Let's revisit Friday lineup changes for P

[DOUGHBOYS]

You have to remember this, a team with a Closer with no Saves Mon-Thurs got 0 Saves from that guy Mon-Thurs. Zero.
He still needs Saves.
He'll have the choice of re-installing him or putting in a mediocre starter, who was left off the starting lineup, thinking that the Closer would enter a game.
No inequity at all.

Dan, How is it not a significant advantage when one owner has the option to take out or leave in a closer, and another owner must leave his closer in the lineup?

Neither pitcher was injured or DLed or injured during the first four games of the week.

It's a CHOICE.
Believe me, the Manager with no Saves is not thinking he has an advantage over teams that already have two Saves from their Closers.
This is not ONLY about injury, it is about having flexibility in our pitchers.
I understand that you don't like it. I get it.

[knuckleheads]

It's a CHOICE.
Believe me, the Manager with no Saves is not thinking he has an advantage over teams that already have two Saves from their Closers.
This is not ONLY about injury, it is about having flexibility in our pitchers.
I understand that you don't like it. I get it.

Which brings us full circle to the Addison Reed example. The owner with no saves has an advantage over the Addison Reed owner (4 base runners and 4 runs in 1 IP).

Yet, the guy with no appearances gets to take his guy out while the A. Reed owner does not have the option.

It's not that I don't like it, it's that it's an objectively bad rule once it is thought through. The proposed rule change would ease a dozen or so DL slights per year, but would create weekly unequal roster flexibility.

I love Friday player changes for hitters. It just does not work for pitchers without fundamentally changing the game to one dominated by streaming strategy.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Which brings us full circle to the Addison Reed example. The owner with no saves has an advantage over the Addison Reed owner (4 base runners and 4 runs in 1 IP).

He also has the advantage NOW!

Really, a better example for unfairness would be Derek Holland throws one inning and gets hurt.
The fella that has a Starter who has not thrown a pitch gets the benefit of choice, while Holland owners do not.
That comes under the heading of tough shitsky.
Your under performance argument is tough shitsky too.
We all try to avoid under performance. I don't think a rule can be made to help under performance.
As said above, even now, I'd rather have the pitcher that hasn't thrown than the under performance from Reed.
You're thinking the no pitch team gets a big benefit.
Reality is, most will trot out that same Closer. Afterall, he is choosing between him or a pitcher thought little enough not to be a start for Mon-Thurs.
Not much of a choice, but a choice nonetheless.

[Captain Hook]

Greg - any further thoughts on this?

[ToddZ]

Eliminate Friday only hitting moves and give each team a set number of discretionary transactions that can be used for hitting or pitching any day of the week (with Monday remaining as is).

[ikenbaseball]

Tigers placed RHP Alfredo Simon was placed on the bereavement list today. This move screws me over in one of my Main Events teams. I had a great matchup vs Oakland and now I get a zero for the week.
This is not the first time I've been blindsided.
It's situations like this why we need flexibility on our pitching staff.

Let me introduce a scenario where I'm playing in the Platinum next year.
It's the last week of the season I'm tied for 1st place and I have Simon pitching vs A's. He goes on the bereavement list and I lose $100,000 because of 1 strikeout. Is this fair? Am I going to be bitter?
Is this going to deter me from ever playing in a higher stakes game. Probably.

Once again, no matter what game your playing whether it's poker, blackjack, or fantasy baseball, win or lose you want to walk away knowing that you got a fair handshake. With absolutely no flexiblility in pitching......this a hard pill to swallow.

Change is hard. You can't make everyone happy. But if you want truly to improve your game and slow down the churn increasing pitching flexibility would be a start.
Or you could do nothing and one day have a nightmare situation where someone losing 100k because of a blister.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Over the last couple of years, there have been some teams that have experimented with a 6-Man rotation.
The Mets announced they would do it today and, of course, Scott Boras is applauding the Mets.
Like a Union Leader, Boras is all for less work for more money that the 6-man rotation would bring.
I believe that agents were the ringleaders in pushing for five man rotations, as they will be for six man rotations.
Starters make more money than bullpenners.

So why is this posted here?
We need to get ahead of the curve a bit. A rain out could curtail Starters getting a start at all during a week with a 6-man rotation. Even with one call-up of a minor leaguer to rest pitchers and an off day, a Starter will miss a start.
Already (it's only May, folks), teams are calling up minor leaguers to give Starters additional rest.
Last week, three Starters missed starts. This week, DeLaRosa and Simon. It is happening weekly.

Sooner or later, we are going to have to change our pitching format.
My vote is sooner. Before we HAVE to change the format.
Thanks for the listen.

[Gekko]

A six man rotation was always a possibility for the mets (maybe even other teams) on draft day. Buyers should be factoring that in when making their evals/picks, no?

[DOUGHBOYS]

A six man rotation was always a possibility for the mets (maybe even other teams) on draft day. Buyers should be factoring that in when making their evals/picks, no?

That's one way to look at it.
A rained out game sets a rotation back one game. Meaning somebody misses a Start.
For the entire week.
That is something that is unaccountable on draft day.

[knuckleheads]

There are currently ZERO teams using a 6-man rotation.

Doughy's resorting to the, "if we don't change the pitching rules now, the terrorist win" argument.

[Fourslot40]

Tigers placed RHP Alfredo Simon was placed on the bereavement list today. This move screws me over in one of my Main Events teams. I had a great matchup vs Oakland and now I get a zero for the week.
This is not the first time I've been blindsided.
It's situations like this why we need flexibility on our pitching staff.

Let me introduce a scenario where I'm playing in the Platinum next year.
It's the last week of the season I'm tied for 1st place and I have Simon pitching vs A's. He goes on the bereavement list and I lose $100,000 because of 1 strikeout. Is this fair? Am I going to be bitter?
Is this going to deter me from ever playing in a higher stakes game. Probably.

Once again, no matter what game your playing whether it's poker, blackjack, or fantasy baseball, win or lose you want to walk away knowing that you got a fair handshake. With absolutely no flexiblility in pitching......this a hard pill to swallow.

Change is hard. You can't make everyone happy. But if you want truly to improve your game and slow down the churn increasing pitching flexibility would be a start.
Or you could do nothing and one day have a nightmare situation where someone losing 100k because of a blister.

Maybe that one strikeout could have come from a risky lineup change in week 3 that didn't work out. Maybe another team that had Simon and Cosart helped pull you that much closer. There are 27 weeks and every single team deals with this sort of thing at some point, however these scenarios do not occur frequently enough to where it doesn't balance out amongst the league. By frequently, I mean unexpected situations not identified in the millions of data channels and not known by the FAAB deadline or lineup submission deadline to where you don't know the risk to prepare.. i.e. bereavement, vertigo, tightness in a bullpen.

It's not going to stop anyone from playing. Theres a small percentage of the luck element that we hope to be on the right side of. It's part of the game. I see no real reason to make a change to the existing format. It will simply open far more issues than it was intended for.

[Navel Lint]

Let me introduce a scenario where I'm playing in the Platinum next year.
It's the last week of the season I'm tied for 1st place and I have Simon pitching vs A's. He goes on the bereavement list and I lose $100,000 because of 1 strikeout. Is this fair? Am I going to be bitter?
Is this going to deter me from ever playing in a higher stakes game. Probably.

Once again, no matter what game your playing whether it's poker, blackjack, or fantasy baseball, win or lose you want to walk away knowing that you got a fair handshake. With absolutely no flexiblility in pitching......this a hard pill to swallow.

Here's the thing though, you are getting a fair handshake.
You might not like the current rule, that's fine; but it's absolutely equal for everyone....
No Pitching Changes. Period.
Not for you, not for me, not for anyone.
Can't get any fairer than that.
And that kind of 100% equality is something that can't be said of all the proposals that have been made throughout this thread.....

[DOUGHBOYS]

There are currently ZERO teams using a 6-man rotation.

Doughy's resorting to the, "if we don't change the pitching rules now, the terrorist win" argument.

I think I am fighting an uphill battle. I KNOW I am fighting an uphill battle. I have no ulterior motive.
I don't expect this rule to be changed this coming year and probably not the year after either.
On whole, fantasy players do not embrace change. They feel safe with present rules. I get it.
It takes a long time to change a rule as major as this. If ever.
I'm passionate that this is the right thing to do. That's all.

Statements like the one above make me think that the conversation is not even worth the time.
Carry on.

[COZ]

There are currently ZERO teams using a 6-man rotation.

Doughy's resorting to the, "if we don't change the pitching rules now, the terrorist win" argument.

That's a bit extreme. I mean this is a Fantasy baseball rule, let's not make this political & resort to political propaganda. Not sure he's resorting to the "terrorists win argument," but merely stating that things are changing and our inability to adapt to a changing landscape will merely result in the end of our American way of life as we know it...democracy, freedom, baseball, hot dogs, apple pie, Friday pitching changes (que up the Bob Seger music). I would not say opposition to the Friday pitching rule is tantamount to the terrosists win, but more like supporters of less regulation & freedom & the American way of life lose. That is what's at stake here. I proudly stand with Doughboys on the side of America and the freedom to change our pitchers on Fridays. USA! USA! USA!

COZ



P.S. I'll show myself out.

[Navel Lint]

There are currently ZERO teams using a 6-man rotation.

Doughy's resorting to the, "if we don't change the pitching rules now, the terrorist win" argument.

That's a bit extreme. I mean this is a Fantasy baseball rule, let's not make this political & resort to political propaganda. Not sure he's resorting to the "terrorists win argument," but merely stating that things are changing and our inability to adapt to a changing landscape will merely result in the end of our American way of life as we know it...democracy, freedom, baseball, hot dogs, apple pie, Friday pitching changes (que up the Bob Seger music). I would not say opposition to the Friday pitching rule is tantamount to the terrosists win, but more like supporters of less regulation & freedom & the American way of life lose. That is what's at stake here. I proudly stand with Doughboys on the side of America and the freedom to change our pitchers on Fridays. USA! USA! USA!

COZ



P.S. I'll show myself out.

[ikenbaseball]

I'm going to make this really simple.
Most fantasy baseball players get involved in this game because it is fun, not to make money.
By giving you, the customer, more flexibility and in more control of your teams destiny rather then luck, most players would be more happy.....win lose or draw.

Why do we have up to five minutes prior to a players first game to lock them up for the week.
We could lock up all the lineups at 12 noon every monday for all the players. But we don't. We wanted that flexibility to change lineups to reduce the amount of times we get screwed for the week.

We don't have to change anything. Maybe Dan is right. Maybe it's a battle not worth fighting.
But like I've been saying over and over. As operator of a game, you want your customers to walk away after each and every year feeling like they determined their fate as much as possible.

[knuckleheads]

There are currently ZERO teams using a 6-man rotation.

Doughy's resorting to the, "if we don't change the pitching rules now, the terrorist win" argument.

That's a bit extreme. I mean this is a Fantasy baseball rule, let's not make this political & resort to political propaganda. Not sure he's resorting to the "terrorists win argument," but merely stating that things are changing and our inability to adapt to a changing landscape will merely result in the end of our American way of life as we know it...democracy, freedom, baseball, hot dogs, apple pie, Friday pitching changes (que up the Bob Seger music). I would not say opposition to the Friday pitching rule is tantamount to the terrosists win, but more like supporters of less regulation & freedom & the American way of life lose. That is what's at stake here. I proudly stand with Doughboys on the side of America and the freedom to change our pitchers on Fridays. USA! USA! USA!

COZ



P.S. I'll show myself out.

Yes, yes it's a bit extreme. Just like Dan suggesting we are soon going to "HAVE" to change our pitching rules because agents are going to make all teams go to six-man rotations. I say the analogy is apt. He made a weak argument and I mocked it. It's not political, it's funny.

[Fourslot40]

Why do we have up to five minutes prior to a players first game to lock them up for the week.
We could lock up all the lineups at 12 noon every monday for all the players. But we don't. We wanted that flexibility to change lineups to reduce the amount of times we get screwed for the week.

The flexibility move to game time is a game operation improvement that doesn't hurt anyone or can't be manipulated/ forecasted for an advantage. It doesn't generate a "non-injury" strategic opportunity that could be offered later in the week after a few games have played. So, it might as well be game time as opposed to noon. Still a level playing field.

[Greg Ambrosius]

There are currently ZERO teams using a 6-man rotation.

Doughy's resorting to the, "if we don't change the pitching rules now, the terrorist win" argument.

I think I am fighting an uphill battle. I KNOW I am fighting an uphill battle. I have no ulterior motive.
I don't expect this rule to be changed this coming year and probably not the year after either.
On whole, fantasy players do not embrace change. They feel safe with present rules. I get it.
It takes a long time to change a rule as major as this. If ever.
I'm passionate that this is the right thing to do. That's all.

Statements like the one above make me think that the conversation is not even worth the time.
Carry on.

I've watched this thread for another week and we're in the same place today as we were last week, just with more words.

Dan, I really don't think people are resistant to change on this one. It's that the change comes with some uneven results. Some call them advantages, some call them more of the luck factor. The bottom line is that we don't have this figured out just yet for a good way to replace pitchers on Friday. At least that's how many see it and I may be in that camp as well.

And we definitely aren't changing rules just because the Mets say they are going with a 6-man rotation. With injuries the way they are, they may be down to 4 good pitchers soon enough. Our game doesn't need to change because of this strategical change.

That being said, I still think Glenn's proposal has some merit and it's not far from a working solution. Obviously we'd need to see how we could program that and if there are some added safeguards that could be easily programmable to make the rule even better. I don't know what can be done there, but it's worth looking into. It never hurts to talk this through with the programmers.

We've made several changes through the years to take as much luck out of the equation as possible with our game. The Friday DL rule was initiated here to avoid a full week of zeroes from players who went on the DL mid-week. We learned some good and some bad with that initial rule. Moving the Set Lineups back to 5 minutes before each game, and then even to Tuesdays if your players weren't playing on Monday has helped as well. If there are other moves that help our game we'll make them.

In the case of pitchers being replaced on Fridays, it's not as simple as the hitters rule where every player basically has three games per weekend. We don't have weekend doubleheaders anymore, so it's an easy fix. Maybe we can figure out the pitchers as well, but if not it's not because people here (including us) are resistant to change. They are resistant to an unfair rule change. And I'm in that camp, too.

But we can still kick the tires on this and see what can be done for 2016 and beyond. Glenn's suggestion is a starting point and we'll see if there's even more ways to refine it. We'll see.

[Greg Ambrosius]

I'm going to make this really simple.
Most fantasy baseball players get involved in this game because it is fun, not to make money.
By giving you, the customer, more flexibility and in more control of your teams destiny rather then luck, most players would be more happy.....win lose or draw.

Why do we have up to five minutes prior to a players first game to lock them up for the week.
We could lock up all the lineups at 12 noon every monday for all the players. But we don't. We wanted that flexibility to change lineups to reduce the amount of times we get screwed for the week.

We don't have to change anything. Maybe Dan is right. Maybe it's a battle not worth fighting.
But like I've been saying over and over. As operator of a game, you want your customers to walk away after each and every year feeling like they determined their fate as much as possible.

Krys, you keep posting that we're being unflexible to the detriment of our customers and that it could result in the demise of the NFBC as players get frustrated. But a bad rule change doesn't help our customers, either. We've seen how pitchers were manipulated in lineups just when we used the Friday DL rule, so this isn't an easy change, from our point of view. We aren't being stubborn; we're trying to be smart on this one.

And the programming of the rule change could be tricky, depending on how we decide to go on a Friday rule involving pitchers. So this isn't a slam dunk and it's not the golden rule that will save the NFBC from an increased churn rate. Heck, it could propel a churn rate if folks see that others manipulated this rule to their advantage.

So let's chill out and vett the rule change thoroughly. That's what needs to be done here and at this point there isn't an easy solution. But there is an option that has some possibilities.

[ikenbaseball]

Greg

I never used the word demise. My posts weren't meant as attacks but rather my opinions on why some players would walk away from the game. I was trying to be helpful.
I was suggesting that by changing the pitching rule, you might have players that are less frustrated and therefore maybe less customers that would stop playing because of this.
This will be my last post on this topic as I feel like I'm eating soup with a fork.

[Cocktails and Dreams]

Eating soup with a fork. Good stuff:)

[Captain Hook]

iken - it feels worse - like eating soup with chopsticks

anyway just a bump to get this ahead of the week 10 drops/adds and in case some genius out there has a suggestion that will help all of us move forward

well aside from just allowing any lineup changes on both Mondays and Fridays

[Captain Hook]

Okay here is one more example of why we need a change in the current procedures....

Archie Bradley (AZ) was placed on the 15-day DL Thursday with right shoulder tendinitis.

Robbie Ray was called up from Triple-A to start Thursday's game, essentially taking Bradley's spot in the D-Backs' rotation.

So if on a DC team I have both Bradley and Ray, WHY shouldn't I be able to switch them on Friday?

[COZ]

Okay here is one more example of why we need a change in the current procedures....

Archie Bradley (AZ) was placed on the 15-day DL Thursday with right shoulder tendinitis.

Robbie Ray was called up from Triple-A to start Thursday's game, essentially taking Bradley's spot in the D-Backs' rotation.

So if on a DC team I have both Bradley and Ray, WHY shouldn't I be able to switch them on Friday?

Well, obviously it seems simple, but allowing this particular transaction opens a whole other can of worms as has been explained numerous times. Nobody is debating the merits of being able to make this change or that having pitchers injured/scratched/demoted puts those fantasy teams at a disadvantage, the issue is whether or not allowing YOU to make this particular move outweighs the ability of OTHERS to make moves that may give them a particular ADVANTAGE. The issue has been thoroughly vetted, I am confident Greg & Tom understand the arguments on both sides and will make the best decision for ALL, and not a few. I would like to see it, but I also recognize the downside/problems that others have articulated. Time to let this debate simmer for awhile.

COZ