NFBC Message Boards

Some rule change items are spilling into the technology thread so I'll start this thread exclusively for just rule changes....

If feasible with software, I'll throw this rule change on the floor for debate.....
One pitcher change on Fridays.

Most of us fear or do not like the streaming of pitchers. I'm one of them.
At the same time, most of us feel handcuffed in not making any pitchers moves at all.
The dl rule failed in that some pitchers were not 'officially' put on the dl and during September if pitchers were hurt, their teams did not feel the need to use the dl designation since rosters expand to 40 players.

Can there be limited streaming with a one pitcher change?
Sure, it's an option. Especially for those with real strong staffs. But they'll have strong staffs with or without the one pitcher change.
The one pitcher change allows us to pull a pitcher out of our lineup if missing a start by Managers decision.
Or skipped because of rain.
Or lost a game due to rain.
Or hurt.
It would also give us the freedom to pitch a double start pitcher against a preferred team rather than being forced to pitch him against both if having a better option.

It lends itself to more strategy since a 6-Starter/3-reliever could be used for four days, 7/2 for three days.
It does give us more control and options.
At the same time, it is a significant change. Not one to be taken lightly.
It could effect the way we map our draft and think during a draft.
Having just nine capable pitchers would not be enough and it could hurt teams with a lot of injuries.

I'm for this change, but I think it needs to be talked out by many before Greg would even consider making this a part of the contest.
Thoughts?
Other ideas?


A grammatical edit was used.

Great idea. Much better than now IMO. It is a bit random and lucky or unlucky who your pitchers happen to draw when they go twice. You have to just play them now within reason. It takes the non streaming way too much to the extreme IMO. It actually brings a much bigger element of luck. This idea would bring more skill into play.

I like it.

Excellent idea and reasoning Dan.

Put me in this camp as well. I am all for something in between what we currently have and the ability to change all pitchers on Friday. I think Chad brings up a good point - we have often viewed the "streaming" idea as taking away from skill and maybe it does but perhaps the current setup does as well? Gallardo would be an example for this week. Now he is starting Saturday. On Monday at lineup time, he was not going to be starting this week.

I was for it when you posted this idea originally and I'm still for it. Well thought out and it should help the NFBC player.
I see no negatives.

I think over the course of a year, everyone will have a couple of SP that miss a start or whatever. So really when all is said and done it will all equal out(or affect the standings in a small way).

Changing it to adding a pitching change, changes everything. Pitching hoarding will be the norm because there is no way you can be the only team not swapping out a pitcher on Friday. All the old stats go out the window. If anything, I think it makes the game less skillfull since you wont have to make that tough choice about a 2 SP with one great matchup and one bad.

JohnP wrote:Put me in this camp as well. I am all for something in between what we currently have and the ability to change all pitchers on Friday. I think Chad brings up a good point - we have often viewed the "streaming" idea as taking away from skill and maybe it does but perhaps the current setup does as well? Gallardo would be an example for this week. Now he is starting Saturday. On Monday at lineup time, he was not going to be starting this week.

How does it make one more skilled by putting in Gallardo on Friday? More attentive yes, not skillful.

DOUGHBOYS wrote: At the same time, it is a significant change. Not one to be taken lightly.
It could effect the way we map our draft and think during a draft.
Having just nine capable pitchers would not be enough and it could hurt teams with a lot of injuries.

I think it would change the draft completely. I wouldnt even draft a backup positional player. MRs and mid tier to bottom tier SPs become way more valuable.

joshguy wrote:

DOUGHBOYS wrote: At the same time, it is a significant change. Not one to be taken lightly.
It could effect the way we map our draft and think during a draft.
Having just nine capable pitchers would not be enough and it could hurt teams with a lot of injuries.

I think it would change the draft completely. I wouldnt even draft a backup positional player. MRs and mid tier to bottom tier SPs become way more valuable.

This same argument was used when we went to Friday changes for hitters. Some said that the bench would be all hitters.
It's a typical over reaction to change.
Why would you want MR's?
It is ONE pitching change a week.
We all already have two or three pitchers on our bench capable of pitching.
If drafting MR's next year because of this rule change, blame yourself, not the rule.

joshguy wrote:

JohnP wrote:Put me in this camp as well. I am all for something in between what we currently have and the ability to change all pitchers on Friday. I think Chad brings up a good point - we have often viewed the "streaming" idea as taking away from skill and maybe it does but perhaps the current setup does as well? Gallardo would be an example for this week. Now he is starting Saturday. On Monday at lineup time, he was not going to be starting this week.

How does it make one more skilled by putting in Gallardo on Friday? More attentive yes, not skillful.

The skill would be in the option of having a choice between Gallardo or Straily who is on the backend of a double start. That skill or option is taken from us now since we'd be handcuffed with no changes and hoping the best for Straily.
Now, the only 'skill' is to hope for the best. More control is a good thing.

Im not saying I would draft 5 backup MR, but I think having one would be a must. What if all your starts are Monday through Thursday, putting in a MR would, assuming he pitches and pitches to his season norms, give you more K's, and lower your ERA and WHIP and also at least give you and opportunity for a win(albeit a small one).

I think comparing the friday hitter rule and the pitcher friday rule is apples to oranges. I would guess most teams are using the hitter rule for injuries ONLY. The only time I use it is in a non injury circumstance is if both players are crappy to begin with and one has 4 games to 3 during M-TH.

Adding 10 or so extra hitting games(for non injuries) you may get from using the Fri rule doesnt have the statistical impact on the game that adding 26 starts would have.

That being said, I would really be fine either way, everyone plays under the same rules so it doesnt matter. I was just pointing out some of the big changes that would occur. Im sure there are more reasons.

But if there was a change that were to happen, why not just keep it simple and just make it so we have 10 pitchers, as thats what this rule would really be(except with more strategy) as no one in their right mind would never not make that 1 pitching change on Friday.

I have been in the NFBC for a number of years and I like this rule change. For some reason, I am always a little miffed by the team who drafts mostly offensive players in the first ten or so rounds of the draft and then makes up for pitching with waiver wire or late round picks. That strategy always seem to work well. Although it can't be quantified, this rule change would put a somewhat greater emphasis on pitching. Twenty six potential more starts means your bench better have decent pitching. I think it would affect how people draft. At the very least, it would be very interesting.

FAAB pickups and late round pitching would have just the same impact by going to this extra pitching spot. Instead of 9 pitchers it basically gives you 10. So really to me, whats the point, all we are doing is adding that extra starting lineup slot.

Also, the original poster mentioned rainouts, injuries, shuffling of rotations. Ok, lets say you lose out on your M-Th pitcher. You put in a guy who is going to start Fri-Sun. So that now gives you 1 start. Meanwhile, a team who didnt have any of that has his 1 pitcher M-Th, now for Fri-Sun he changes out that pitcher so he now has 2 starts. So either way you're down 1 start.

So if youre not able to make up that 1 start deficit, why change the way we draft, do FAAB and set lineups. Thats pretty much changing the whole game.

Love it. Make it happen. Don't want to hear that IT can't support it. Let us players speak here.

Although great advances continue to be made, I would be surprised if this idea could even be programmed appropriately. However, I do not see the skill in it. Everyone would just plug in a reliever or starter for a pitcher already used regardless of circumstances.

My opinion is that allowing the utility spot to be either a hitter or pitcher seems more strategic and doable with our software. Starts could be made up with a Friday change for those scratched or injured during the week. Its been brought up here before, but it may offer an alternative to this idea. I'm good with the way it currently stands, but would prefer the utility option for pitchers over this idea.

In theory I would be very much in favor of this change. The part I would have a problem with is the technical side. Do I now have to spend hours on end figuring out if there is a way around the rule? I refer to the Friday DL rule of last season.

I want to know that everyone is playing on a level field. I will not spend my time trying to discover ways to circumvent the spirit of any given rule. That particular circumstance and revelation obviously still sticks with me and enough so to say, I wouldn't endorse this change, even though I like it.

Ando wrote:Love it. Make it happen. Don't want to hear that IT can't support it. Let us players speak here.

When have we ever not let the players speak here? And IT can certainly support such a change if it's something we request, so that's not an issue.

Thanks for all the comments and they are very revealing already. In September we can discuss all potential rules changes, contest changes, new contests and more. We can't wait to unveil our contests for 2014 and we can't wait to start drafting in November. All rules will need to be in place by then, so this is a good discussion.

But it's not a subtle rules change being proposed here. It would be a big one and that's why the honest comments to this are appreciated. Thanks all.

I do not know how technically difficult it would be. I miss rotary phones, feel most computers would be better off as boat anchors, and have trouble finding the right remote to turn on my TV, so I yield to more proficient minds.

As far as the rule itself, as I recall everyone like the flexibility of DL rule but objected to those who manipulated it to take greater advantage, in context, than the rule was intended to provide.

I think Dan's proposal is a good one, allowing a little flexibility with limited overall impact (some combination of 26 potentially missed starts and 26 potentially additional starts which means net-net, it should not greatly increase the number of available starts) and keeps streaming to a minimum. And I feel this rule change will have zero impact on the draft.

While the concept of the true Utility (i.e. can be either a pitcher or a batter) is a bad one in my opinion, I would support Dan's proposed rule change to allow one pitching move on Friday.

I would not be in favor I think the current format is fine. Allowing a switch takes the tough 2 start decision making out which is part of the game. Do i roll 2 average starts or 1 strong? Having that 2nd bad start on the weekend makes it interesting. As for injuries mid week or starters getting pulled that's the rub of the game - Certainly not so common that we we need a rule for it.

With this proposed rule change you will be using 10 pitchers per week. Instead of this, why not increase the starting lineup to 10 pitchers with a six man bench?

Bob Enzyte wrote:With this proposed rule change you will be using 10 pitchers per week. Instead of this, why not increase the starting lineup to 10 pitchers with a six man bench?

This is very different from 10 pitchers and a 6 man bench, Lindy. And it's not just an automatic extra 26 starts. In fact, it could be the substitution of somebody like Rick Porcello who has a double start, one at home vs. Houston, the other on the road vs. Texas.
Or it could be that your team may want to try and eke out an extra save, so we bench a start to put in a would-be Closer.
In both cases, no extra start.

A lot of folks have looked at the obvious and are thinking streaming.
I get that.
But it'll be more than that.
There are also the circumstances of a Closer getting lit up early in the week, in danger of losing his job. I want him out of that lineup before the Manager puts him in a non-closing role and more bad stats are applied.
10 pitchers doesn't allow me to do that.

It's an option for us. It takes off the handcuffs on Friday.
10 Pitchers isn't an option, it is just adding one more pitcher.
An option on Friday is more than just another pitcher.

I like the idea. Too many times I've sat back and watched a start get erased by reasons already mentioned.
If we're trying to mimic MLB conditions, then certainly we don't want to stream, yet we need to be able to fill in an empty start.

I'm also a little skeptical about the ability of IT ability to allow only one pitching change per team per week on Fridays only,...but hey.....go for it!

This may be jumping the gun...but here's a little forethought ....
...let's say they accomplish this and I go in and exchange pitcher A for pitcher B ahead of the deadline. Then think it over and decide that I like pitcher C better...for whatever reason. Will the IT recognize the first change as the only change? Just a thought.

I've recently become aware of the reluctance to "make the game easier" so is have to assume this is a change that NFBC really doesn't want to make.
In many ways they seem to maintain traditional rules while keeping the game similar to the way MLB really works. A manager announces his rotation and that's what the team goes with. Unless there's an injury, you don't see Jim Leyland replacing Rick Porcello when it's his turn to pitch at Texas.

I have no idea how hard the technology is but the only way I could see NFBC agreeing to allow a replacement pitcher is if you had a Probable Starter get scratched due to injury. No replacing injured RPs or adding in a bench guy who's announced mid week as a starter. It seem like it would happen so infrequently that it's not worth the trouble for NFBC to make the changes.

I've suggested before that such a significant rule change should be considered only for a new game rather than the Main Event or other existing games. If there's enough demand, why wouldn't NFBC create a daily lineups league where you can fiddle with the pitchers all you like?

By enough demand I mean hundreds of managers, of course.



Cheers!

If you don't think this in essense becomes just another streaming option ur kidding urself....u replace bad back end double starts...or just add a start....pretty basic. This would be used 99% NOT in the case of DL or scratched starters. This contest is supposed to be difficult....let's not keep making it easier.