Minimum starts

viper · Post by **viper** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 12:04 am

In NY7, crazytown.gov employed the "3 closer - 6 minor league pitchers" strategy. Also, JerseyPaul employed the "2 closer/many setup men" strategy.

Consider that the #150 score overall in each category would be the entire NFBC average score. Let's compare that to the #8 score in NY7.

Giving the NY7 score first:

ERA: 4.036 - 3.994 (NY7 under average)

Wins: 54 - 56 (NY7 under average)

WHIP: 1.314 - 1.309 (NY7 under average)

Ks: 679 - 659 (NY7 above average)

Saves: 43 - 42 (NY7 above average)

This is a single league sample but the numbers are really pretty similar.

[ July 25, 2005, 06:10 AM: Message edited by: viper ]

eddiejag · Post by **eddiejag** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:24 am

I agree with gekko. The other teams in newyork 7

[as an example] Could pick up pitchers in rounds

5 to 20 that shouldnt be their.Myself getting kerry wood in round 9.Now wood didnt pan out because of injury, but if he stayed healhty he shouldnt have been there.It gives us a better chance in a league where 2 teams try this , to get better starting pitching , than the other leagues.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 2:28 am

Originally posted by eddiejag:

I agree with gekko. The other teams in newyork 7

[as an example] Could pick up pitchers in rounds

5 to 20 that shouldnt be their.Myself getting kerry wood in round 9.Now wood didnt pan out because of injury, but if he stayed healhty he shouldnt have been there.It gives us a better chance in a league where 2 teams try this , to get better starting pitching , than the other leagues. Gordon is correct, there would be more starting pitchers available for the 12 other owners (if three teams tried this strategy), yet there would also be fewer top closers available to those 12 teams. Would those 12 teams similarly suffer in saves, ERA and WHIP compared to teams in the 19 other leagues? Probably.

Eddie is right, that great starting pitcher who seemingly falls to you doesn't always pan out. Anyway, the discussion about minimum innings pitched is interesting and all the potential scenarios going forward make sense, but to this point there is no statistical data that shows any success with multiple teams going after pitchers with very few innings pitched.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 2:50 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

Gordon is correct, there would be more starting pitchers available for the 12 other owners (if three teams tried this strategy), yet there would also be fewer top closers available to those 12 teams. Would those 12 teams similarly suffer in saves, ERA and WHIP compared to teams in the 19 other leagues? Probably. maybe the avg team might be hurt slightly in saves for the OVERALL contest, but that's about it. but, saves are easy to come by as the season goes on.

you get one intelligent owner in one of these jokes of a league that has 3 closer/injured pitcher teams, and he wins 100K, i think you'll be hearing from a bunch of people.

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

Anyway, the discussion about minimum innings pitched is interesting and all the potential scenarios going forward make sense, but to this point there is no statistical data that shows any success with multiple teams going after pitchers with very few innings pitched. again, i'd HATE to find out i came in 2nd overall to a team that drafted in a league that had 3 teams closer/injured pitcher teams. if that happened to you greg, would you question the integrity of the event?

those are my thoughts, and from the comments on the MB, most other owners seem to agree.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 3:56 am

What about a per-slot minimum of 20 innings? with a total requirement of 300? this would allow for usage of some of the reliever strats and avoid the dead player situation

Spy

la Jolla · Post by **la Jolla** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 4:17 am

i am currently employing the all reliever strategy in the ultimate and mixed auction and see no reason to change the rules in those events because in a single league environment different strategies should be allowed, but in the overall contest (main event) i do agree with the consensus that the 100k could be affected by the all reliever play and potentially cause problems...although, i still can't believe people would employ this in the main event because they have no chance to win the overall.

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 4:44 am

Gekko's point (on the back of Greg's last response)

That's a lot of conjecture. I mean a lot! If there really is that one intelligent manager, he would have drafted and picked up the best players regardless of what strategy other managers are employing. You can easily end up in a league that has 10 idiots in it regardless of strategies. Are we going to then start giving IQ tests to all participants and make sure those IQ's are dispersed evenly across each league? I mean where to we stop?

Like Greg said, lack of supply of closers for other managers will also inflate ERA and WHIP, as well as reduce Saves because arguable only 22 closers will be out there if 2 managers employ a 4 closer strategy. That's 22 closers for only 13 managers and arguably only an extra 3-4 starters out there. Besides only about 35-40 starters are even picked by the first 10 rounds. And if someone is smart enough to move on one of those 3-4 pitchers (ie adding another SP in their top 10 round strategy), then they are also most likely going to sacrifice Offense for that adjustment.

Like I said there are far too many if's...and has anyone forgotten how much luck also plays into someone winning this god damn thing?

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 4:52 am

Originally posted by nydownunder:

That's a lot of conjecture. I mean a lot! if 3 teams in the same league ALL employ the relievers/injured pitcher strategy, ALL SP will be distributed to only 12 teams (instead of 15). This is not conjecture. This is a fact. sorry

as for losing pts in saves, whip and era, that is conjecture. they may lose pts in their individual league, but not many (if any) in the overall contest. saves are the one category you can pick up off the waiver wire more easily than anything else.

to go one step further, if a team won the 100K and they were in a league with 3+ teams using the relievers/injured pitcher strategy, i would consider not playing the NFBC anymore.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 4:55 am

Originally posted by nydownunder:

You can easily end up in a league that has 10 idiots in it regardless of strategies. Are we going to then start giving IQ tests to all participants and make sure those IQ's are dispersed evenly across each league? I mean where to we stop?I've heard of leagues that using IP requirements. I've NEVER heard of an IQ test though. Try using a more relevant example.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 4:58 am

Originally posted by nydownunder:

Are we going to then start giving IQ tests to all participants and make sure those IQ's are dispersed evenly across each league? I mean where to we stop?

also, how does IQ relate to fantasy baseball success? thanks.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:20 am

A couple of things bug me about this. For example, if during the draft, you are near a turn and realize all the people below you are doing the closer strat, you get a huge advantage drafting... Also, the dead slot should be disallowed, the goal of the game is to pick the best team, not to exploit a loophole in the rules...

to say that a team WINS WHIP and ERA yet can do that with basically no active players is just stupid... Even in real life, people have put in minimum atbats for contetion for highest BA for example to avoid this kind of crap...

Next year, I will throw saves, Ks, and Wins, and only go for ERA and WHIP thereby enabling the most insane hitting ever seen in NFBC! let me see, 33 pitching points + 75 hitting points will get me almost a guaranteed second place win.

Spy

[ July 25, 2005, 11:23 AM: Message edited by: Spyhunter ]

la Jolla · Post by **la Jolla** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:23 am

spy, i have to disagree...the goal of anyone playing this game is to win money, period..if thats not your ultimate goal, why play?

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:24 am

the goal is the win money, the WAY to win should be to demonstrate the best ability to pick baseball players, not to lawyer some rules...

Spy

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:29 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by nydownunder:

That's a lot of conjecture. I mean a lot! if 3 teams in the same league ALL employ the relievers/injured pitcher strategy, ALL SP will be distributed to only 12 teams (instead of 15). This is not conjecture. This is a fact. sorry

as for losing pts in saves, whip and era, that is conjecture. they may lose pts in their individual league, but not many (if any) in the overall contest. saves are the one category you can pick up off the waiver wire more easily than anything else.

to go one step further, if a team won the 100K and they were in a league with 3+ teams using the relievers/injured pitcher strategy, i would consider not playing the NFBC anymore. [/QUOTE]Your point about the extra SP's will be distributed amongst the 12 remaining managers is abviosuly fact (as I stated as well), but you are only talking about an extra 5 or 6 SP's amongst them. The fact that this has not happened, yet you are assuming the result or lack facts/stats to back it up...is conjecture!

You are also very wrong about not losing points in the overall league. There is a noticable difference in ERA and WHIP when using 6 SP's vs 7 SP's. On avg, the latter strategy get you about 75-100 points less in the overall in just those 2 categories alone. And don't tell me you will use 6 SP's because you won't have 3 Closers to fill out the rest of your active pitching roster...and if you do use an MRP, then you are again not leveraging value for all categories (ie losing points because of lower K's without the beneift of Saves).

Also, it is very to imgaine 3 managers in one league being able to pull this off successfully in a draft as people watch the supple of closers very carefully during...1 or 2 manager may not make it as noticable, but ceratinly 3 will.

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:31 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by nydownunder:

You can easily end up in a league that has 10 idiots in it regardless of strategies. Are we going to then start giving IQ tests to all participants and make sure those IQ's are dispersed evenly across each league? I mean where to we stop?I've heard of leagues that using IP requirements. I've NEVER heard of an IQ test though. Try using a more relevant example. [/QUOTE]I was 'taking the **** ' out of you.

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:39 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by nydownunder:

Are we going to then start giving IQ tests to all participants and make sure those IQ's are dispersed evenly across each league? I mean where to we stop?

also, how does IQ relate to fantasy baseball success? thanks. [/QUOTE]Better question, has does having a few more SP's to choose from and a few less RP's to choose from equate to success in NFBC? Prove it: show me some numbers using pre 2005 projections.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:41 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

you get one intelligent owner in one of these jokes of a league that has 3 closer/injured pitcher teams, and he wins 100K, i think you'll be hearing from a bunch of people.

again, i'd HATE to find out i came in 2nd overall to a team that drafted in a league that had 3 teams closer/injured pitcher teams. if that happened to you greg, would you question the integrity of the event?

those are my thoughts, and from the comments on the MB, most other owners seem to agree. I couldn't disagree more GG. If a certain strategy becomes too popular, it stops working. The draft process is a freely-trading "market". Markets from time to time reach excess based on the popularity of certain ideas, but eventually they self-correct.

Just like certain players, certain strategies will always be over- or under-valued. We don't need "legislation", let the free market system do its thing and self-correct.

The ealier point about "where do we stop" (testing for IQ) was a good one. The issue is this --- life is full of inequities, and you can't legislate them away. Some leagues will be better-managed, some teams will have better luck, some leagues may have an edge from too few or too many people trying a certain strategy.

My preference is this - maintain a system of equal OPPORTUNITY and let the best man win - and no whining if you don't.

[ July 25, 2005, 11:43 AM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:42 am

Originally posted by nydownunder:

Your point about the extra SP's will be distributed amongst the 12 remaining managers is abviosuly fact (as I stated as well), but you are only talking about an extra 5 or 6 SP's amongst them. The fact that this has not happened, yet you are assuming the result or lack facts/stats to back it up...is conjecture! an extra 5 or 6? try around 21-24 total.

Originally posted by nydownunder:

You are also very wrong about not losing points in the overall league. There is a noticable difference in ERA and WHIP when using 6 SP's vs 7 SP's. On avg, the latter strategy get you about 75-100 points less in the overall in just those 2 categories alone. that is TOTAL crap. one of the BIGGEST lies i've ever heard.

Originally posted by nydownunder:

Also, it is very to imgaine 3 managers in one league being able to pull this off successfully in a draft as people watch the supple of closers very carefully during...1 or 2 manager may not make it as noticable, but ceratinly 3 will. TOTAL CRAP once again. you're 2 for 2 today.

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:48 am

Originally posted by Spyhunter:

For example, if during the draft, you are near a turn and realize all the people below you are doing the closer strat, you get a huge advantage drafting... Also, the dead slot should be disallowed, the goal of the game is to pick the best team, not to exploit a loophole in the rules...

Spy So when will you realize all 3 are doing it? 1st round? Nope, 2nd round? Nope. 3rd or 4th round? Perhaps. 5th and 6th? More than likely. So now you have another few rounds before it's all over (and for you to try and take advantage).

But it will only be a slight advantage for SP's only because there is still a 60% chance they will draft offense during there first 10 picks. Any how many SP's do you think go in rounds 6-9? Not many my friend. And so, you get an SP 10 picks later than you otherwise would have in a single round between 6-9...because surely your not going to watse 2 SP picks in those rounds.

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 5:55 am

Gekko

...5-6 quality pitchers in rounds 1-10. And 12 mangers are not going to carry an extra 2 pitchers (8 and 9) on thier roster because of the extra supply. And again, a 4th, 5th, and/or 6th pitcher can not replicate or beat an ERA or WHIP of a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th relief pitcher. Your ERA and WHIP will go up. And don't forget SP's ERA and WHIP are 3x more impacting than a closer.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:26 am

Originally posted by KJ Duke:

The draft process is a freely-trading "market". Markets from time to time reach excess based on the popularity of certain ideas, but eventually they self-correct.

Just like certain players, certain strategies will always be over- or under-valued. We don't need "legislation", let the free market system do its thing and self-correct.

def of free market - "An economic market in which supply and demand are not regulated or are regulated with only minor restrictions."

a "more" free market draft system would let owners draft whatever players they want (not 2 catchers, 1 MI, etc...). management during the season would allow owners to decide how many batters and how many pitchers to play each week, not 14 and 9. that's free market.

legislation?? - what's wrong with dictating that you need 500IP or else your stats don't count? greg is already dictating you need two catchers, 1 MI, 9 pitchers, etc...

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:31 am

Originally posted by nydownunder:

Gekko

...5-6 quality pitchers in rounds 1-10. And 12 mangers are not going to carry an extra 2 pitchers (8 and 9) on thier roster because of the extra supply. And again, a 4th, 5th, and/or 6th pitcher can not replicate or beat an ERA or WHIP of a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th relief pitcher. Your ERA and WHIP will go up. And don't forget SP's ERA and WHIP are 3x more impacting than a closer. sure...tell that to the following owners of these players...thanks.

Mesa, Jose (PIT)

Cordero, Francisco (TEX)

Brazoban, Yhency (LAD)

Foulke, Keith (BOS)

Kolb, Dan (ATL)

Graves, Danny (NYM)

Hawkins, LaTroy (SF)

Benitez, Armando (SF)

Dotel

Gagne

viper · Post by **viper** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:12 am

I play in NY7. This league has two teams trying a non-starting pitcher strategy and there are a few less obvious points you need to consider.

This closer strategy will never win the overall title although it may win a tight league. Realize that in these teams' first 10 round, they will be drafting at most 7 hitters. Numerous teams draft 8 and 9 hitters in the first 10 rounds. 13s across the board in hitting are all that could realistically be acquired. This yields a hoped for 65 hitting points. Add to that the best case scenario of 47 pitching points and you get to 112. 112 league points will not convert to enough overall points to compete. Even a perfect 75 hitting points will only get to 122 points if absolutely everything breaks your way. Of the current top 10 teams, only one has less than 122 points. Any overall prize is forsaken but league prizes are possible.

In the draft, both these teams have essentially filled their benches with offensive players by round 24. About 14 top bench players are gone by the time the remaining 13 teams are looking at bench players. In the last 6 rounds, these two team are either drafting minor leaguers or those WHIP/ERA middlemen that are seldom drafted until the very, very end. The net effect is less depth to those other teams. Yes, they can get a better pitching staff than would be expected but the cost is hitting depth.

Also, look at how the FAAB dollars will be spent. I don’t know what your projected allocation was between hitting and pitching but those two teams can bid extremely high for any new closers and still have extra money for any emerging hitters. Their entire pitching budget can be concentrated on closers while the rest of us are spending dollars on those ever-present missed starting pitchers.

We are 60% of the way through the season and I am not sure whether their strategy is helping or hurting my team. I do believe that a reasonable balanced approach is the only winning approach. You cannot toss away two categories and expect to win overall and the margin for error in winning your league is very small.

[ July 25, 2005, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: viper ]

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:32 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by KJ Duke:

The draft process is a freely-trading "market". Markets from time to time reach excess based on the popularity of certain ideas, but eventually they self-correct.

Just like certain players, certain strategies will always be over- or under-valued. We don't need "legislation", let the free market system do its thing and self-correct.

def of free market - "An economic market in which supply and demand are not regulated or are regulated with only minor restrictions."

a "more" free market draft system would let owners draft whatever players they want (not 2 catchers, 1 MI, etc...). management during the season would allow owners to decide how many batters and how many pitchers to play each week, not 14 and 9. that's free market.

legislation?? - what's wrong with dictating that you need 500IP or else your stats don't count? greg is already dictating you need two catchers, 1 MI, 9 pitchers, etc... [/QUOTE]Even a "free market" system generally has structure/rules. The objective of such is generally thought of as along the lines of --- to maximize the choices that an individual can make without impeding upon the rights of others.

So the question is, would this potential rule be put in place because it is needed structurally; or would it be put in place to impede players from exercising a strategy of their choosing (which by the way is an option for anyone that wants to pursue it)?

Any possible advantage it creates (if it does, which I don't see evidence of), would likely cause an "adjustment" which would render it ineffective anyway. By comparison, the old issue of draft slots is a bigger problem because I don't have an "equal opportunity" that is within my control to get the players I want.

Additionally, from a consistency standpoint, I have a problem with it. If we dictate minimum IP why not dictate minimum ABs, SB and HR.

... following your logic, if someone decides to grab all power hitters, isnt the rest of the league at a disadvantage for getting power hitters? Or speed guys, or all SP's ? How are you gonna make rules for all that ?

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:35 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by nydownunder:

Gekko

...5-6 quality pitchers in rounds 1-10. And 12 mangers are not going to carry an extra 2 pitchers (8 and 9) on thier roster because of the extra supply. And again, a 4th, 5th, and/or 6th pitcher can not replicate or beat an ERA or WHIP of a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th relief pitcher. Your ERA and WHIP will go up. And don't forget SP's ERA and WHIP are 3x more impacting than a closer. sure...tell that to the following owners of these players...thanks.

Mesa, Jose (PIT)

Cordero, Francisco (TEX)

Brazoban, Yhency (LAD)

Foulke, Keith (BOS)

Kolb, Dan (ATL)

Graves, Danny (NYM)

Hawkins, LaTroy (SF)

Benitez, Armando (SF)

Dotel

Gagne [/QUOTE]Not at the time of draft....which means the FAAB then comes into play....which is no different in fairness than any other league with various staregies.