...but what grinds YOUR gears?

[Sebadiah23]

Yes that's a nice idea Ryan.



In my own vernacular, having the premeditated intention to take all relievers in a draft or auction is "tanking" two categories, whereas the act of being forced to change strategy, especially in an auction, or anytime during the season if injuries occur, is called "punting", because you attempted to get a first down the respected way, metaphorically speaking, but you were unable to get it and "punted".

[glenlake22]

"BB rate is fairly stable, I have yet to see a good argument for switching. (The fact that OBP may be a better indicator of player skill isn't a good argument)."



What is your argument for BA over OBP? On the contrary, OBP IS a better indicator of player skill and that IS a good argument for switching.



OBP top 20. (N)=not in top 20 BA

mauer

pujols

n johnson (N)

helton

votto

youk (N)

fielder

han ram

a gonz

jeter

zobrist (N)

a rod (N)

berkman (N)

dunn (N)

utley (N)

miggy

figgins (N)

choo (N)

holliday

D lee (N)



Players in top 20 BA but not OBP:

sandoval

coghlan

m young

cano

bartlett

tejada

aybar

span

ordonez

felipe lopez????



I'll take the OBP list. The whole point of baseball (offensively) is to score runs. Step #1 in creating a run is to get on base and not record an out. The best players record the least amount of outs per PA. It follows that OBP, while not being perfect, is a better indicator of skill than BA. My main point: taking a walk should be rewarded in fantasy baseball, not just indirectly with an opportunity to steal or score a run, but as a sign of skill or respect (IBB) because that is precisely what it is.



The NFBC is behind the times on this one. I understand that the NFBC didn't spring up yesterday and that making changes in an organization of this magnitude is not easy to do. I had a blast last year and I look forward to participating again with BA as a category, but still view OBP as a much better stat than BA and think that one day the change will be made.



Joe

[bjoak]

Originally posted by glenlake22:

"BB rate is fairly stable, I have yet to see a good argument for switching. (The fact that OBP may be a better indicator of player skill isn't a good argument)."



What is your argument for BA over OBP? On the contrary, OBP IS a better indicator of player skill and that IS a good argument for switching.



OBP top 20. (N)=not in top 20 BA

mauer

pujols

n johnson (N)

helton

votto

youk (N)

fielder

han ram

a gonz

jeter

zobrist (N)

a rod (N)

berkman (N)

dunn (N)

utley (N)

miggy

figgins (N)

choo (N)

holliday

D lee (N)



Players in top 20 BA but not OBP:

sandoval

coghlan

m young

cano

bartlett

tejada

aybar

span

ordonez

felipe lopez????



I'll take the OBP list. The whole point of baseball (offensively) is to score runs. Step #1 in creating a run is to get on base and not record an out. The best players record the least amount of outs per PA. It follows that OBP, while not being perfect, is a better indicator of skill than BA. My main point: taking a walk should be rewarded in fantasy baseball, not just indirectly with an opportunity to steal or score a run, but as a sign of skill or respect (IBB) because that is precisely what it is.



The NFBC is behind the times on this one. I understand that the NFBC didn't spring up yesterday and that making changes in an organization of this magnitude is not easy to do. I had a blast last year and I look forward to participating again with BA as a category, but still view OBP as a much better stat than BA and think that one day the change will be made.



Joe I'm with Kev. What part of this game mimicks real baseball? It's not like we just stick in OBP and it suddenly is exactly like strategizing a real game. There are far better stats than OBP too. Are we going to make WARP 3 a category? The two games are not remotely compatible. This is it's own game and I enjoy it the way it is currently played.

[glenlake22]

On the slippery slope argument:



1) It's universally accepted (I think) among baseball fans that walks are a very important statistic in determining pitching/hitting skills/success and determining the outcome of individual games.



2) The measuring statistic OBP has gained widespread popularity and acceptance among baseball fans in recent years. It's very easy to understand. To be an excellent mathematician or interested in sabermetrics is unnecessary when attempting to grasp OBP.



In sum: the "average" fantasy player can (probably already does) understand and use OBP. The reason for doing so is to incorporate one of the most important aspects of batting into the offensive fantasy categories. Same reason we use WHIP instead of HIP. Why do we penalize pitchers for walking batters? OBP makes sense.



OBP in 2010!



Joe

[bjoak]

You're argument on the coice of stat is sound, but hey, why stop there? Why even count walks as a + or -? To me, when one of *your* guys walks another should advance. If another hits a triple, *your two guys* should score, not whoever was on base in the game. Are you starting to see how real baseball is a completely different game? In real baseball walks are not a category. Nor is OBP. They are tools that help a team win. As long as your team is not working together, the stats are sort of arbitrary. It's just about anticipating performance. I enjoy anticipating a batting average. Why is it better to anticipate an OBP?



Well, anyway, the logical way to go about it is to start an OBP 2011 campaign. There is no way they go back and change the rules on games people already signed up for.



[ January 27, 2010, 04:00 PM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

[KJ Duke]

Originally posted by glenlake22:



What is your argument for BA over OBP? On the contrary, OBP IS a better indicator of player skill and that IS a good argument for switching.

I'll reiterate, walk rate for players tends to be fairly stable, so if a guy is a 280 hitter with a 10% BB rate his OBP is 350. (38/110). If I am projecting out players then, for the most part, I am projecting BA and then tacking on his BB rate. So the point of using OBP over BA amounts to ?????? adding a column to my spreadsheet.



BA is the single most quoted statistic, and the most fundamental part of the game - if you can't hit you can't play the game. Is it the absolute best analytical stat? no. Is OBP? no chance. How about R, RBI, SB? no. Instead of SBs why not use net SBs? Instead of R or RBI why not use a runs-created forumula? Instead of OBP why not use OPS?



Bottom-line, BA is a traditional measure in both baseball and FB that indicates a particular skill. It is not meant to be the "best" all-encompassing statistic. And as far as FB is concerned, what is the point in switching away from a tradition when it adds NOTHING to the game. It doesn't make the NFBC more fair, or more relevant, or change the luck/skill component. It's just unneccesary.



You know the ivy on the OF walls at wrigley field? I propose we rip it down and put up some "better" high tech padding ... at the very same time the NFBC decides to switch to OBP. Screw tradition, it has no part in baseball!



[ January 27, 2010, 05:14 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]

[glenlake22]

I understand the difference between real baseball and FB. My leagues have gone through numerous changes over the years, including the switch from BA to OBP. I can imagine the difficulty of making a change in an organization as large as the NFBC. The OBP 2010 thing was a joke and if any changes are to be made I'm sure they are far, far away. Honestly, not a big deal to me.



KJ Duke claimed to have never been convinced why the switch from BA to OBP was sensible. I tried to explain.



I explained why there is a difference in the current state of fantasy baseball between OBP and RC, woba, sabermetrics, net SB, etc. The sky will fall if... doesn't change the validity of the argument.



I don't think you can deny that it makes complete sense to use OBP over BA, if given the choice. Some people just don't like change, or do like tradition, and I accept that.



As far as the walk rate being "fairly stable" for mlb hitters... that is not true. So you might have to do a little more than add a column to the spreadsheet.

[bjoak]

BA is the single most quoted statistic, and the most fundamental part of the game - if you can't hit you can't play the game. Is it the absolute best analytical stat? no. Is OBP? no chance. How about R, RBI, SB? no. Instead of SBs why not use net SBs? Instead of R or RBI why not use a runs-created forumula? Instead of OBP why not use OPS?This makes perfect sense to me.



I don't think you can deny that it makes complete sense to use OBP over BA, if given the choice. Some people just don't like change, or do like tradition, and I accept that.Does it make more sense to use OBP in that it is a more complete stat? Sure. But what I would love to hear Glen answer is why it makes more sense than these other changes. Is it somehow less valuable to subtract CS's from SB's? Only if you say that SB's are not important to begin with in which case you have something way more important than BA to change. While we are at it, why don't I get credit for doubles and triples? Aren't they more important than walks, stolen bases, or team stats like runs and RBIs?



What I am asking is, why does *this* change need to be made as opposed to the other 5 million things you can do to change a roto league to more fully encompass the real value of the players?



[ January 27, 2010, 06:28 PM: Message edited by: bjoak ]

[KJ Duke]

Originally posted by bjoak:

What I am asking is, why does *this* change need to be made as opposed to the other 5 million things you can do to change a roto league to more fully encompass the real value of the players? Precisely Brian.



Glenn - I have pushed for/supported many of the changes in the NFBC and NFFC since they began. So it's not that I am change averse. I've also created some concepts which have been run privately or as NFFC satellites. All of the above had one objective in common, to make the game better in some way.



How does going from BA to OBP make the game better? To me it's like changing the font size on the home page. My personal preference might be for a larger or smaller font, but it does not change the game. Likewise for OBP. It seems to me you have argued why OBP is a better stat, not how it changes/improves the game.



[ January 27, 2010, 06:44 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]

[Sebadiah23]

As far as the OBP thing, I can honestly say that I've struggled with this for over twenty years, since first reading Bill James' yearly Abstracts in the 80's that tried to measure a player's true value to a team. I also played in simulation games such as ABPA (like Stratomatic), where the player performed, on average over millions of trials, exactly as we would in real live, so every real life stat is rewarded including walks.



I've come to terms with regular 5X5 roto for several reasons though. Number #1, a walk is rewarded in several indirect ways such as leading to more runs, its better than an out, possibly more stolen bases, and its an intangible that gets the player more playing time ultimately. Number #2, the delicate balance of stats forces the player to get a more eclectic mix of baseball player types. Number #3, like the boom of Texas Hold 'Em in the early 2000's, the simplicity of the game and how everyone played the same variety was important for it universal adoption.



That is why I'm all for keeping it the same and not muddying the waters.



-Craig

[CC's Desperados]

Originally posted by glenlake22:

As far as the walk rate being "fairly stable" for mlb hitters... that is not true. So you might have to do a little more than add a column to the spreadsheet. So you are telling me Delmon Young will suddenly start taking walks or Joe Mauer will start swinging away at the plate?



Every player has a certain skill set. The WALK RATE of each individual player is realitively stable. Sure some players will improve over time or maybe they even regress, but the OBP will parrallel a batter's avg plus their walk rate.

[Jim Young]

Originally posted by glenlake22:

I understand the difference between real baseball and FB. My leagues have gone through numerous changes over the years, including the switch from BA to OBP. I can imagine the difficulty of making a change in an organization as large as the NFBC. The OBP 2010 thing was a joke and if any changes are to be made I'm sure they are far, far away. Honestly, not a big deal to me.



KJ Duke claimed to have never been convinced why the switch from BA to OBP was sensible. I tried to explain.



I explained why there is a difference in the current state of fantasy baseball between OBP and RC, woba, sabermetrics, net SB, etc. The sky will fall if... doesn't change the validity of the argument.



I don't think you can deny that it makes complete sense to use OBP over BA, if given the choice. Some people just don't like change, or do like tradition, and I accept that.



As far as the walk rate being "fairly stable" for mlb hitters... that is not true. So you might have to do a little more than add a column to the spreadsheet. Does anyone else think that Glen is secretly Paul DePodesta or Billy Beane? And just playing fantasy baseball under the name Glen because if anybody found out that a real GM or former GM played FB they would never work in real baseball again?

[rkulaski]

Originally posted by Ryan Carey:

I'll reword the "gimmick" case this way- and I'm borrowing this somewhat from Childs - it would be great to have a choice of a format where players couldn't avoid tackling the toughest task in fantasy - assembling a Rotation of SP's.



I have often been on the side arguing against the All RP strategy in SATs. But I will be the first to acknowledge that this is not a strategy for the unskilled or weak hearted owner. And I don't agree with calling those players low class or under handed. They play by the rules like anyone else.



We've debated this many times

And likely will continue to do so - but the fact remains that as long as the rules make these strategies viable - you will always find a couple owners who will give it a go.



I veered to a strategy of not paying for saves (or punting) in my last draft. I didn't draft the Top guys in the early going and I didn't grab the questionable guys mid draft. I walked away with Dotel and 4 set-up guys. But I still have a staff of SP's. Who knows - by Opening Day I may have more actual closers than my league mates (I can dream - right?)



I understand the decision by the powers that be to allow owners to draft and manage a team as they desire. However -Maybe it's finally time for a 1200 IP minimum SAT league on the list. If it fills up - then we'll know there is a demand for this type of league. Choice is never a bad thing IMO. ryan,



I 100% agree with you and the guys who punt a category or two AND still win deserve all the credit. But I would be one of the first to sign up for a satellite with the 1200 min ip requirement.



Greg,

if you're reading this, any chance to setup a couple of these this year?

[Don M]

There should be one set of rules, FOR ALL

Everyone must follow the rules.



This is exactly what we now have and what makes the NFBC the best.



How you choose to play your team is YOUR CHOICE

[Ryan C]

Originally posted by Don M:

There should be one set of rules, FOR ALL

Everyone must follow the rules.



This is exactly what we now have and what makes the NFBC the best.



How you choose to play your team is YOUR CHOICE Hey Don - I'll agree with you that there should be one set of rules when it comes to all of the Major Events that fall under the NFBC umbrella.



What myself and Rich are calling for would fall under the Satellite umbrella - thus really having no effect on how the NFBC runs their Overall contests. There is already ample precedent for tweaking the rules or format in pre-season leagues - KJ Duke's salary format from last year is the one that jumps into my mind here. He came up with something interesting enough to get 15 guys to do it last year and Greg set it up.



That's all that I'm asking for - and I honestly believe that such a league would fill up fast. I've already finished one slow draft against an All-RP team - I might just buy one more SAT team and I really don't want to play in another All-RP draft if I can help it.



It's just my opinion - but I'm fairly certain that if a 1200 IP limit Slow Draft landed on the boards today - it would fill up before the other two $125 drafts that are waiting to be filled. You'd probably see about 4-5 of the 9 owners signed up switch over.



The key here is if Greg/Tom want to test these waters. If they do - then pre-season SAT leagues, which many owners use as draft prep for the Main, is the place to do it. Hell, just comparing the ADP's from the two would be worth the trouble of setting these up IMO.



[ January 28, 2010, 11:20 AM: Message edited by: Ryan Carey ]

[bjoak]

Originally posted by Jim Young:

quote:Originally posted by glenlake22:

I understand the difference between real baseball and FB. My leagues have gone through numerous changes over the years, including the switch from BA to OBP. I can imagine the difficulty of making a change in an organization as large as the NFBC. The OBP 2010 thing was a joke and if any changes are to be made I'm sure they are far, far away. Honestly, not a big deal to me.



KJ Duke claimed to have never been convinced why the switch from BA to OBP was sensible. I tried to explain.



I explained why there is a difference in the current state of fantasy baseball between OBP and RC, woba, sabermetrics, net SB, etc. The sky will fall if... doesn't change the validity of the argument.



I don't think you can deny that it makes complete sense to use OBP over BA, if given the choice. Some people just don't like change, or do like tradition, and I accept that.



As far as the walk rate being "fairly stable" for mlb hitters... that is not true. So you might have to do a little more than add a column to the spreadsheet. Does anyone else think that Glen is secretly Paul DePodesta or Billy Beane? And just playing fantasy baseball under the name Glen because if anybody found out that a real GM or former GM played FB they would never work in real baseball again?



[/QUOTE]No.

[Sebadiah23]

I obviously agree with Ryan. I would sign-up in two seconds.

[Ryan C]

Well- that's three - anyone else have any interest in playing in a 1200 IP minimum SAT???

[Hoosier]

me

[Ryan C]

Originally posted by Ryan Carey:

Well- that's three - anyone else have any interest in playing in a 1200 IP minimum SAT??? It has been pointed out to me by a respected member of the community that my previous post seems like I am "signing" people up for a league/format that doesn't exist. That was not my intention and I respect Greg and Tom enough to not knowingly overstep-so I apologise if it seemed that way.





It was mentioned last year that this was something we could discuss trying to do this year



I posted my thoughts and after Rich and seb seconded them - I guess I got a little carried away. I do however think that the group of people who desire this is greater than expected - they just haven't been asked to say so.

[sportsbettingman]

On the subject of "gimmick" drafting...



Wouldn't the easiest categories to draft be...



Easy to predict aside from injury...



HR

SB

K

SV



Next easiest...



RUNS

RBI

W



Then the ratios...



ERA

WHIP

AVG



Why would you chose to "dump" a category that is easy to draft and easy to find on WW, rather than one that is more of a coin flip anyway like a ratio?

[rkulaski]

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

On the subject of "gimmick" drafting...



Wouldn't the easiest categories to draft be...



Easy to predict aside from injury...



HR

SB

K

SV



Next easiest...



RUNS

RBI

W



Then the ratios...



ERA

WHIP

AVG



Why would you chose to "dump" a category that is easy to draft and easy to find on WW, rather than one that is more of a coin flip anyway like a ratio? In a nutsell, the categories that are easier to predict as you listed above, are therefore the easiest to punt.

[rkulaski]

Originally posted by Ryan Carey:

quote:Originally posted by Don M:

There should be one set of rules, FOR ALL

Everyone must follow the rules.



This is exactly what we now have and what makes the NFBC the best.



How you choose to play your team is YOUR CHOICE Hey Don - I'll agree with you that there should be one set of rules when it comes to all of the Major Events that fall under the NFBC umbrella.



What myself and Rich are calling for would fall under the Satellite umbrella - thus really having no effect on how the NFBC runs their Overall contests. There is already ample precedent for tweaking the rules or format in pre-season leagues - KJ Duke's salary format from last year is the one that jumps into my mind here. He came up with something interesting enough to get 15 guys to do it last year and Greg set it up.



That's all that I'm asking for - and I honestly believe that such a league would fill up fast. I've already finished one slow draft against an All-RP team - I might just buy one more SAT team and I really don't want to play in another All-RP draft if I can help it.



It's just my opinion - but I'm fairly certain that if a 1200 IP limit Slow Draft landed on the boards today - it would fill up before the other two $125 drafts that are waiting to be filled. You'd probably see about 4-5 of the 9 owners signed up switch over.



The key here is if Greg/Tom want to test these waters. If they do - then pre-season SAT leagues, which many owners use as draft prep for the Main, is the place to do it. Hell, just comparing the ADP's from the two would be worth the trouble of setting these up IMO. [/QUOTE]Yes, I think many owners do use the slow drafts to prepare for the main, and since nobody (or very few) punts categories in the main, these slow drafts/satellites of min 1200 innings would be even better for those owners.

[Ryan C]

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

On the subject of "gimmick" drafting...



Wouldn't the easiest categories to draft be...



Easy to predict aside from injury...



HR

SB

K

SV



Next easiest...



RUNS

RBI

W



Then the ratios...



ERA

WHIP

AVG



Why would you chose to "dump" a category that is easy to draft and easy to find on WW, rather than one that is more of a coin flip anyway like a ratio? Lance - are you being serious or sarcastic here or are you just trying to steer the crowd away from the All RP debate?



I've never heard anyone talk about "dumping" a ratio - simply because you can't as easily as you can a counting stat. Also - there is no statistical upside that I can see to be gained by knowingly dumping any of these three measures of excellence.



That's why the All RP strategy is the most popular gimmick and focuses on the two Ratio Stats and Saves.



I can see over drafting power at the expense of AVG - but I don't think anyone knowingly tries to have a shitty BA to gain an advantage.



The only thing I've ever seen discussed in regards to ERA and WHIP is how you can eliminate the risk involved in these categories by avoiding SP's (W's and K's).



Do you REALLY need it explained why Saves and Steals are the best two categories (assuming you only want to "punt" one category) to choose from if you are considering punting something??



[ January 28, 2010, 09:06 PM: Message edited by: Ryan Carey ]

[sportsbettingman]

Originally posted by rkulaski:

In a nutsell, the categories that are easier to predict as you listed above, are therefore the easiest to punt. [/quote]


On the one hand...if you are "punting" then chasing, that's one thing...but how about being 100% committed to punting...no chasing.



I've tried to draft a solid average and failed year after year. I wondered how fun it would be to just punt average. Load up on pitching, power and steals plus all the guys who hit in the heart of lineups but are deadly to your average. Those guys can be had so much later in drafts.