Apr 13, 2013 18:50:33 GMT -5
I don't get how adding SLG % would significantly set him back. Just about all of his batters have decent to plus power. Don't see how it could hurt him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 18:52:42 GMT -5
Without doing any research at all, has QS been discussed for replacing W's?
I mean it's a far superior stat obviously but i can understand how some people would want W's instead if they acquired P's on winning teams instead of P's who go 6+ IP to get the QS.
|
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Apr 13, 2013 18:55:08 GMT -5
Right now QS and Wins & Losses are all included, which is fine with me. Wins & Losses is the most useless statistic in baseball by far but since it is considered such a big stat, I have no problem with keeping it, especially since QS count.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 19:01:16 GMT -5
Oh yeah....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 19:35:56 GMT -5
I definitely agree with brew for once. I had Alex Gordon who led the league in doubles last year but was worthless because doubles, XBH, or slugging wasn't a cat.
However the problem with adding the category is that people have traded under the assumption that slugging and various related categories aren't important. The value of players would change drastically. I'm 50/50 on adding it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 19:41:01 GMT -5
The thing is this is def a change that could improve the league. The problem with any change in this sort of league is going to be the construction of rosters will be affected.
Maybe say if this change is implemented the best way would be to put it out there now that on opening day 2015 the change will be made.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 19:59:48 GMT -5
I think you could probably get it for 2014 but definitely not during the season
|
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Apr 13, 2013 20:01:48 GMT -5
I'd settle for 2014, if it's good with the admins.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 20:12:21 GMT -5
It's much more of a discussion than a simple yes or no. This would probably take a few months of debating and thinking. I'd like to see what they have to say as I could be swayed
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 20:46:24 GMT -5
Exactly why it probably won't be changed because it wouldn't benefit the 5 or so front runners. It definitely would help my team because I have a lot of doubles guys but the front runners don't want to hurt their chances. Which is fine and dandy with me
|
|
|
|
Post by Cincinnati Reds - Chris on Apr 13, 2013 21:05:55 GMT -5
I definitely agree with brew for once. I had Alex Gordon who led the league in doubles last year but was worthless because doubles, XBH, or slugging wasn't a cat. However the problem with adding the category is that people have traded under the assumption that slugging and various related categories aren't important. The value of players would change drastically. I'm 50/50 on adding it. I'd be 100% for implementing SLG. In saying that, either an offensive stat would need to be removed or a pitching stat added to balance things out. And really instead of complicating things further I'd rather see an offensive stat removed. |
|
|
|
Post by Cincinnati Reds - Chris on Apr 13, 2013 21:11:28 GMT -5
We have some quality bats (though some of them are on the DL) but not much power. Switching to total bases or slugging percentage would be a devastating change for us. Royals has pretty much a total power and would benefit greatly form the sorts of changes you are prescribing. His dominance of the league would be fairly insurmountable. For the purposes of discussion, we vote no. Can't see the rule helping anyone other than the Royals. For the next decade, this league would be a joke. Why change? What would it help? If a guy like Alex Gordon is valuable, keep him and build around him. If he isn't, deal him (we would have discussed a trade for him). We can't see why a category change is needed. So your angle is how 2 teams of 30 are built, and not a true reflection of players actual abilities and performance? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 21:12:22 GMT -5
Switch OBP to OPS. keeps all the cats there by combing 2.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cincinnati Reds - Chris on Apr 13, 2013 21:16:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by BrewCrewGM on Apr 13, 2013 21:18:49 GMT -5
I agree. I'd rather keep OBP and not try to implement OPS.
I'd also rather add a pitching category than remove a hitting category in order to add SLG %, as teams would probably benefit more from adding a category than removing one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 21:22:51 GMT -5
But cigar wouldn't... That's the key issue in all of this hahaha.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 21:30:22 GMT -5
I see where both sides are coming from.
Otoh the league can be improved
On the other, teams are built so deep that a small change can drastically shift the balance of power and ruin years of planning/waiting.
Cigar, would you be ok with a change like this if you had two years to prepare/adjust?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2013 21:35:56 GMT -5
Lol no he wouldn't... His team is stacked for 10 years from now.
|
|
