What are the pros and cons of allowing pitcher moves on Friday?

[Gekko]

Originally posted by Navel Lint:

I’m not trying to make this harder than it should be , but even IP/H/BB=0 has happened 9 times this season.



During 5 of the 9 occasions a pitcher hit the only batter he faced.



1 time the pitcher faced 2 batters and they both reached on an error



2 times the pitcher faced 1 batter that reached on an error



1 time the pitcher actually struck out the hitter, but the batter reached first base on a passed ball by the catcher. The pitcher got credit for the K, but didn’t not record an out so no IP. where are you finding this stuff!!!!

[ToddZ]

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

While I understand the sentiment of the proposal, I lean towards an idea that helps all involved, not just some and this only helps some. Todd,

This helps ANY owner who would like to switch out a pitcher who hasn't appeared in a Mon-Thu game. If this rule applies to all owners, why wouldn't it be fair to all owners (as your statement implies)? [/QUOTE]It's not going to be a deal breaker for me, just a preference. But then, I still prefer to set lineups on Monday and that's it, but I digress.



And upon further review, my example(s) would not occur every time someone took out one of their pitchers.



So I'll just retract my statement and go back to watching Roy Halladay, because some of us like to watch baseball games

[bjoak]

Originally posted by luck and skill:

Maybe the formula would have to be:



If pitch count in Week xx = 0, then unlock that pitcher (this assumes that all bench pitchers would be unlocked whether they have IP or not for that week). Just to continue the devil's advocate theme, a guy comes in, gets a pick-off, and throws no pitches.



I'm not sure we need to feed a simple formula to fanball. If Greg says they can easily track player appearances for the purpose of activating minor leaguers I don't see why they wouldn't be able to track all pitching appearances in the same manner.

[Dub]

Originally posted by Gekko:

Yes, this would enhance the overall NFBC enjoyment. I'm guessing Travis Wood owners would be a lot happier if they didn't have to take a zero through no fault of their own. No fault of their own? All players have risk associated with them. When you own a young pitcher like Wood, the risk of him missing starts is implicit.

[Gekko]

Originally posted by Dub:

quote:Originally posted by Gekko:

Yes, this would enhance the overall NFBC enjoyment. I'm guessing Travis Wood owners would be a lot happier if they didn't have to take a zero through no fault of their own. No fault of their own? All players have risk associated with them. When you own a young pitcher like Wood, the risk of him missing starts is implicit. [/QUOTE]just like when you drive on the highway, if someone hits you, it's partially your fault, right? :rolleyes:

[CC's Desperados]

So you are looking to legalize the Friday DL move?

[Gekko]

Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

So you are looking to legalize the Friday DL move? not sure what you mean. if a pitcher is on the DL, you can switch him out as it is now.

[freddiezee]

I totally agree with Gekko on this one - you should be able to replaced a pitcher on Friday only if he hasn't entered a game so far in the week. That way you only draw stats from 9 pitchers during the week, just as we do now. The small rule change would prevent getting screwed if a pitcher is pushed back, rained out etc. during the week.

If your closer doesn't pitch Mon-Thurs you can take him out but that means you are down a closer for the week so there is a risk/reward to factor in there.

This small rule change would do the same as the Friday hitter rule - it would prevent owners from getting excessively burned from a schedule change, early week injury etc. It would still make owners make a firm decision on two-start pitchers - use both starts or none.

It's a slippery slope before this becomes too close to a daily transaction league. Most of us are too busy for that type of league. Unlimited Friday pitcher switches goes too far IMO. It lets you own 13-14 pitchers and use almost all of them each week. But, the rule change that Gekko mentioned keeps us with 9-man pitching staffs each week.

[Dub]

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Dub:

quote:Originally posted by Gekko:

Yes, this would enhance the overall NFBC enjoyment. I'm guessing Travis Wood owners would be a lot happier if they didn't have to take a zero through no fault of their own. No fault of their own? All players have risk associated with them. When you own a young pitcher like Wood, the risk of him missing starts is implicit. [/QUOTE]just like when you drive on the highway, if someone hits you, it's partially your fault, right? :rolleyes: [/QUOTE]If you buy a Volvo you can expect to survive the accident. If you buy a Yugo, all bets are off.

[CC's Desperados]

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

So you are looking to legalize the Friday DL move? not sure what you mean. if a pitcher is on the DL, you can switch him out as it is now. [/QUOTE]Yes it's legal, but it wasn't meant to be that way.

[Dub]

Originally posted by freddiezee:

I totally agree with Gekko on this one - you should be able to replaced a pitcher on Friday only if he hasn't entered a game so far in the week. That way you only draw stats from 9 pitchers during the week, just as we do now. The small rule change would prevent getting screwed if a pitcher is pushed back, rained out etc. during the week.

If your closer doesn't pitch Mon-Thurs you can take him out but that means you are down a closer for the week so there is a risk/reward to factor in there.

This small rule change would do the same as the Friday hitter rule - it would prevent owners from getting excessively burned from a schedule change, early week injury etc. It would still make owners make a firm decision on two-start pitchers - use both starts or none.

It's a slippery slope before this becomes too close to a daily transaction league. Most of us are too busy for that type of league. Unlimited Friday pitcher switches goes too far IMO. It lets you own 13-14 pitchers and use almost all of them each week. But, the rule change that Gekko mentioned keeps us with 9-man pitching staffs each week. Given choice of streaming or the Gekko plan, I choose Gekko's way. But I would prefer to leave pitching the way it is. It all evens out in the long run. Sometimes the missed starts help and sometimes they don't.

[ToddZ]

If we are into fancy programming, I would support a rule saying if a pitcher begins the week on your active roster with the DL designation, he must remain on your roster all week.



Granted, this opens up the chance you start someone expected to come off the DL during the week and may have a setback, but to me, that trade-off more than makes up for the other reasons one may start a pitcher on the DL at the beginning of the week.

[CC's Desperados]

It's one thing for relief from a rotation change or a player sent to the minors. It's another with open manipulation of DL pitcher or using a pitcher who will pitch on the weekend to keep your options open.

[Bama]

Why dont ewe just let Mark run the whole gdamn contest the way he wants. Be easier for him too cheat the system that way. Not in favor of streaming pitchers. Would be nice and let the working person have a chance in this thing but i dont ever see us going back to once a week moves which is a shame.

[Gekko]

Originally posted by Bama:

Why dont ewe just let Mark run the whole gdamn contest the way he wants. Be easier for him too cheat the system that way. Not in favor of streaming pitchers. Would be nice and let the working person have a chance in this thing but i dont ever see us going back to once a week moves which is a shame. ken - why are you such a bitter person? i feel bad for anyone who has to "put up" with you on a consistent basis (like your family...assuming you have one).



let the "working person" have a chance? are you saying most people in this contest don't have a job. Wow, you really are "out there"

[Spyhunter]

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by ToddZ:

While I understand the sentiment of the proposal, I lean towards an idea that helps all involved, not just some and this only helps some. Todd,

This helps ANY owner who would like to switch out a pitcher who hasn't appeared in a Mon-Thu game. If this rule applies to all owners, why wouldn't it be fair to all owners (as your statement implies)? [/QUOTE]Gekko/ Glenn et all. Really? You want to 'institutionalize' the ability to switch in/out a player to avoid a bad Monday start?



Simple strategy:

1. draft 1-2 super stud prospects

2. Use them to avoid hard starts Mon-Thurs (because they wont' have played)

3. When they start playing, revisit waiver wire to find some schmuck sent down to the Minors



Sorry guys, I vote for keeping pitching as it is



Spyhunter

[Gekko]

Originally posted by Spyhunter:

Gekko/ Glenn et all. Really? You want to 'institutionalize' the ability to switch in/out a player to avoid a bad Monday start?



Simple strategy:

1. draft 1-2 super stud prospects

2. Use them to avoid hard starts Mon-Thurs (because they wont' have played)

3. When they start playing, revisit waiver wire to find some schmuck sent down to the Minors



Sorry guys, I vote for keeping pitching as it is



Spyhunter huh?? you can use a DL pitcher to hide a bad Mon-Thu start RIGHT NOW. how is this any different?

[Spyhunter]

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Spyhunter:

Gekko/ Glenn et all. Really? You want to 'institutionalize' the ability to switch in/out a player to avoid a bad Monday start?



Simple strategy:

1. draft 1-2 super stud prospects

2. Use them to avoid hard starts Mon-Thurs (because they wont' have played)

3. When they start playing, revisit waiver wire to find some schmuck sent down to the Minors



Sorry guys, I vote for keeping pitching as it is



Spyhunter huh?? you can use a DL pitcher to hide a bad Mon-Thu start RIGHT NOW. how is this any different? [/QUOTE]Hi,

Isn't it clear? The current capability to move is a loophole, but atleast, you are required to hold someone on the DL on your team and take up a slot. With this strategy, you get doubly rewarded for drafting/holding a prospect



Congrats again on Cargo. I am so mad, I can't believe I let you have him (and that I was the only one contesting you!!!)

[Gekko]

Originally posted by Spyhunter:

Hi,

Isn't it clear? The current capability to move is a loophole, but atleast, you are required to hold someone on the DL on your team and take up a slot. With this strategy, you get doubly rewarded for drafting/holding a prospect



Congrats again on Cargo. I am so mad, I can't believe I let you have him (and that I was the only one contesting you!!!) interesting point.



as for cargo, I know i would have bid up to $22, not sure how much higher. maybe $24. i had 5 live drafts this year. i was fortunate to get cargo on all 5. when i drafted him over markakis, the owner next to me almost fell off his chair!



[ August 15, 2010, 08:58 PM: Message edited by: Gekko ]

[Spyhunter]

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Spyhunter:

Hi,

Isn't it clear? The current capability to move is a loophole, but atleast, you are required to hold someone on the DL on your team and take up a slot. With this strategy, you get doubly rewarded for drafting/holding a prospect



Congrats again on Cargo. I am so mad, I can't believe I let you have him (and that I was the only one contesting you!!!) interesting point.



as for cargo, I know i would have bid up to $22, not sure how much higher. maybe $24. i had 5 live drafts this year. i was fortunate to get cargo on all 5. when i drafted him over markakis, the owner next to me almost fell off his chair! [/QUOTE]Good call. My take away from this year is to go even more with who I like. For example, I was big on Rios, Cargo, Josh H and Vlad, but only ended up with Rios on most of my teams. I spent money price enforcing which was wasted. Atleast Hellickson is coming through (as you know I loved him!)

[Money]

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Bama:

Why dont ewe just let Mark run the whole gdamn contest the way he wants. Be easier for him too cheat the system that way. Not in favor of streaming pitchers. Would be nice and let the working person have a chance in this thing but i dont ever see us going back to once a week moves which is a shame. ken - why are you such a bitter person? i feel bad for anyone who has to "put up" with you on a consistent basis (like your family...assuming you have one).



let the "working person" have a chance? are you saying most people in this contest don't have a job. Wow, you really are "out there" [/quote]


[ August 16, 2010, 04:15 AM: Message edited by: Fast Money ]

[Cocktails and Dreams]

Originally posted by Gekko:

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bama:

[qb] Why dont ewe just let Mark run the whole gdamn contest the way he wants. Be easier for him too cheat the system that way. Not in favor of streaming pitchers. Would be nice and let the working person have a chance in this thing but i dont ever see us going back to once a week moves which is a shame. "i feel bad for anyone who has to "put up" with you on a consistent basis"





10000 spoons and all I need is a knife. What is the saying about glass houses?



[ August 16, 2010, 12:40 PM: Message edited by: Cocktails and Dreams ]

[Gekko]

Originally posted by Cocktails and Dreams:



10000 spoons and all I need is a knife. What is the saying about glass houses? it's probably the same as someone professing "no one would ever say a bad word about me". one of the stupidest things anyone (with integrity) has ever publicly professed. sorry.

[Cocktails and Dreams]

Originally posted by Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Cocktails and Dreams:



10000 spoons and all I need is a knife. What is the saying about glass houses? it's probably the same as someone professing "no one would ever say a bad word about me". one of the stupidest things anyone (with integrity) has ever publicly professed. sorry. [/QUOTE]Who has? You and Raiders. Enough said.

[Cocktails and Dreams]

Sounds like the consensus here would not want the bi weekly pitching changes. Will look forward to trying this format next year. Until then, it is hard to form an opinion, although I really like the biweekly format.