Pitching Changes

[Philippe27]

It's my first year playing Fantasy Baseball, I signed up for a couple of Main Event teams. I have a ton of experience playing other fantasy sports so I thought I'd throw in the opinion from a baseball newbie.

1. I don't understand the complaints about starting pitching. Yes pitching is changing and it can be frustrating when your starter is taken out after just 5 inning but I don't see why that would be a reason to adjust the position requirements. All this does is give more value to the top starters and the top middle relievers. It makes the decision interesting between say R.A DIckey and Joe Smith:
6 W, 58 K,4.63 ERA and 1.39 WHIP
vs
3 W, 47 K, 3.41 ERA and 1.14 WHIP
Based on the team and the matchup, a case can be made for either one and I think that's what makes it interesting. Much more so than if we drop it to 7 or 8 pitchers and we all have good starters.

2. I prefer 2 catchers rather than just 1. I think the most interesting leagues are the ones where all positions can be valuable and where a case can be made to draft any position in the first few rounds of the draft. In 1 catcher leagues, there'd be no point to draft Buster Posey in the 3rd or 4th round and it would become an even more popular position to punt. The replacement value would be a catcher in the 16 to 20 range because very few people would keep 2 catchers and guys like Evan Gattis and Mike Zunino would be available in a lot of leagues.

3. I love how the NFBC has no DL spots. Adding 1 or 2 DL spots or bench spots would really dilute the FAAB and would make it boring. I know this year I had to make tough decisions like dropping Shin-Soo Choo and Tim Anderson, both of whom I would have kept had I had an extra spot or two. Best example is Marcus Semien whom I drafted, dropped it as soon as he was hurt and I was lucky enough to find Zack Cozart and picked him up. It would have been nice to keep Semien on the DL while he was hurt but I'm sure Cozart wouldn't have been available had that owner been able to put someone else on the DL. I would have had Semien on the DL but his replacement would have been Iglesias, Mercer or whoever, doesn't help much.

4. The other topic brought up was about player eligibility. I'm fine with it as is but the one change that could be made is that after all the drafts, all players drafted in all Main Event leagues are available in all leagues. This means if Bellinger wasn't drafted in your league, he's eligible to be picked up. This way the list of players would be the same in all Main Event leagues. If someone wants to pick up a player a few weeks before he's called up, sure he might get lucky but he'd have to drop a player that might be interesting to someone else and he might end up wasting the spot for 5-6 weeks or more if he doesn't get called up. I think it would add some strategy and could make it even more interesting.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Great post!

There are no 'complaints' about pitching.
I wanted to start a thread about how baseball is changing and how it may effect our game.
The Dickey-Smith example is a good example of how a middle inning guy can be used.
Is it happening?
No, not much.
Our game is driven by innings. Starters get more innings and the collateral effect is more strike outs and Wins.
I just checked every team in my league to see how many middle inning guys are starting this week.
There are none (except for the usual Miller, Betances, and Devenski.
There are 'CIW' (Closers in Waiting) such as Street, Bedrosian, Bradley, etc, but there have always been CIW hoping to vulture Saves on rosters.
I'm sure there are are some owners using middle relievers on teams, but the Starters rule.

Sure, we CAN use a middle reliever for a seventh starting pitcher on our roster.
In theory , yes we can. In practice, eh, not much.
Unless extraordinary like Miller, Betances, or Devinski, most will go for the innings or Saves.
Like at bats on offense, maximum innings is best for pitching.
That is the reason this thread was brought up.
Not to change rules, but to make folks aware that maybe down the road, a change may be needed.

Again, great post.
And we do have a great game..

[Philippe27]

With 3 starters hurt and guys like Chacin and Perdomo as the best Free Agents, I'm starting Brad Hand, Will Harris, Tommy Kahnle, Blake Parker, Trevor Rosenthal, Aroldis Chapman and Craig Kimbrel this week.

It's obviously not like this every week but like you said it can be done and I think there's some value to it.

Phil

[DOUGHBOYS]

With 3 starters hurt and guys like Chacin and Perdomo as the best Free Agents, I'm starting Brad Hand, Will Harris, Tommy Kahnle, Blake Parker, Trevor Rosenthal, Aroldis Chapman and Craig Kimbrel this week.

It's obviously not like this every week but like you said it can be done and I think there's some value to it.

Phil

Before we had innings limits set higher, there was a fellow who made a living with a pitching lineup like that!
Hi Jim, wherever you are

Chacin and Perdomo being the best Starters on FAAB re-enforces the strategy most use in this game.
It is a Starters game.
Your pitching lineup can be used for short burst of time and it could be a good thing for peripherals.
Over the long haul though, it would be very tough, Phil.

[KJ Duke]

Cobb 8 IP, 0 ER
Colome 1 IP, 2 ER (BS, Win)

This is just wrong. Not a fantasy fix but a long, long, long overdue MLB fix.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Cobb 8 IP, 0 ER
Colome 1 IP, 2 ER (BS, Win)

This is just wrong. Not a fantasy fix but a long, long, long overdue MLB fix.

No fix needed at all.
Colome is the pitcher of record and gets the Win.
Starter gives up five runs or six runs in five innings, relievers throw four scoreless.
Starter gets Win. Nothing is said.
Relievers should not be held to a higher standard.

[KJ Duke]

Cobb 8 IP, 0 ER
Colome 1 IP, 2 ER (BS, Win)

This is just wrong. Not a fantasy fix but a long, long, long overdue MLB fix.

No fix needed at all.
Colome is the pitcher of record and gets the Win.
Starter gives up five runs or six runs in five innings, relievers throw four scoreless.
Starter gets Win. Nothing is said.
Relievers should not be held to a higher standard.

Now this is the silliest response I've ever seen in a dough post. There's a reason most pen guys are in the pen - either they don't have the durability or stuff to go thru the lineup 3-4 times. I don't need to tell you that, you know more about baseball than anyone here. And yes, the "W" could use a complete overhaul, and the rarely-used most effective pitcher standard should be used more often with starters losing the W at times to far more effective multi-inning RPs, but in no universe of fairly crediting pitcher wins should a 1-IP RP who blows an 8-inning shutout for the starter be credited with a W. You just want to play antagonist now?

[DOUGHBOYS]

Cobb 8 IP, 0 ER
Colome 1 IP, 2 ER (BS, Win)

This is just wrong. Not a fantasy fix but a long, long, long overdue MLB fix.

No fix needed at all.
Colome is the pitcher of record and gets the Win.
Starter gives up five runs or six runs in five innings, relievers throw four scoreless.
Starter gets Win. Nothing is said.
Relievers should not be held to a higher standard.

Now this is the silliest response I've ever seen in a dough post. There's a reason most pen guys are in the pen - either they don't have the durability or stuff to go thru the lineup 3-4 times. I don't need to tell you that, you know more about baseball than anyone here. And yes, the "W" could use a complete overhaul, and the rarely-used most effective pitcher standard should be used more often with starters losing the W at times to far more effective multi-inning RPs, but in no universe of fairly crediting pitcher wins should a 1-IP RP who blows an 8-inning shutout for the starter be credited with a W. You just want to play antagonist now?

Wait. If I disagree with you once, I am the antagonist? C'mon KJ.
Scorekeeping rules are built to take as much arbitrary decisions away from the scorekeeper for after game results as possible.
Hence, almost all Wins, BS, Holds, and Saves are steadfast.
The pitcher of record receives each stat.
In this day and time, that is more important than ever.
Most scorekeepers play fantasy baseball. If they could win money by 'throwing' a Win to a pitcher, there is a good chance that would happen.
The pitcher of record is the only way to go in baseball.
It doesn't matter whether the performance by Cobb leading up to the blown Save was masterful or not, Colome is the pitcher of record.

That is all said as a scorekeeper, myself.
My own opinion, Wins is a stupid statistic.

[KJ Duke]

Wait. If I disagree with you once, I am the antagonist? C'mon KJ.
Scorekeeping rules are built to take as much arbitrary decisions away from the scorekeeper for after game results as possible.
Hence, almost all Wins, BS, Holds, and Saves are steadfast.
The pitcher of record receives each stat.
In this day and time, that is more important than ever.
Most scorekeepers play fantasy baseball. If they could win money by 'throwing' a Win to a pitcher, there is a good chance that would happen.
The pitcher of record is the only way to go in baseball.
It doesn't matter whether the performance by Cobb leading up to the blown Save was masterful or not, Colome is the pitcher of record.

That is all said as a scorekeeper, myself.
My own opinion, Wins is a stupid statistic.

We disagree all the time, have I ever suggested that before? no.

But now we do agree again; I also thinks it's a stupid stat as currently defined.

And I also agree with removing arbitrary scorekeeping to the greatest extent possible. But there are definitive changes that could be added to the definition of a W. For example, no reliever that allows more runs in fewer innings can be credited with a Win over a starter. As stat-heavy as MLB is now, this is an archaic stat that can easily be overhauled. Making a "W" more in sync with what the guys on the field think --- you think Colome thinks he "deserved" that win, or his manager, or anyone at all on the team? --- would make it a better stat for both baseball and fantasy.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Kevin, if it were up to me, the statistic would be removed completely.
The Father of baseball statistics was Henry Chadwick.
Chadwick created the box score and many of the statistics that have lasted for more than 100 years.
Even Chadwick did not think the 'Win/Loss' would last.
He thought it 'sporting' to assign a hurler some form of acclaim.
The sporting papers at the time, were dubious about Wins and losses for pitchers.
Here is part of a story from the Sporting News.....

"It seems to place the whole game upon the shoulders of the pitcher and I don’t believe it will ever become popular even with so learned a gentleman as Mr. Chadwick to father it. Certain it is that many an execrable pitcher game is won by heavy hitting at the right moment after the pitcher has done his best to lose it.

This perfectly explains the Cobb/Colome situation.

That article was written in 1888
That writer could have written the same thing today.

[KJ Duke]

But like many other things in baseball, it's part of the fabric of the game after 129 years ... far more tenable to improve it than scrap it.

[DOUGHBOYS]

And we do agree on one other thing.
The picture of the dog by your name is AWESOME

[Philippe27]

Most agree that Wins are a pretty useless stat. I think the one change that could be made is a player who gets a BS cannot get the W. The W would go to the pitcher of record before the BS. Simple change that would take away some of the silliness of the stat.

I know it won't happen because it's the MLB but just thought I'd say it anyways.

[DOUGHBOYS]

MLB would have a hard time being budged on ANY statistic change.
Scorekeepers and other groups, including well known broadcasters, have approached them multiple times about the 'team error' concept.
A concept that would more accurately place blame for actions on the field in the correct categories.
Nothing.

Changing Wins?
That will only come about on a 'need-to' basis.
And it won't be the change you are looking for.
It will be effected when pitch counts are driven even further down by the stupid people who think they are 'saving arms'.
And even five innings become insurmountable.

By the way Ron Darling, a big thumbs up for giving a big thumbs down to today's baseball trainers.
These players do not need to be ripped or have 6-packs. They need to be in baseball shape, which is not tight muscles everywhere.
Sorry, off track.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Most agree that Wins are a pretty useless stat. I think the one change that could be made is a player who gets a BS cannot get the W. The W would go to the pitcher of record before the BS. Simple change that would take away some of the silliness of the stat.

I know it won't happen because it's the MLB but just thought I'd say it anyways.

Agreed on both counts.
Would love the stat change and it'll never happen.

[KJ Duke]

And we do agree on one other thing.
The picture of the dog by your name is AWESOME

That's the new guy, three months old and 30 lbs.

My longtime logo was Great Pyrenees/Wolf. This guy is full Pyr. The only downside to Pyr, maximum stubbornness!

[DOUGHBOYS]

And we do agree on one other thing.
The picture of the dog by your name is AWESOME

That's the new guy, three months old and 30 lbs.

My longtime logo was Great Pyrenees/Wolf. This guy is full Pyr. The only downside to Pyr, maximum stubbornness!

Like his Master!

Great looking pup.

[KJ Duke]

I guess you get what you deserve.

[Yah Mule]

And we do agree on one other thing.
The picture of the dog by your name is AWESOME

That's the new guy, three months old and 30 lbs.

My longtime logo was Great Pyrenees/Wolf. This guy is full Pyr. The only downside to Pyr, maximum stubbornness!

Beautiful pup. I was just about to ask about him.

My full blood Pyr, Bronco was a very stubborn guy. Came out with alpha male stamped on his butt. 180 pounds at the height of his power, but I took him down in the low 160's as he got older. I adopted a Pyr/Golden mix named Bruno and a Pyr/Lab mix named Breezy about seven years ago. The dilution of those more pliable breeds makes for a pretty manageable dog. Great Pyrenees are so beautiful, they make a nice template for a mix with any other good sized breed of dog. We also have a pair of miniature Dachshunds, another notoriously stubborn breed, so it's a constant ruckus around here. The woman we bought the Doxies from also breeds Great Pyrenees/Bernese Mountain Dog mixes.

[KJ Duke]

I recall you had dogs Jim but didn't know you've had Pyrs! I really missed having one around for the past two years, I love all sorts of dogs but they are a unique breed. Jack being mixed with wolf actually did balance him out too as his pack orientation countered the Pyr independence. He hit a high of 175 with taller wolf legs but a narrower body than the biggest Pyrs like Bronco. Remington Duke, on the other hand, has no such personality balance and just wants to do what he wants to do. He won't get as big, more standard Pyr size - probably 120-130 range based on parents. Being able to start with him from the pup stage, at least we can deal with the learning process early. Plus my GDS/Husky does put him in his place when he crosses the line, and he respects that.

[Yah Mule]

I was told that their history guarding flocks is the reason for their independence. These dogs were expected to make decisions by themselves. Pyrs had to be courageous enough to scare off predators, but disciplined enough not to abandon their flock in pursuit of an intruder.

My wife and I visit the Wolf and Wildlife Center about once a year. It's a wolf sanctuary in Divide, Co and they do really great work there. I hope to get back there this fall.