Scoring Categories Proposal (poll)

[BrewCrewGM]

All credit goes to Chris (Reds) for this proposal:

Hitters: H, R, HR, RBI, SB, OBP, SLG

Pitchers: QS, W, SV, HLDS, ERA, OBA, K/BB

If I haven't been on-record enough regarding this, I think it's brilliant.

It's the middle of the off-season, so I think it's the right time to vote on something this significant. It's certainly been a hot topic of late.

Let the voting commence.

[Deleted]

R, HR, RBI, SB, K's, Avg, OBP, SLG
QS, K's, SV, HLDS, L's, ERA, WHIP, K/BB

I think this is a better. It's more in-line with easy to reference stats. A more even counting stats to ratio stats....err ratio. And I like keeping the negative K's and L's stats.

[St. Louis Cardinals (Andrew)]

I'm with Brewers & Reds although I prefer WHIP to oBA but have no issues as long as it's a category ESPN offer.

[St. Louis Cardinals (Andrew)]

The good owners will evolve to suit the categories anyway.

[Deleted]

Why not simply add SLG on the offensive side and BAA (batting average against) to the pitching categories, and leave everything else the same? The K category on offense always struck as a wasted stat, but it's already in place, so run with it.

Adding the two stats (one on each side helps) hopefully eliminate all the arguing over which stats or more relevant or more realistic, though trying to make the stats "realistic" in a league with 31 active roster stats is pretty absurd.

[BrewCrewGM]

I wouldn't mind that but for some reason people want to stay with just seven categories a piece.

[St. Louis Cardinals (Andrew)]

I'd be happy to simply add the two categories

[Deleted]

I would like to see 8 categories remain for each pitching and hitting. Getting rid of K's and L's and adding SLG % and BAA is my vote.

[Deleted]

Don't you see, if you have so many SP on rosters, it is impossible to eliminate Loses?

[Deleted]

Jan 5, 2014 18:23:47 GMT -5 @cigarcity said:

Getting rid of the Loses category while allowing teams to carry a million starters is extremely poorly thought out.

Tell me how you really feel about teams streaming starters.

[Deleted]

We feel very negative about it!

[Deleted]

Streaming starters isn't as big of an advantage as you say. Starters have no impact on 2 of the 8 pitching categories (saves and holds). And there are only 3 accumulative categories where you would really gain an edge by having a surplus of starters. Era, whip, and baa are all be hard to maintain good numbers if you're running out 10 starters (some if which would clearly not be elite guys)

[Deleted]

And for the record, I would be in favor of a cap of say 12 starts per week for each team. That would limit the amount of stat accumulation somewhat, while allowing teams to have more starters on their rosters if they choose to. The limit would also give room for more strategizing if you have to pick and choose who you will start each week based on matchups etc.

[Deleted]

Are you frickin serious? Twelve starters a week is what you are proposing/supporting? How is that a limit? You mean you're against someone running 13 SP out there? heh heh

[Deleted]

12 starts, not 12 starters. There are many weeks where a given starter pitches twice. So it would probably be the equivalent of having an 8 or 9 starter maximum on roster in terms of starts made. ESPN definitely allows caps on weekly number of starts.

And btw, the 12 was a suggestion. We could probably settle for 11, but I think 10 is too low.

[Deleted]

Our misread. Twelve starts makes way more sense. Though, we aren't sure we like streaming, no matter how many starts are allowed.

[Deleted]

Jan 5, 2014 20:11:53 GMT -5 @marlinsgm said:

Streaming starters isn't as big of an advantage as you say. Starters have no impact on 2 of the 8 pitching categories (saves and holds). And there are only 3 accumulative categories where you would really gain an edge by having a surplus of starters. Era, whip, and baa are all be hard to maintain good numbers if you're running out 10 starters (some if which would clearly not be elite guys)

Using Fish's post as a discussion point, it's clear there's an advantage in 3 of 6 categories, giving streaming teams a huge edge in competition if they continue to roster so many starters. Just way too many SP allowed in a league that tries to mirror the MLB. And, trimming active roster slots some would go a long way toward rectifying this problem -- with the bonus of easing team salary issues.

[Deleted]

Jan 6, 2014 8:23:00 GMT -5 @cigarcity said:

Jan 5, 2014 20:11:53 GMT -5 @marlinsgm said:

Streaming starters isn't as big of an advantage as you say. Starters have no impact on 2 of the 8 pitching categories (saves and holds). And there are only 3 accumulative categories where you would really gain an edge by having a surplus of starters. Era, whip, and baa are all be hard to maintain good numbers if you're running out 10 starters (some if which would clearly not be elite guys)

Using Fish's post as a discussion point, it's clear there's an advantage in 3 of 6 categories, giving streaming teams a huge edge in competition if they continue to roster so many starters. Just way too many SP allowed in a league that tries to mirror the MLB. And, trimming active roster slots some would go a long way toward rectifying this problem -- with the bonus of easing team salary issues.

How many starting pitcher may each team have on their MLB and MiLB rosters?

[Deleted]

I'd also like to hear your stance on why teams are allowed to carry 2 starting SS's. That means that some of us are not going to earn offensive counting stats at the SS position. If 15 teams employed a starting SS at the utility position then HALF THE LEAGUE wouldn't get stats from the SS position and that is not fair!

[Cincinnati Reds - Chris]

Jan 5, 2014 12:36:26 GMT -5 BrewCrewGM said:

I wouldn't mind that but for some reason people want to stay with just seven categories a piece.

The Goldilocks Principle is what applies here. Too few categories just doesn't cover everything that may need to be covered. And too many categories just waters things down and leads to the overlapping of categories and it muddies things.