NFBC Rules Changes Discussion For 2013

[Baseball Furies]

Churchill - an RP strategy did win an overall contest last season, it wasn't the classic main event but if it could happen there with the same rule set it could happen in any of the contests. If Greg doesn't bump the IP to more than 1000 I might try it just to prove it can be done.

Secondly, I agree on Friday pitchers ... if they haven't pitched through Thursday we should be able to swap them out. That would be a nice addition. In football, Thursday game players lock for the weekend - so I would think STATS could do the same for pitchers.

Agree 100% on the pitcher swap. Can't remember how many times this situation screwed me this past season. No way this change does anything to hurt the competition. Should be one that is instituted.

[Baseball Furies]

I also vote for raising the innings limit, especially for leagues independent of an Overall. I respect the relief pitcher strategy and understand that those who win with it do play within the rules. However, I would never utilize it personally and therefore don't like playing against it because I feel my unwillingness to use it puts me at a disadvantage. The challenge I'm looking for when joining these leagues is to see if I can construct the best team with the best players, not to see if I can find the best "advantage" or "loophole", especially at the high dollar levels I now play. It's similar to why I had an issue with those who gamed the pitcher DL rule. It was within the rules, but was not in the spirit of the type of game I want to play. 1000 innings, 1100, 1200, the higher the better as far as I'm concerned.

I second this motion...or whatever it's up to by now. Well said, Glenn.

[Greg Ambrosius]

The DL designation was a constant problem for years. I liked it, but I also disliked it because it was clunky with the timing of that official designation. The only other concern with this rule was that allowed streaming if a guy came off the DL ... but you certainly can't stream a starter if he hasn't pitched through Thursday. Just allow for a Friday swap of ANY pitcher if he hasn't pitched prior to Friday and every problem here is solved.

I really have no desire to return to the DL designation again. Like KJ said, it was troublesome because of the way Major League Baseball reported official DL moves and it became very frustrating to NFBC owners. People would blame us for not having a guy on the DL fast enough when really we were at the mercy of MLB. Once people read it on Rotoworld.com or Rotowire.com, they assumed it was official, but it wasn't. So I'm really not looking to return to that format again.

I can look into the Friday pitcher swap, but you've obviously never seen a can of worms before when you say "and every problem here is solved." We'll talk to IT and consider this, but the intent of the rule has to be to help owners if pitchers get swapped out of their start that week due to injury or something unforeseen. That's the idea and we need to make it simple enough for everyone to understand and simple enough for everyone to do on Friday. We'll see about this.

[Greg Ambrosius]

Why do we have to have the same innings limit across the board? Why not 900 for the slow drafts (due to possible SP attrition that can't be replaced via FAAB), 1000 for the Main Events (since just about everyone in a Main Event is going for the Overall at the draft but still allows for shifting gears in-season), and 1100-1200 for the Diamond, Ultimates, and Supers where at that pricing I believe most of us would like all players to play it straight?

It is possible, but some have already said they want a consistent IP minimum. We'll consider this and poll likely players before making a decision.

[King of Queens]

The DL designation was a constant problem for years. I liked it, but I also disliked it because it was clunky with the timing of that official designation. The only other concern with this rule was that allowed streaming if a guy came off the DL ... but you certainly can't stream a starter if he hasn't pitched through Thursday. Just allow for a Friday swap of ANY pitcher if he hasn't pitched prior to Friday and every problem here is solved.

I really have no desire to return to the DL designation again. Like KJ said, it was troublesome because of the way Major League Baseball reported official DL moves and it became very frustrating to NFBC owners. People would blame us for not having a guy on the DL fast enough when really we were at the mercy of MLB. Once people read it on Rotoworld.com or Rotowire.com, they assumed it was official, but it wasn't. So I'm really not looking to return to that format again.

I can look into the Friday pitcher swap, but you've obviously never seen a can of worms before when you say "and every problem here is solved." We'll talk to IT and consider this, but the intent of the rule has to be to help owners if pitchers get swapped out of their start that week due to injury or something unforeseen. That's the idea and we need to make it simple enough for everyone to understand and simple enough for everyone to do on Friday. We'll see about this.

The IT "hurdle" here would be the timing of when this pitching swap is allowed. It would have to be setup that you could ONLY make the switch on Friday -- otherwise you could take out your Wednesday/Thursday SP on Tuesday night and replace him with a Friday/Saturday SP (thereby getting an extra start for the week).

[KJ Duke]

The DL designation was a constant problem for years. I liked it, but I also disliked it because it was clunky with the timing of that official designation. The only other concern with this rule was that allowed streaming if a guy came off the DL ... but you certainly can't stream a starter if he hasn't pitched through Thursday. Just allow for a Friday swap of ANY pitcher if he hasn't pitched prior to Friday and every problem here is solved.

I really have no desire to return to the DL designation again. Like KJ said, it was troublesome because of the way Major League Baseball reported official DL moves and it became very frustrating to NFBC owners. People would blame us for not having a guy on the DL fast enough when really we were at the mercy of MLB. Once people read it on Rotoworld.com or Rotowire.com, they assumed it was official, but it wasn't. So I'm really not looking to return to that format again.

I can look into the Friday pitcher swap, but you've obviously never seen a can of worms before when you say "and every problem here is solved." We'll talk to IT and consider this, but the intent of the rule has to be to help owners if pitchers get swapped out of their start that week due to injury or something unforeseen. That's the idea and we need to make it simple enough for everyone to understand and simple enough for everyone to do on Friday. We'll see about this.

The IT "hurdle" here would be the timing of when this pitching swap is allowed. It would have to be setup that you could ONLY make the switch on Friday -- otherwise you could take out your Wednesday/Thursday SP on Tuesday night and replace him with a Friday/Saturday SP (thereby getting an extra start for the week).

If a player locks as soon as he enters a game - similar to how NFFC players lock as soon as their game starts, there would be no chance of getting an extra start under this rule.

[joshguy]

The Friday pitcher change to me at least doesnt seem to be that big of a deal. To me it just doesnt seem like it needs to be done all that often. A SP will usually get hurt during his start so you wouldnt be able to swap him out anyway. A rainout during the week could push your Sunday starter into the next week. But really, how often would this happen? A couple times a year? Everyone would probably experience this a couple of occasions a year.

They would have to figure out a way to not allow a swap of DLd pitcher who has already pitched that week. I suppose it can be done, but seems fine the way it is.

[KJ Duke]

The Friday pitcher change to me at least doesnt seem to be that big of a deal. To me it just doesnt seem like it needs to happen all that often. A SP will usually get hurt during his start so you wouldnt be able to swap him out anyway. A rainout during the week could push your Sunday starter into the next week. But really, how often would this happen? A couple times a year? Everyone would probably experience the couple of occasions a year.

They would have to figure out a way to not allow a swap of DLd pitcher who has already pitched that week. I suppose it can be done, but seems fine the way it is.

It will happen most often with players who are expected to pitch but dealing with an injury of uncertain timing - coming off the DL, possibly going on the DL or just getting pushed back a few days. I would say it happens a fair amount over the course of a season, and even if it's only a start or two, that would have been enough to impact the money standings in many of my leagues this year.

[Motorboat Jones]

I like the current Friday hitter rule more than a Thursday change.
It works better logistically because of the start of the weekend series.
Thursday is usually a travel day and less than half our players play.
I'd rather have that extra 24 hours to garner information in finding out which of our players are good to go for the weekend.

I agree with this.

I also agree with this. Keep it on Friday.

[Motorboat Jones]

I also think raising the innings pitched limit from 900 to 1000 is no big deal. Makes sense to move it up a bit.

[King of Queens]

If a player locks as soon as he enters a game - similar to how NFFC players lock as soon as their game starts, there would be no chance of getting an extra start under this rule.

Yes, I got that. I'm talking about the period from Monday to as late as Thursday evening BEFORE the pitcher pitches. Say Kershaw is pitching on Thursday night, and I've got a pitcher going on Friday on my bench. If I swap out Kershaw for that bench pitcher on Tuesday or Wednesday, I get two starts for the week.

[DOUGHBOYS]

The window would be very small for owners with this rule.
IT would have to identify the pitchers not throwing a pitch by late Thursday night, forcing every owner who would want to take advantage of the rule to make their lineup changes on Friday by 7 PM.
Earlier if there's a game at Wrigley.
I'm for it, but I doubt the masses would be.

[King of Queens]

The window would be very small for owners with this rule.
IT would have to identify the pitchers not throwing a pitch by late Thursday night, forcing every owner who would want to take advantage of the rule to make their lineup changes on Friday by 7 PM.
Earlier if there's a game at Wrigley.
I'm for it, but I doubt the masses would be.

Exactly my point. This isn't like hitter swaps, where you can make them freely at any time between Monday night and Friday afternoon/evening. The pitcher swap window would be somewhere between 14 and 20 hours.

[lrr]

I am not a fan of the pitcher rule that is being proposed. Any rule change will probably have unintended consequences. It is unfortunate when a pitcher is scheduled to pitch on Monday through Thursday and is scratched or gets injured. My guess though is that in many cases, if this rule is implemented, the pitcher switched out on Friday will be someone who was not scheduled to pitch on Monday through Thursday. It will be some grade B pitcher who is scheduled to pitch on Friday through Sunday (in a bad match up) who the owner will not start that week. He is inserted on Monday through Thursday and then switched for a better pitcher who has a two start week but a particularly bad match up Monday through Thursday. It also would be handy to have a minor league phenom on your bench who could be switched out every Friday for the convenience of the owner when necessary. I'm sure others can think of different examples that may cause issues.

[DOUGHBOYS]

The two start pitcher part of the loophole can be eliminated.
It can be eliminated by having the same rule applied to benched players.
If the benched player has thrown a pitch Mon-Thurs, he would not be available to pitch Fri-Sun

[Rog]

I am sure I missed it somewhere but how does this affect my team if I have 3 closers in my lineup and have not pitched by friday and I have 3 nice starts on my bench going on Friday , Sat, and Sunday?
(other than draft better closers)

[DOUGHBOYS]

I am sure I missed it somewhere but how does this affect my team if I have 3 closers in my lineup and have not pitched by friday and I have 3 nice starts on my bench going on Friday , Sat, and Sunday?
(other than draft better closers)

Six pitchers and none have pitched Mon-Thurs, no rule helps that!

[Rog]

ok so you got me there Doughy ,how about this? If my closers havent pitched by friday and I have starting pitchers or other closers (because I like to keep a bench full of pitchers ) on my bench ,would I be able to switch them out under these rules?
If so I do not like the rule change.

[DOUGHBOYS]

ok so you got me there Doughy ,how about this? If my closers havent pitched by friday and I have starting pitchers or other closers (because I like to keep a bench full of pitchers ) on my bench ,would I be able to switch them out under these rules?
If so I do not like the rule change.

I would think you'd be able to switch them.
The short window between late Thursday night and before games on Friday is a deal breaker for the rule change anyway though...

What we have isn't broke.
It's fair for everybody. We're all gonna have a pitcher that should pitch and does not.
Just my opinion.

[Greg Ambrosius]

The window would be very small for owners with this rule.
IT would have to identify the pitchers not throwing a pitch by late Thursday night, forcing every owner who would want to take advantage of the rule to make their lineup changes on Friday by 7 PM.
Earlier if there's a game at Wrigley.
I'm for it, but I doubt the masses would be.

Exactly my point. This isn't like hitter swaps, where you can make them freely at any time between Monday night and Friday afternoon/evening. The pitcher swap window would be somewhere between 14 and 20 hours.

The confusion just in this thread is already proving the point that dealing with pitcher changes on Friday is not an easy solution. As KOQ states, the only way you could do this is to not allow any pitcher changes until Friday morning after all games from the night before have completed, giving owners 12-16 hours to change their pitching lineups. And at the same time we're allowing hitter changes after lineups lock on Monday. I haven't even asked IT if that's possible, but the confusion just in this thread has me leaning one way already.

And there are scenarios for loopholes. I'm more on pace for the 1,000 IP minimum now.

[Outlaw]

greg- I agree with you about the confusion on the thread. Just up the IP limit.

[KJ Duke]

If a player locks as soon as he enters a game - similar to how NFFC players lock as soon as their game starts, there would be no chance of getting an extra start under this rule.

Yes, I got that. I'm talking about the period from Monday to as late as Thursday evening BEFORE the pitcher pitches. Say Kershaw is pitching on Thursday night, and I've got a pitcher going on Friday on my bench. If I swap out Kershaw for that bench pitcher on Tuesday or Wednesday, I get two starts for the week.

You're misunderstanding how I would expect the system to work. If you bench Kershaw on Tuesday, his stats, likewise, are on the bench for the entire week unless you activate him again prior to his start. The coding would have to work like it does in football, meaning there is only one scoring period per week for pitchers.

There would be no chance to get double starts from different pitchers with this setup, and no loopholes.

[Money Men]

I'll ask this again. Perhaps I an naive, and this has been answered in previous years.

Isn't the simplest solution to containing streaming an innings cap? That way you can change out pitchers just like hitters mid week, but you can't stream the entire season.

[KJ Duke]

Trouble with an innings cap is the extra time to evaluate pitchers. Wcofb did that and it cut down on league counts most people would play, and some wouldn't play at all because of the time commitment of evaluating all the double start scenarios. Plus, then everyone has to monitor their IP.

[lrr]

Let's say I have four good starts for the week, two on Tuesday on two on Friday. Under the present system, I would use four starters and five relief pitchers in my weekly lineup. Let's also say I have seven total relief pitchers on my team. Under the new system as proposed, I could on Monday through Thursday, use the two starters that are scheduled to start and seven relief pitchers. I wouldn't have to pick and choose among the relief pitchers. On Friday, I will bank on the fact that two of these relievers will not pitch during the week and switch them out for the two starters scheduled to start on Friday. This is basically Rog's example, but if it works, it adds a new dimension that adds relief pitching pitching flexibility. I prefer the present system.