LGP Fantasy Baseball League

[Idoit40fans]

I'd go for it. I just want us to decide on how to handle this situation moving forward at some point.

[Mr. Colby]

We should probably put some of this **** in writing, put a by-laws section in the Google doc before next season. Too much lack of clarity

[Idoit40fans]

This has been a known issue since the beginning. It just never gets resolved.

[Mr. Colby]

Well I'd be more than happy to start **** around with it in my spare time

[Idoit40fans]

We could do it, the problem is that no one ever weighs in on anything outside of 4 or 5 of us.

[Mr. Colby]

Anyone want Axford? Big strikeout closer having a down year, signed for next season however. Willing to move him for more immediate help if anyone is up for it.

[Kraftster]

I can't afford to miss starts on Garza with my need to generate wins, a ridiculous category, I might add.

I am interested in moving Garza (3) for immediate help in the rotation in the (1) or (2) year contract variety.

[Idoit40fans]

That brings up a good point. Maybe we should go with IP instead of W as the balancing factor between starters and relievers.

[ulf]

That brings up a good point. Maybe we should go with IP instead of W as the balancing factor between starters and relievers.

Wins minus losses, and k's per 9 do the trick.

[Idoit40fans]

That brings up a good point. Maybe we should go with IP instead of W as the balancing factor between starters and relievers.

Wins minus losses, and k's per 9 do the trick.

If we do Ks/9, I'll just play Kimbrel and Chapman and no one else and I'll take that category. I like carrying as many counting stats as possible in a fantasy baseball league.

[Kraftster]

I don't really love IP or Wins. But I really ****ing hate wins right now. 11K, 8 ERA, 11 WHIP, 2 Wins.... herp derp

[Kraftster]

What about quality starts?

[Idoit40fans]

That could work. I would balance out the pitching a little bit.

[Mr. Colby]

Innings pitched is the way to go here. K/9 is a little redundant considering we already have K

[Kraftster]

Innings pitched is the way to go here. K/9 is a little redundant considering we already have K

I think it would be in place of K.

I generally prefer ratios to counting stats, but for this league I like counting since it penalizes those who do not participate.

[Mr. Colby]

Innings pitched is the way to go here. K/9 is a little redundant considering we already have K

I think it would be in place of K.

I guess you could do that too.

I'd rather have:

IP or QS, ERA, WHIP, K, SV

I agree with you on the counting stats thing - this is a league that requires full participation to run properly, given how in-depth the setup is.

[Idoit40fans]

I really don't like K/9, though I wouldn't fight it too hard.

And I think with starters and closers being given equal roster spots, I want there to be a penalty for carrying tons of closers.(like i'm doing now. )

[ulf]

Innings pitched is the way to go here. K/9 is a little redundant considering we already have K

I think it would be in place of K.

I generally prefer ratios to counting stats, but for this league I like counting since it penalizes those who do not participate.

True. I'm not a fan of wins, k's, innings, because people can just load up on starters with DL replacements and dominate those categories. Although they do run the risk of bad era and whip.

[Mr. Colby]

I don't like K/9 either, it affects the value of pitchers too much

[Mr. Colby]

Innings pitched is the way to go here. K/9 is a little redundant considering we already have K

I think it would be in place of K.

I generally prefer ratios to counting stats, but for this league I like counting since it penalizes those who do not participate.

True. I'm not a fan of wins, k's, innings, because people can just load up on starters with DL replacements and dominate those categories. Although they do run the risk of bad era and whip.

It's my understanding that there's a rule in place that says you have to keep an injury replacement for a minimum of 7 days before swapping him out - thus taking away the ability to get an extra start every day and beef up counting stats

[Idoit40fans]

I don't like K/9 either, it affects the value of pitchers too much

Exactly. Thats my big concern. Using K/9 and IP would work well, it would balance out well.

[Kraftster]

I wish I had the time to see where I'd rank if it was QS instead of Wins. I've lost so many wins on quality starts from Lee, Kershaw, Hernandez it's sickening.

I'm definitely up for QS next year. I guess the one difference between QS and IP as alternatives to wins is that relievers can't contribute to QS at all whereas they can contribute slightly to IPs.

On Idoit's note, it is ridiculous that Kraftster, beerman, and Idoit have 14 active closers between them on those 3 rosters.

[Idoit40fans]

I wish I had the time to see where I'd rank if it was QS instead of Wins. I've lost so many wins on quality starts from Lee, Kershaw, Hernandez it's sickening.

I'm definitely up for QS next year. I guess the one difference between QS and IP as alternatives to wins is that relievers can't contribute to QS at all whereas they can contribute slightly to IPs.

On Idoit's note, it is ridiculous that Kraftster, beerman, and Idoit have 14 active closers between them on those 3 rosters.

Lulz...rankings the saves leaders:
96
95
93
53
51
47
45
43
34
27
25

Guess which ones are we 3.

[Kraftster]

I put the rules for my Contract Years Cap hockey league in the League Rules sheet on the Cap Sheets on google doc. I figure it might give a starting point for putting a formal set of rules for the league together. A lot of overlap so some of it can probably be recycled. This way maybe whoever wants to work on it can chip away at it for it to be done by the beginning of next season.

[beerman]

I'd be ok with dropping wins but I'm not really a fan of IP as a category. It's pretty easy to boost that, although the format of this league would make it tougher than a standard league, where wins are at least a little more difficult to find. I think saves are just as dumb to track as wins but I won't win that one.

I think quality starts would be an interesting middle ground, requires some digging to find them (unlike IP which you get just by putting someone in the lineup for the day) but tied more to the pitchers performance than wins, where you might get a win out of a crappy performance and lose one on a gem. I also don't think it's a big deal that you end up excluding relievers because the saves stat does that with starters and since we have smallish rosters and only count saves and not holds you probably don't get many wins from the closers on the roster as it is.

I prefer K to K/9 but I think that should depend more on what we do with the W/IP/QS category. If we go with IP then I think it should go to K/9, the more innings you have pitched the more K's you'll have so doing great in one category is kind of going to boost you in the other without doing much. Kraftster is first in IP & K, I'm second in both, Idoit is 4th in IP & 3rd in K, MWB is 5th & 4th. Sure there is some room for discrepancy there (LITT is 3rd in IP and just 6th in K) but for the most part those will be tied pretty closely together. If you go with IP and k/9 the variance will be much greater and more in the talent of the staff than the quantity of innings they throw.

I'm fine with keeping it the way it is, but I'd also be fine with quality starts in for wins and keeping K.