Hi,
I know it is completely legal but I continue to see teams using the all closer/setup reliever strategy - even with the increase to 600 innings (for example in my $250 auction league), but I wish that the NFBC would raise the inning minimum. IMHO Roto is supposed to be a game based on the premise of comparing who could be a better baseball manager. Admittedly it is abstracted - I personally would like to add errors to hitters, but that is another topic. Teams in real life often do things like throw Steals to load up on hr/onbase guys. But no where do they not have starting pitching. By having 2 pitching categories be based purely on ratio and low innings requirements, you can *almost* guarantee yourself 43-45 pitching points and load your offense (which is exactly what happended my $250 Auction league). Not only that, but they can load up their FAAB on hitting throughout the year, while they continue to use very low cost FAAB on relievers... I recognize that in the overall NFBC, this strategy is very hard to win the overall $100k prize, but, there are many other leagues within the NFBC structure these days...
Just my 2 cents...
[ June 06, 2007, 08:46 AM: Message edited by: Spyhunter ]
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
Agree with the premise that a fantasy staff is meant to be built to resemble a real staff, just like position players are meant to resemble a lineup/bench ...
4 starters x 150 IP = 600
5 relivers x 40 IP = 200
total IP = 800
... the above calculation showing 800 minimum IP would be a more realistic minimim, while still leaving plenty of room for injuries and middle relievers to come into play.
I think (?) Greg had considered bumping the minimum to 800 or so in the past, maybe next season?
[ June 06, 2007, 09:14 AM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]
4 starters x 150 IP = 600
5 relivers x 40 IP = 200
total IP = 800
... the above calculation showing 800 minimum IP would be a more realistic minimim, while still leaving plenty of room for injuries and middle relievers to come into play.
I think (?) Greg had considered bumping the minimum to 800 or so in the past, maybe next season?
[ June 06, 2007, 09:14 AM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]
-
Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 41100
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
Agree with the premise that a fantasy staff is meant to be built to resemble a real staff, just like position players are meant to resemble a lineup/bench ...
4 starters x 150 IP = 600
5 relivers x 40 IP = 200
total IP = 800
... the above calculation showing 800 minimum IP would be a more realistic minimim, while still leaving plenty of room for injuries and middle relievers to come into play.
I think (?) Greg had considered bumping the minimum to 800 or so in the past, maybe next season? If the goal is to replicate an MLB team, then obviously the minimum innings pitched would be 1,000 innings or higher. The 600 IP minimum comes out to less than 67 innings pitched for your nine pitchers, so obviously we're nowhere close to what a real MLB team needs from its staff.
But the goal here is to replicate the decisions that an MLB manager and general manager have to go through during a season while allowing some roster creativity as well. The UT position, CI and MI positions allow that a bit offensively and the minimum innings pitched total allow that with your pitching staff.
I'll analyze the minimum at season's end, but at this point I don't see the need to bump up the total or to add a maximum innings pitched total. I saw owners still being creative on Draft Day and trying out different strategies in the single leagues and in the main event, which I think is a good thing.
Agree with the premise that a fantasy staff is meant to be built to resemble a real staff, just like position players are meant to resemble a lineup/bench ...
4 starters x 150 IP = 600
5 relivers x 40 IP = 200
total IP = 800
... the above calculation showing 800 minimum IP would be a more realistic minimim, while still leaving plenty of room for injuries and middle relievers to come into play.
I think (?) Greg had considered bumping the minimum to 800 or so in the past, maybe next season? If the goal is to replicate an MLB team, then obviously the minimum innings pitched would be 1,000 innings or higher. The 600 IP minimum comes out to less than 67 innings pitched for your nine pitchers, so obviously we're nowhere close to what a real MLB team needs from its staff.
But the goal here is to replicate the decisions that an MLB manager and general manager have to go through during a season while allowing some roster creativity as well. The UT position, CI and MI positions allow that a bit offensively and the minimum innings pitched total allow that with your pitching staff.
I'll analyze the minimum at season's end, but at this point I don't see the need to bump up the total or to add a maximum innings pitched total. I saw owners still being creative on Draft Day and trying out different strategies in the single leagues and in the main event, which I think is a good thing.
Greg Ambrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
Starting pitchers are, arguably, the most important part of the game (at least that's what the announcers always say 
)
Why allow a guy to simply bail on analyzing and drafting starting pitchers?
At around 800 IP, everyone would, at a minimum, have to have 4 SPs in their lineup for most of the season. Seems reasonable without being overly restrictive.
) Why allow a guy to simply bail on analyzing and drafting starting pitchers?
At around 800 IP, everyone would, at a minimum, have to have 4 SPs in their lineup for most of the season. Seems reasonable without being overly restrictive.
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
An alternative to increasing the minimum innings requirement would be to create separate roster positions for starters and relievers. We would still use 9 pitchers but let's say four of them would have to be starters, three of them relievers and the other two are up to the discretion of each owner. Of course this would create an unenviable problem for Greg and Tom, that being distinguishing starting pitchers from relievers. How many starts would Braden Looper need to make before qualifying as a starter? How many relief appearances would Brett Myers need to attain relief status? That sort of thing. And what about the pitchers coming up from the minors? Not sure I want to go there, but it's a thought...
Kevin
Kevin
"Fear ... that's the other guy's problem!" - Lewis Winthorpe (Dan Akroyd) from Trading Places
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
Greg,
Your game, your call, however, it is extremely frustrating as a player like me to deal with people who only have to compete for hitters. Winning 3 categories with minimal drafting effort then followed by the HUGE FAAB advantage it gives you during the season just is frustrating.
Watch what happens in the Matthis mid season league. Last year proved how successful this strategy was, I expect to see much more of the same this year
Spy
Your game, your call, however, it is extremely frustrating as a player like me to deal with people who only have to compete for hitters. Winning 3 categories with minimal drafting effort then followed by the HUGE FAAB advantage it gives you during the season just is frustrating.
Watch what happens in the Matthis mid season league. Last year proved how successful this strategy was, I expect to see much more of the same this year
Spy
-
Chest Rockwell
- Posts: 2400
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
Originally posted by Spyhunter:
Greg,
Your game, your call, however, it is extremely frustrating as a player like me to deal with people who only have to compete for hitters. Winning 3 categories with minimal drafting effort then followed by the HUGE FAAB advantage it gives you during the season just is frustrating.
Watch what happens in the Matthis mid season league. Last year proved how successful this strategy was, I expect to see much more of the same this year
Spy You neglect to mention 2 things-
1) That people who have employed this strategy simply have not been very succesful with it.
2) They already made the switch in the Mathis league.
Greg,
Your game, your call, however, it is extremely frustrating as a player like me to deal with people who only have to compete for hitters. Winning 3 categories with minimal drafting effort then followed by the HUGE FAAB advantage it gives you during the season just is frustrating.
Watch what happens in the Matthis mid season league. Last year proved how successful this strategy was, I expect to see much more of the same this year
Spy You neglect to mention 2 things-
1) That people who have employed this strategy simply have not been very succesful with it.
2) They already made the switch in the Mathis league.
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
I also think the innings should be moved up to at least 800.Guys in leagues who have a couple guys draft just relief pitching is a huge advandage to the rest of the guys grabbing starting pitching later.
Example
In one league , a normal league i had to take Dan Haren in the 7th round pick 7. Now it was tough to get good pitching.
The next draft a couple guys try the relief pitching think, and i get Bonderman in round 7 , C Young round 8, and Haren round 9.All three guys went 30 rounds later because of the guys who dont draft starters.
Guess which league im doing much better than.
If we had 800 to 1000 innnings rule these guys will have to draft a stsrter or two.
just my opinion. needs to be looked at an discussed, or leagues are not equal.
Example
In one league , a normal league i had to take Dan Haren in the 7th round pick 7. Now it was tough to get good pitching.
The next draft a couple guys try the relief pitching think, and i get Bonderman in round 7 , C Young round 8, and Haren round 9.All three guys went 30 rounds later because of the guys who dont draft starters.
Guess which league im doing much better than.
If we had 800 to 1000 innnings rule these guys will have to draft a stsrter or two.
just my opinion. needs to be looked at an discussed, or leagues are not equal.
EDWARD J GILLIS
-
GOD Loves You
- Posts: 997
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 6:00 pm
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
I would love to have teams in my leagues employing the "reliever strategy" because it gives me more of a chance to win the league. They are already negating their points in at least 2 categories, how can this be a bad thing? And please don't say, "well they are almost guranteed to be at the top in the other 3" because it's not 100% true.
I agree the minimum innings pitched could be increased, but to say a team using this strategy has an advantage is wrong? Aren't you guys who play in the NFBC supposed to be some of the best fantasy baseball players in the country?? More power to the teams who use this strategy, but I still feel my "knowledge" will win out and beat these teams.
Buster, from Creative Sports used this strategy in a 30 team league at Rotowin.com((ran by poopy tooth))Anyways, he drafted Rivera, Papelbon and a bunch of minor league/retired pitchers who will never pitch in the majors this season. By doing this, he was able to basically draft all offensive players until the final rounds. Once the season started, people started complaining about the strategy he used and how it wasn't fair. Well it has somewhat worked out for him considering he's in 1st place, but I drafted "normal" and am also in 1st place, even with B.J. Ryan being lost for the season. We're tied for 1st for the slow ones.
I somewhat understand people's arguments, but to act as if this strategy is unfair to others is lacking merit IMO. There's a lot of different strategies people use in fantasy sports, if you truly think the reliever strategy gives people more of a chance to win, why not do it yourself??
A lot of teams believe you can't win a league by going pitching heavy, but almost half-way through the season the country is lead by a team who did this and I am winning one of my NFBC leagues doing the same thing.
If you are good, you can win no matter what the other owners in your league do. It's the same with football, many feel you can't win without a top pick, yet many teams do win from the bottom of the draft. Talent is talent. And Spyhunter, don't think I'm being a donkey, just offering my opinion since I've read a few posts regarding this topic the past few years and I totally disagree with the complaints put forth.
I agree the minimum innings pitched could be increased, but to say a team using this strategy has an advantage is wrong? Aren't you guys who play in the NFBC supposed to be some of the best fantasy baseball players in the country?? More power to the teams who use this strategy, but I still feel my "knowledge" will win out and beat these teams.
Buster, from Creative Sports used this strategy in a 30 team league at Rotowin.com((ran by poopy tooth))Anyways, he drafted Rivera, Papelbon and a bunch of minor league/retired pitchers who will never pitch in the majors this season. By doing this, he was able to basically draft all offensive players until the final rounds. Once the season started, people started complaining about the strategy he used and how it wasn't fair. Well it has somewhat worked out for him considering he's in 1st place, but I drafted "normal" and am also in 1st place, even with B.J. Ryan being lost for the season. We're tied for 1st for the slow ones.
I somewhat understand people's arguments, but to act as if this strategy is unfair to others is lacking merit IMO. There's a lot of different strategies people use in fantasy sports, if you truly think the reliever strategy gives people more of a chance to win, why not do it yourself??
A lot of teams believe you can't win a league by going pitching heavy, but almost half-way through the season the country is lead by a team who did this and I am winning one of my NFBC leagues doing the same thing.
If you are good, you can win no matter what the other owners in your league do. It's the same with football, many feel you can't win without a top pick, yet many teams do win from the bottom of the draft. Talent is talent. And Spyhunter, don't think I'm being a donkey, just offering my opinion since I've read a few posts regarding this topic the past few years and I totally disagree with the complaints put forth.
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
Originally posted by Chest Rockwell:
quote:Originally posted by Spyhunter:
Greg,
Your game, your call, however, it is extremely frustrating as a player like me to deal with people who only have to compete for hitters. Winning 3 categories with minimal drafting effort then followed by the HUGE FAAB advantage it gives you during the season just is frustrating.
Watch what happens in the Matthis mid season league. Last year proved how successful this strategy was, I expect to see much more of the same this year
Spy You neglect to mention 2 things-
1) That people who have employed this strategy simply have not been very succesful with it.
2) They already made the switch in the Mathis league. [/QUOTE]Not true Chest, I am in the $250 auction league where mgk2007 has employed the strategy to good effect. He has 45 pitching points, and was recently highly ranked. He did get unlucky with offensive injuries though which has limited him.
You can see from his waiver wire picks how he has been able to focus on relievers or offense w/o spending FAAB like the rest of the people
I hope this demonsrates how people can get 45 pitching points w/o much trouble!!! I am not sure why you say people have not been successful with it, I have consistently seen players in my leagues here in the NFBC do well with it (though as I said, it will not win the $100k)
As for the Don Mathis league, why do you say it has been dealt with? As I show above people are using in auction leagues right now (and that is without the ability to know that you 1/2 a season of stats locked in. IMHO it HASNT been dealt with. It will be simple to draft 300 innings and have an all reliever staff.
Spy
Spy
quote:Originally posted by Spyhunter:
Greg,
Your game, your call, however, it is extremely frustrating as a player like me to deal with people who only have to compete for hitters. Winning 3 categories with minimal drafting effort then followed by the HUGE FAAB advantage it gives you during the season just is frustrating.
Watch what happens in the Matthis mid season league. Last year proved how successful this strategy was, I expect to see much more of the same this year
Spy You neglect to mention 2 things-
1) That people who have employed this strategy simply have not been very succesful with it.
2) They already made the switch in the Mathis league. [/QUOTE]Not true Chest, I am in the $250 auction league where mgk2007 has employed the strategy to good effect. He has 45 pitching points, and was recently highly ranked. He did get unlucky with offensive injuries though which has limited him.
You can see from his waiver wire picks how he has been able to focus on relievers or offense w/o spending FAAB like the rest of the people
I hope this demonsrates how people can get 45 pitching points w/o much trouble!!! I am not sure why you say people have not been successful with it, I have consistently seen players in my leagues here in the NFBC do well with it (though as I said, it will not win the $100k)
As for the Don Mathis league, why do you say it has been dealt with? As I show above people are using in auction leagues right now (and that is without the ability to know that you 1/2 a season of stats locked in. IMHO it HASNT been dealt with. It will be simple to draft 300 innings and have an all reliever staff.
Spy
Spy
-
Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 41100
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
Chris, minimum IP for the Don Mathis mid-season league is 600.
If the all-reliever strategy is so easy to use in the private leagues, why aren't more people using it? I think Chest is right with his two points. But again, with 600 IP it does leave for some creative strategies on Draft Day and every owner has to adjust.
Eddie, your two examples are the main event and the Ultimate League. As you know, fewer people try this strategy in the main event because it's tough to win the $100,000 grand prize dumping two categories. So your analysis that this can throw off certain leagues isn't necessarily strong. But in the Ultimate League, yes this strategy does force those owners to watch what is going on and to adjust on the fly.
Again, I'll look at the total IP at the All-Star break and again at the end of the season and see if adjustments need to be made. At this point, I'm not leaning hard to move the IP level for 2008.
If the all-reliever strategy is so easy to use in the private leagues, why aren't more people using it? I think Chest is right with his two points. But again, with 600 IP it does leave for some creative strategies on Draft Day and every owner has to adjust.
Eddie, your two examples are the main event and the Ultimate League. As you know, fewer people try this strategy in the main event because it's tough to win the $100,000 grand prize dumping two categories. So your analysis that this can throw off certain leagues isn't necessarily strong. But in the Ultimate League, yes this strategy does force those owners to watch what is going on and to adjust on the fly.
Again, I'll look at the total IP at the All-Star break and again at the end of the season and see if adjustments need to be made. At this point, I'm not leaning hard to move the IP level for 2008.
Greg Ambrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
Chris, minimum IP for the Don Mathis mid-season league is 600.
If the all-reliever strategy is so easy to use in the private leagues, why aren't more people using it? I think Chest is right with his two points. But again, with 600 IP it does leave for some creative strategies on Draft Day and every owner has to adjust.
Eddie, your two examples are the main event and the Ultimate League. As you know, fewer people try this strategy in the main event because it's tough to win the $100,000 grand prize dumping two categories. So your analysis that this can throw off certain leagues isn't necessarily strong. But in the Ultimate League, yes this strategy does force those owners to watch what is going on and to adjust on the fly.
Again, I'll look at the total IP at the All-Star break and again at the end of the season and see if adjustments need to be made. At this point, I'm not leaning hard to move the IP level for 2008. Greg, as I said, your game, your call. My point was that is relatively easy to get to 600ip w/ at most 1 starter. The Don Mathis league rule as I understand it is 300ip from the drafted stats, the remaining 300ip must be gotten after the break. I am almost tempted to throw in $250 to participate in this league just to demonstrate how easy it is to win with this strategy
Spy
[ June 10, 2007, 11:08 AM: Message edited by: Spyhunter ]
Chris, minimum IP for the Don Mathis mid-season league is 600.
If the all-reliever strategy is so easy to use in the private leagues, why aren't more people using it? I think Chest is right with his two points. But again, with 600 IP it does leave for some creative strategies on Draft Day and every owner has to adjust.
Eddie, your two examples are the main event and the Ultimate League. As you know, fewer people try this strategy in the main event because it's tough to win the $100,000 grand prize dumping two categories. So your analysis that this can throw off certain leagues isn't necessarily strong. But in the Ultimate League, yes this strategy does force those owners to watch what is going on and to adjust on the fly.
Again, I'll look at the total IP at the All-Star break and again at the end of the season and see if adjustments need to be made. At this point, I'm not leaning hard to move the IP level for 2008. Greg, as I said, your game, your call. My point was that is relatively easy to get to 600ip w/ at most 1 starter. The Don Mathis league rule as I understand it is 300ip from the drafted stats, the remaining 300ip must be gotten after the break. I am almost tempted to throw in $250 to participate in this league just to demonstrate how easy it is to win with this strategy
Spy
[ June 10, 2007, 11:08 AM: Message edited by: Spyhunter ]
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
Originally posted by Spyhunter:
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
Chris, minimum IP for the Don Mathis mid-season league is 600.
If the all-reliever strategy is so easy to use in the private leagues, why aren't more people using it? I think Chest is right with his two points. But again, with 600 IP it does leave for some creative strategies on Draft Day and every owner has to adjust.
Eddie, your two examples are the main event and the Ultimate League. As you know, fewer people try this strategy in the main event because it's tough to win the $100,000 grand prize dumping two categories. So your analysis that this can throw off certain leagues isn't necessarily strong. But in the Ultimate League, yes this strategy does force those owners to watch what is going on and to adjust on the fly.
Again, I'll look at the total IP at the All-Star break and again at the end of the season and see if adjustments need to be made. At this point, I'm not leaning hard to move the IP level for 2008. Greg, as I said, your game, your call. My point was that is relatively easy to get to 600ip w/ at most 1 starter. The Don Mathis league rule as I understand it is 300ip from the drafted stats, the remaining 300ip must be gotten after the break. I am almost tempted to throw in $250 to participate in this league just to demonstrate how easy it is to win with this strategy
Spy [/QUOTE]lol, Chris ... you should know by now, it is never easy to win any NFBC league
I agree with you it should be raised, but I believe so mainly from the standpoint that no NFBC winners should get a free pass on having to evaluate (and live with the results) of SP talent.
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
Chris, minimum IP for the Don Mathis mid-season league is 600.
If the all-reliever strategy is so easy to use in the private leagues, why aren't more people using it? I think Chest is right with his two points. But again, with 600 IP it does leave for some creative strategies on Draft Day and every owner has to adjust.
Eddie, your two examples are the main event and the Ultimate League. As you know, fewer people try this strategy in the main event because it's tough to win the $100,000 grand prize dumping two categories. So your analysis that this can throw off certain leagues isn't necessarily strong. But in the Ultimate League, yes this strategy does force those owners to watch what is going on and to adjust on the fly.
Again, I'll look at the total IP at the All-Star break and again at the end of the season and see if adjustments need to be made. At this point, I'm not leaning hard to move the IP level for 2008. Greg, as I said, your game, your call. My point was that is relatively easy to get to 600ip w/ at most 1 starter. The Don Mathis league rule as I understand it is 300ip from the drafted stats, the remaining 300ip must be gotten after the break. I am almost tempted to throw in $250 to participate in this league just to demonstrate how easy it is to win with this strategy
Spy [/QUOTE]lol, Chris ... you should know by now, it is never easy to win any NFBC league
I agree with you it should be raised, but I believe so mainly from the standpoint that no NFBC winners should get a free pass on having to evaluate (and live with the results) of SP talent.
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
Originally posted by KJ Duke:
quote:Originally posted by Spyhunter:
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
Chris, minimum IP for the Don Mathis mid-season league is 600.
If the all-reliever strategy is so easy to use in the private leagues, why aren't more people using it? I think Chest is right with his two points. But again, with 600 IP it does leave for some creative strategies on Draft Day and every owner has to adjust.
Eddie, your two examples are the main event and the Ultimate League. As you know, fewer people try this strategy in the main event because it's tough to win the $100,000 grand prize dumping two categories. So your analysis that this can throw off certain leagues isn't necessarily strong. But in the Ultimate League, yes this strategy does force those owners to watch what is going on and to adjust on the fly.
Again, I'll look at the total IP at the All-Star break and again at the end of the season and see if adjustments need to be made. At this point, I'm not leaning hard to move the IP level for 2008. Greg, as I said, your game, your call. My point was that is relatively easy to get to 600ip w/ at most 1 starter. The Don Mathis league rule as I understand it is 300ip from the drafted stats, the remaining 300ip must be gotten after the break. I am almost tempted to throw in $250 to participate in this league just to demonstrate how easy it is to win with this strategy
Spy [/QUOTE]lol, Chris ... you should know by now, it is never easy to win any NFBC league
I agree with you it should be raised, but I believe so mainly from the standpoint that no NFBC winners should get a free pass on having to evaluate (and live with the results) of SP talent. [/QUOTE]well last year, 2 of the top 3 teams used this strategy if memory serves? or was it 3 of 4? anyway, I totally agree with your point, it seems crazy to be able to pick up 1 starter only... 9 players to get 600 ip is pretty easy to achieve w/o much in the way of SP if any at all
Spy
quote:Originally posted by Spyhunter:
quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
Chris, minimum IP for the Don Mathis mid-season league is 600.
If the all-reliever strategy is so easy to use in the private leagues, why aren't more people using it? I think Chest is right with his two points. But again, with 600 IP it does leave for some creative strategies on Draft Day and every owner has to adjust.
Eddie, your two examples are the main event and the Ultimate League. As you know, fewer people try this strategy in the main event because it's tough to win the $100,000 grand prize dumping two categories. So your analysis that this can throw off certain leagues isn't necessarily strong. But in the Ultimate League, yes this strategy does force those owners to watch what is going on and to adjust on the fly.
Again, I'll look at the total IP at the All-Star break and again at the end of the season and see if adjustments need to be made. At this point, I'm not leaning hard to move the IP level for 2008. Greg, as I said, your game, your call. My point was that is relatively easy to get to 600ip w/ at most 1 starter. The Don Mathis league rule as I understand it is 300ip from the drafted stats, the remaining 300ip must be gotten after the break. I am almost tempted to throw in $250 to participate in this league just to demonstrate how easy it is to win with this strategy
Spy [/QUOTE]lol, Chris ... you should know by now, it is never easy to win any NFBC league
I agree with you it should be raised, but I believe so mainly from the standpoint that no NFBC winners should get a free pass on having to evaluate (and live with the results) of SP talent. [/QUOTE]well last year, 2 of the top 3 teams used this strategy if memory serves? or was it 3 of 4? anyway, I totally agree with your point, it seems crazy to be able to pick up 1 starter only... 9 players to get 600 ip is pretty easy to achieve w/o much in the way of SP if any at all
Spy
-
Greg Ambrosius
- Posts: 41100
- Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2004 6:00 pm
- Contact:
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
Originally posted by Spyhunter:
[QUOTE]The Don Mathis league rule as I understand it is 300ip from the drafted stats, the remaining 300ip must be gotten after the break. I am almost tempted to throw in $250 to participate in this league just to demonstrate how easy it is to win with this strategy
Spy Chris, please read the rules before stating things like this here. It's 600 IP for the Don Mathis League, just like other full-season leagues. There isn't any "300 IP before the break/300 IP after the break." I agree, if this strategy is so easy, you should enter the Don Mathis League and try it. I think we'd all like to see how you'd do with this "easy" strategy. Remember, last year the innings pitched minimum in the Don Mathis League was 1/3 as I failed to change that rule; this year it's 600.
It's not my game, it's all of our game. And truthfully, most people far exceed 1,000 innings pitched. Maybe next year I will increase the rule from 600 IP, but for now I think we have a good rule in place that allows creativity among all owners. We'll see what the final results say.
[QUOTE]The Don Mathis league rule as I understand it is 300ip from the drafted stats, the remaining 300ip must be gotten after the break. I am almost tempted to throw in $250 to participate in this league just to demonstrate how easy it is to win with this strategy
Spy Chris, please read the rules before stating things like this here. It's 600 IP for the Don Mathis League, just like other full-season leagues. There isn't any "300 IP before the break/300 IP after the break." I agree, if this strategy is so easy, you should enter the Don Mathis League and try it. I think we'd all like to see how you'd do with this "easy" strategy. Remember, last year the innings pitched minimum in the Don Mathis League was 1/3 as I failed to change that rule; this year it's 600.
It's not my game, it's all of our game. And truthfully, most people far exceed 1,000 innings pitched. Maybe next year I will increase the rule from 600 IP, but for now I think we have a good rule in place that allows creativity among all owners. We'll see what the final results say.
Greg Ambrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Founder, National Fantasy Baseball Championship
General Manager, Consumer Fantasy Games at SportsHub Technologies
Twitter - @GregAmbrosius
Little to no impact of the change in innings requirement
To be fair, I should say 'how easy it is to place highly'. Winning 1st place is any league is challenging. My point is that the people who used this strategy last year were all 'around the rim' and that 600ip vs. 200 actually makes little difference.
KJ's point is well taken, that to win in events titled the "NFBC" and be able to blow off Starting Pitching analyzing, drafting, bidding via FAAB, managing starting match ups doesn't make sense to me personally.
If everything goes well with my wife (she is expecting in 2 weeks), then I will do the league. We will see if I can prove my point!
Spy
KJ's point is well taken, that to win in events titled the "NFBC" and be able to blow off Starting Pitching analyzing, drafting, bidding via FAAB, managing starting match ups doesn't make sense to me personally.
If everything goes well with my wife (she is expecting in 2 weeks), then I will do the league. We will see if I can prove my point!
Spy