Gaming system or being smart?

bjoak · Post by **bjoak** » Wed Jul 19, 2006 8:18 pm

Originally posted by mdz129:

It still means 1/3 of an inning-- i.e. one out. Greg is not going make it 133 1/3 innings because of a gramatical snafu. Are you re--never mind.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:22 pm

So the midseason requirement is 1/3 of an inning ? huh? GREG PLEASE CONFIRM

Spy

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 1:10 pm

Originally posted by RTKS:

I understand working within the rules to win the league. I understand finding a loop hole within those rules to take advantage. Its not in the spirit of the game and I think its wrong, but I see how it happens.

Here is my thought though, wasn't it Don Mathis who came up with the idea of a mid-season league with first half stats counting?? Thus the league is named after him. Isn't he the one who has drafted all the DL pitchers? Am I wrong here?

It sounds to me like, he already had this all planned, when he suggested the idea for this draft. I think that is inappropriate, to come up with the rules or the idea and then exploit it!

Oh well, it will be interesting to see how it plays out. This is the second year for the Don Mathis League and in all of our NFBC leagues last year -- including all of the mid-season leagues -- our minimum innings pitched requirement was 1/3 of an inning. We did not have minimums the first two years of the NFBC, so Don did not put that rule in place. I did. We decided to add 400 IP minimums to all of our events this year, but I did not change that for the mid-season leagues. I left the rules intact for people to try different strategies. I guess next year I will update those leagues to make them more consistent with our overall format as well.

Since three guys are trying this same strategy, it's unfair to single out Don for doing it better than two other owners. Not only that, it's very early in the season of this league, so let's play it out and see how the strategies work. We had a lot of banter about this strategy at the beginning of last season too and there wasn't a single owner who won a league title with this strategy.

As I've stated before, we'll evaluate the IP totals at the end of this year and see if we need to increase them above 400. If we do, we will then half whatever total we decide on for the mid-season leagues.

Now best of luck to everyone in this league as I trust the 12 other owners feel they have a pretty good chance of winning this league as well.

viper · Post by **viper** » Fri Jul 21, 2006 3:45 pm

just out of couriosity, were there any teams that employed the RP strategy last season when there were not any minimum inning requirements in any leagues?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sat Jul 22, 2006 5:08 am

Originally posted by viper:

just out of couriosity, were there any teams that employed the RP strategy last season when there were not any minimum inning requirements in any leagues? Of course, which is why we instituted the minimum innings pitched rule. Nobody won a league title with that strategy, even in the mid-season leagues. In the main event, I think we had two or three teams under 400 IP, which is where the cutoff is today. Most were at 900 IP or more. Teams did finish in the money in the auction leagues using this strategy and the 400 IP is now part of all auction leagues, too.

Again, at season's end we'll look at the minimum IP total and see if it needs adjusting. We will incorporate a higher minimum IP total for the mid-season leagues next year as well.

Mudster · Post by **Mudster** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 10:13 am

I'm not even in this league and I have to speak up. I don't see how anyone can complain about someones strategy when all rules were up front and stated. Anyone could've done the same thing, if they see this as a way to win. Someone mentioned that this goes against the "spirit of the game". I thought the spirit of the game was to come up with a strategy of compiling players that will land you the highest total of points. I will state a made up scenerio that could also be called foul upon and tell me what YOU would do....Let's say Albert Pujols got his leg lopped off the morning off the Mathis draft. Would you pass up on putting him on your roster to acquire his first half stats, knowing you could slip in any warm body afterwards and the total would be mvp-ish numbers for the position slot? It goes against the so called spirit of the game to do so, but I highly doubt anyone would turn it away. There is nothing unethical about taking an abnormal approach to winning. There is a lot of season left and it just sounds like jealousy from some of you that you took an unimaginative approach to the game. And for the record, I tried this approach to putting together an auction team back in 1989 and it failed terribly...A couple bad shellings and the whole strat is trashed.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 1:08 pm

Mudster, it is a little bit different in the Don Mathis League around the potential for blow ups.

The problem with Ratio statistics is that they can get gamed - normally people don't try with BA (though someone is doing that in the Don Mathis League as well) because of the loss of all other stats - CRAZY IDEA: Why not add a 6th pitching statistic = Innings pitched?

FYI: You could start a team of SPs of 5 santanas and 4 Halladays and still be losing ERA to Mathis and XxyyZ!

viper · Post by **viper** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 1:56 pm

Funny you should mention IP as a category. I play in an NL only auction league where IP is used. However they dropped Ks when they added IP. The league wanted SPs to be more critical but felt that adding a 6th pitching category would require a 6th hitting category for balance and apparently they wanted a somewhat standard 5x5 scoring system.

I personally like the ability to try various strategies with ptchers. I see fantasy baseball as a game of categories and not as a simulation of real baseball. If it were a simulation then defense and daily adjustments would somehow be incorporated into the game. But it isn't as we all know.

For the most part, pitching is the only area where an owner's "skills" and judgement are put to the test. For all the hitting categories, we would likely never make a change if players stayed healthy - baring that huge slump. This is why most people concentrate on hitting early in the draft. You draft the best you can and pray for health. Ideally, every starting position player will play 160 games. Every replacemant player you need is a major downgrade.

Pitching is different. Matchups, two-start pitchers and certain park/opponent avoidance all come into play. Decisions are weekly even when all players are healthy. There are very few hitting strategies ever discussed. Only pitching strategies are discussed and tried. The Mathis league provides a great environment of strategies because you have about 60% of your season's stats already in place.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sun Jul 23, 2006 4:43 pm

BTW Mudster, no one is complaining about this years league. We are discussing if the rules should be adjusted for next year.

My point (again) is that it creates an very unbalancing situation. Greg has already indicated that he will be looking at the IP requirements, I think the discussion is pretty much done

FYI: People who flushed categories are 1,3,5 and 6 as of today in the Don Mathis league

Spy

Mudster · Post by **Mudster** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 10:19 am

I probably shouldn't have posted when I was in the mood that I was in..sorry. I thought I did see someone call "shenanigans" on Don though saying he has a loophole in a league named after him. Nonetheless, I'm not in the league and it really isn't my place to say anything, so I apoligize for being critical to anyone.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 3:32 am

I don't mean to drag this subject up again, but I just wanted to look over the statistics of this league after two weeks of action to see if anything would have changed if we had instituted a 200 IP limit (half of our 400 IP regular season limit). The answer is no as all 15 teams are over that limit and in fact all but one team is already over 400 IP. Since we were using first half stats in this particular mid-season league, the IP minimum in future years will be the same as the main event, so 400 IP is the level we should look at here. Here's a look at the IP totals as of July 27th:

344.2 (second place)

407.0 (8th)

415.1 (1st)

883.1

823.0

946.0

1107.0

900.1

718.0

798.1

914.1

766.1

894.0

725.0

866.1

I do not see a problem raising the IP minimum next year for this league or the NFBC main event leagues as it's obvious most teams will be well over 900 IP. Raising it to 600 IP or in that area will eliminate some strategies while still keeping in some uniqueness for those who want to try different strategies.

There has been talk about a minimum at-bats level, but I honestly don't think that's necessary, although I see someone is trying that strategy in this league, too. I also don't think we need a maximum number of innings pitched or at-bats. If you want an all starter strategy, you are welcome to try that as well.

Good luck the rest of the way, guys. This league has a long ways to go and several teams are well in reach of winning this and earning some money. Just like every other NFBC race, I trust this one will go down to the wire.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 12:06 pm

Greg, I think 600 is a great number - basically allows for different strategies, but keeps people from using very odd strategies.

Just to be specific for the midseason leagues next year, would this mean 300/300 for don mathis leagues only, and 000 / 300 for the other midseason formats.

Thanks for looking into this, I personally believe the goal of fantasy baseball is that the points show who can draft and manage a team the best, not who can figure out how to make empty slots turn ratio categories into points...

Spy

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Thu Jul 27, 2006 1:11 pm

600 IP is great.

Get rid of whatever that player list was.

It made no sense that B.Wood was on the list and A.Gordon was not.

The rosters are thin enough that carrying a Jered Weaver from Day 1 is risky.

Open the draft to anyone.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 12:36 am

Originally posted by UFS:

600 IP is great.

Get rid of whatever that player list was.

It made no sense that B.Wood was on the list and A.Gordon was not.

The rosters are thin enough that carrying a Jered Weaver from Day 1 is risky.

Open the draft to anyone. what he said!!!

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 1:32 am

I agree, but perhaps for a very different reason:

Personally, if Greg would say "we will have pre-printed labels for the 40man roster for all on draft day" the I would vote for the 40man rule, otherwise, I vote for open. I really think that errors on draft day cause a ton of problems, so anything that reduces them is a positive...

Spy

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 7:01 am

Originally posted by Spyhunter:

Just to be specific for the midseason leagues next year, would this mean 300/300 for don mathis leagues only, and 000 / 300 for the other midseason formats. Spy No, Don Mathis League would be 600 IP and other mid-season formats would be 300 IP.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 7:03 am

Originally posted by UFS:

600 IP is great.

Get rid of whatever that player list was.

It made no sense that B.Wood was on the list and A.Gordon was not.

The rosters are thin enough that carrying a Jered Weaver from Day 1 is risky.

Open the draft to anyone. That's very possible. We'll see what I can do within my license with MLBAM. You didn't forget that as you made this fine suggestion, did you?

mdz129 · Post by **mdz129** » Fri Jul 28, 2006 1:59 pm

Just becase a "few" individuals want more than 400 IP doesn't mean 600 or 800 or 1000 should be implemented.

The 400 IP has more than eliminated the 2 closers and single A players strategy.

Keep the minimum at 400 IP for the Main Event and Auction Leagues. I really don't care about the Mathias leagues which is really not a standard roto league so whatever rules you decide on should not be held as part of the season long Main Event and Auction leagues.

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Sat Jul 29, 2006 2:39 pm

Originally posted by mdz129:

Just becase a "few" individuals want more than 400 IP doesn't mean 600 or 800 or 1000 should be implemented.

The 400 IP has more than eliminated the 2 closers and single A players strategy.

Keep the minimum at 400 IP for the Main Event and Auction Leagues. I really don't care about the Mathias leagues which is really not a standard roto league so whatever rules you decide on should not be held as part of the season long Main Event and Auction leagues. A think there is more than a few. I would say there is only a few that want the less innings. It's simple. Just offer three types of auction leagues, 1/3 inning, 400 inning, and 800 innings, then let the players decide.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 2:36 am

Originally posted by mdz129:

Just becase a "few" individuals want more than 400 IP doesn't mean 600 or 800 or 1000 should be implemented.

The 400 IP has more than eliminated the 2 closers and single A players strategy.

Keep the minimum at 400 IP for the Main Event and Auction Leagues. I really don't care about the Mathias leagues which is really not a standard roto league so whatever rules you decide on should not be held as part of the season long Main Event and Auction leagues. You are not alone in this thought or response to me as I've heard from other owners who do not want the minimum IP total increased. As I've told the others, I'll look at the final numbers at season's end and decide. However, if we increase to 600 IP that is just an average of 66.6 IP per pitcher, which doesn't eliminate the all-RP strategy. What it does eliminate is the all-RP strategy with "dead" players in your lineup. Right now Eric Gagne can be a valuable starter even on the DL as he protects your team's ERA and WHIP and that doesn't make sense.

Making sure that nine active pitchers are part of the game makes more sense, whether they are starters or relievers. But again, I'll look at the final numbers at season's end and I'll bet that 98 percent of the teams will be at 600 IP by then. If that's the case, then we'll evaluate if 400 IP is right, 500 IP is right, 600 IP is right or 800 IP is right.

viper · Post by **viper** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 11:00 am

Gagne definitely protects ERA & Whip but I seriously doubt that he will help in Ks, Wins or Saves.

The perfect RP strategy will yield exactly 47 category points. To get that 15 in saves you probably need 4 closers. It generally take 110 or more to win a league so can you get 63 points in hitting? Realize that in order to get 4 initial closers you will have to use 4 or your first 15 picks on closers. Better is to get 3 quality closers (using more high draft pikcs unfortunately) and grab another during the season.

The strategy is more workable in auction leagues where you have some control over players you get and in "mathis" style leagues where over 50% of the statistics are already in place but really not for the main event. The strategy should keep your team competitive in the league but makes first place unlikely. If your goal is a league 3rd, then it can be a success. Sort of like playing the slots for 3-4 hours. You probably won't lose all your money but you will have less when the session is over.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 3:18 pm

63 points in hitting isn't hard at all with this strategy - remember you have only taken 3 (or maybe 4) pitchers with your first 24 picks. You haven't had to take 3-5 SPs that everyone else had done. If the innings total isn't changed, I will play this strat because I think it can easily get atleast a 1st or 2nd place finish in the league. I will take 3 closers and a bunch of setup guys.

I agree, however, that you would not be able to win the $100k with this strat, but $5k isn't bad. I also agree that it is even stronger in the auction type leagues and incredibly powerful in the Mathis style league

Spy

[ July 30, 2006, 09:19 PM: Message edited by: Spyhunter ]

mdz129 · Post by **mdz129** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 3:35 pm

Most opening day closers are gone by round 10 -- so you'll need to take 3 closers out of the first 10 picks not 24. Most teams are built with 1 or 2 closers in first 10 round and 1 maybe 2 starters. Hence your only advantage in rounds 1-10 is one spot of hitting( probably rounds 6-10).

Now in rounds 11-24 you pick up 5 hitters vs starters and remember the quality set-up guys do go in rounds 11-20(Rodney, shields, linebrink, ) so you are guaranteed good MR's to complement your 3 closers. Your bats in rounds 11-24 could be great finds(uggla, ramirez, rios, swisher or delucci, castlla, rondell white, mench, etc)

So First unlikely, 2nd maybe, 3rd, 4th or 5th probably.

Try it-- the other teams will see your strategy and delay taking starters until later rounds.

Just an opinion from experience.

triple a · Post by **triple a** » Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:04 am

in my own personal league we solved these punting away the category problems by making it 1,000 innings pitched to eliminate the using all closers strategy, and we use w-l instead of wins to eliminate the all starter strategy.