|
Post by Chris - D-Town Diamond Dusters on Jan 21, 2011 18:14:07 GMT -8
I am thinking of cutting back a little on the pitching stats. My first thought is to reduce IP from 1 point per inning to .75 points per inning (each out would be worth a quarter of a point). That may not sound like much, but over the course of a season for 200 IP it is a difference of 50 points. That may help prevent streaming some.
Feel free to comment on that idea, or suggest any ideas you might have!
|
|
|
Post by Doug - Tatooine Tusken-Raiders on Jan 23, 2011 21:57:38 GMT -8
Instead of that, maybe charge half a point for each walk allowed. Crappier pitchers would be worth less. That would constitute less streaming in my mind.
|
|
|
Post by Chris - D-Town Diamond Dusters on Jan 23, 2011 23:22:06 GMT -8
Not a bad idea. Just for fun, I went into the scoring options on CBS and changed the stats to reflect my suggestion and yours (IP=.75, Walk=-.5) and the projections looked much better. Prior to the change, when looking at the current free agents, 4 pitchers (Lee, Lester, Verlander, and someone else) were projected to outscore every batter (Votto, CarGo, Tulo) except Miggy Cabrera.
I will leave it to reflect the change for a few days so that others can check it out and give me their thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by Joe - Milwaukee Brewers on Jan 24, 2011 15:29:37 GMT -8
I think that we need to have relievers have more value,especially since all the closer by committee and set up men
|
|
|
Post by Doug - Tatooine Tusken-Raiders on Jan 24, 2011 18:29:57 GMT -8
Holy crap, that made closers worth way more. I'd like to see it w/ innings worth 1 pt and walks (not IBB if possible) be -0.5 pt.
Chris I mentioned this to you a couple of years ago, but we currently charge pitchers for allowing inherited runners to score. Can we add a point for not allowing inherited runners to score? This would definitely increase the value of a middle reliever.
|
|
|
Post by Doug - Tatooine Tusken-Raiders on Jan 24, 2011 18:31:55 GMT -8
I'd rather have more of a balance between starting pitching and hitting. That way if you want to go towards building a hitting team, you could still match up against a pitching team.
|
|
|
Post by Chris - D-Town Diamond Dusters on Jan 24, 2011 18:36:33 GMT -8
From a value standpoint, it definitely did make the closers worth more. It didn't really change them on a point-value basis. I think the only way to fix that would be to make saves worht less.
With innings worht 1 point, that would still leave many SPs much more valuable than top hitters, so I'm not sure on that one.
I checked, and CBS still does not offer any scoring for runners stranded by RP's. I will brainstorm some scoring combos to make MR's worth a little more, closers worth a tad less, and SP's stay close to where they are at with .25 pts per 1/3 IP, as I think that SP's compared to hitters currently reflects close to a real-world difference.
|
|
|
Post by Doug - Tatooine Tusken-Raiders on Jan 24, 2011 19:51:43 GMT -8
Sorry, closers actually didnt become worth more, just that they raised in value since SP's went down.
|
|
|
Post by Mike - N.C. Pine Tar Sluggers on Jan 29, 2011 18:07:32 GMT -8
I know I'm new here, and haven't seen the scoring weighting over a season, but even with the lower scoring for pitchers, it still seems pitcher heavy. I would suggest combining the pitching reduction with something to help the hitter - i.e., minus 0.5 pts for strikeouts. I just think that a pitcher desrves more credit for a K (1 pt), than a better should be penalized for the same SO. It would also return some value to the HR or SO hitters. Just my thought.
Also, there seem to be a lot of pitchers (especially 6 RP). It has to affect the overall weighting of some of the back end (non-closer) relievers. Has the league ever considered having of the pitch slots being P instead of pre-defined SP or RP? Just a thought.
Mike F - co-GM Pine Tar Sluggers
|
|
|
Post by Mike - N.C. Pine Tar Sluggers on Jan 30, 2011 12:09:34 GMT -8
I have a few question on the evolution of the pitching scoring. It seems as if pitchers have been scoring too much. That seemed strange to me since each inning is 0.75 pts according to CBS. Looking into it though, I realized that the penalty scoring for pitching seemed to be missing some basic elements. That said, I was wondering if someone could fill me in on how the pitching scoring evolved.
(FYI - The league I have been playing has pretty much followed the old CBS scoring (about 2006?) with 10 pt saves and wins, no loss/BS penalty, 3 pts per inning, but-1 pt for W, -1 pt for hit, -1 pt for ER, etc). Some of my questions:
1. Why is there no penalty for Hits allowed? This is the big reason that you are cutting down the points for IP. In addition, to lowering the value of innings eaters, ou make a 1-2-3 inning the same value as 3 singles loading the bases.
2. Similar to above why are walks only -0.5? A walk is bad pitching (and you could give an accomodation for an intentional walk).
3. How did the league evolve to penalize Runs allowed instead of Earned Runs. It penalizes pitchers for a bad fielding team. Similarly why are Inherited Runs Scored the same penalty as a run allowed. If you want to penalize for these, why not minus 0.5 for IRS and Unearned Run while using -1 for Earned runs.
4. Increasing these penalties would go along way to reducing pitching points while letting you increase the pts for Innings Pitched. This would reduce streaming while also increasing the value of low ERA and low WHIP pitchers (i.e. the better pitchers are worth more). This would also discourage streaming of bad SP. The above 3 items are typically accounted for in Points leagues since they emulate ERA and WHIP in 5x5.
Aso a few other comments/questions. As a matter of record I always like the special situations like these.
5. Why point for Games Finished? A CG and a Save already get points, why offer more. Unless this is to reward a losing pitcher who finishes.
6. If a pitchers throws a perfect game, do they get 15 pts for the No Hitter and and additional 25 pts for the Perfect Game (i.e. 40 pts?). Just want to know up front, since my son once made the playoffs on a Sunday night No Hitter.
7. I like the penalties for Losses and especially Blown Saves. In addition HR Against is a good penalty.
In terms of hitting, I had only two general comments.
1. Minus 1 pt for strikeouts seems severe (drops the value of some big names) and contributes to the hitting/pitching disparity.
2. I always like to at least get 1 pt when by batter is HBP (especially if he goes on the injured list). I have also seen pitchers penalized for this.
Note that I understand this league has a lot of history and scoring has evolved I am just trying to get an understanding of scoring. I also thought I would put in my thoughts since it sounds like there is a desire to adjust the pitching scoring.
|
|
|
Post by Chris - D-Town Diamond Dusters on Jan 30, 2011 13:24:48 GMT -8
Hey Mike, you make a lot of great points, and I love the feedback. I'll see how well I can roll through it all...
That seemed strange to me since each inning is 0.75 pts according to CBS. I just recently adjusted the IP scoring from 1 pt per IP down to .75 per, as well as adding the -.5/walk. Previously there was no penalty for walks. I did this only to see how the pitching projections were affected. Looking into it though, I realized that the penalty scoring for pitching seemed to be missing some basic elements. That said, I was wondering if someone could fill me in on how the pitching scoring evolved. The pitching stats have basically evolved incrementally since the beginning of the league. Just a minor tweak here and there. Although, I have been noticing that it may be time for a partial overhaul of the stats.
(FYI - The league I have been playing has pretty much followed the old CBS scoring (about 2006?) with 10 pt saves and wins, no loss/BS penalty, 3 pts per inning, but-1 pt for W, -1 pt for hit, -1 pt for ER, etc). Some of my questions:
1. Why is there no penalty for Hits allowed? This is the big reason that you are cutting down the points for IP. In addition, to lowering the value of innings eaters, ou make a 1-2-3 inning the same value as 3 singles loading the bases. I really like the idea of neg. points for hits, and I honestly can't tell you why it hasn't been implemented in the past. [/color]
2. Similar to above why are walks only -0.5? A walk is bad pitching (and you could give an accomodation for an intentional walk). As mentioned before, the -0.5/walk is only a test change, I am completely open to making walks hurt more. [/color]
3. How did the league evolve to penalize Runs allowed instead of Earned Runs. It penalizes pitchers for a bad fielding team. Similarly why are Inherited Runs Scored the same penalty as a run allowed. If you want to penalize for these, why not minus 0.5 for IRS and Unearned Run while using -1 for Earned runs. I think this came about when the league was first formed, prior to all the online stat services, when I was doing the scoring from weekly stats... Runs were listed, ER were not, and it hasn't really come up until recently - this is a change that will be made though. [/color]
4. Increasing these penalties would go along way to reducing pitching points while letting you increase the pts for Innings Pitched. This would reduce streaming while also increasing the value of low ERA and low WHIP pitchers (i.e. the better pitchers are worth more). This would also discourage streaming of bad SP. The above 3 items are typically accounted for in Points leagues since they emulate ERA and WHIP in 5x5. I like it. I do remember a time about 6 or 7 years ago, where I tried to come up with a pts formula to closely mirror whip and era, but couldn't come up with a combo that seemed to work out right. I like the penalties for hits and walks, although IMO -1 pt for each is a bit high. If a pither throws 7 innings with a 1.00 whip, which would be a good outing, he would gain 0 points for the innings (assuming IP are left at 1pt per). I think maybe -.75/walk, -.5/hit would be close to fair? Walks should hurt a little more than hits, IMO, since a walk is bad pitching. A hit can happen on an 0-2 count on a slider 3 feet off the plate, which is out of a pitchers control.
Aso a few other comments/questions. As a matter of record I always like the special situations like these.
5. Why point for Games Finished? A CG and a Save already get points, why offer more. Unless this is to reward a losing pitcher who finishes. This was put in to give middle relievers a little extra value. Saves were adjusted down 1 point to compensate. CG and SO were not, since they are increasingly rare, and extra point for those feats isn't too big a deal in my mind.
6. If a pitchers throws a perfect game, do they get 15 pts for the No Hitter and and additional 25 pts for the Perfect Game (i.e. 40 pts?). Just want to know up front, since my son once made the playoffs on a Sunday night No Hitter. For a perfect game they would just get the 25 points.
7. I like the penalties for Losses and especially Blown Saves. In addition HR Against is a good penalty.
In terms of hitting, I had only two general comments.
1. Minus 1 pt for strikeouts seems severe (drops the value of some big names) and contributes to the hitting/pitching disparity. This one I'm split on. I do see how it lowers the value on some, but also, on a per game basis - if a guy K's 4 times in a game, he should get a -4 IMO, for having a terrible game. I am open to lowering however to -.75 or -.5. Anyone else have some thoughts?
2. I always like to at least get 1 pt when by batter is HBP (especially if he goes on the injured list). I have also seen pitchers penalized for this. Makes sense, a couple of others have also expressed a desire for a point per HBP, so I'll make that adjustment. As far as a pitcher getting dinged for one, I think once we get the hits/walks issue figured out, I'll lump that one in and make a sweeping change.[/color]
Thanks again for all the feedback and questions - keep them coming!
|
|
|
Post by Kenny - Carolina Mud Cats on Jan 30, 2011 15:47:38 GMT -8
Sorry I haven't been able to jump in on a lot of this stuff but things have been hectic lately and we had a 70 degree day today so I had to jump in on that. I really liked Mikes suggestions on pitching. I have been in leagues before that also used the (1) pt per out and K, (-1) pt for each hit, BB and HBP and ER allowed. It worked out well in those leagues because owners were rewarded very well for a good start. Ina game where a pitcher didn't pitch particularly well but still got the win it didn't reward a team with a ridiculous amout of points for a bad start that resulted in a win. You could also really get hammered by a bad start. The thing is though in these leagues starts by SP's were limited to 162 starts per SP slot but that was a different type of league. If we wanted to change the overall value of starting pitching, couldn't we just decrease the number of SP slots in the lineups each day? Currently we have to have 5 SP's in our lineups each day. On an average day each team will only start an average of maybe 2 SP's. Back when we did weekly lineups I can see the need to have 5 SP slots but now that we are doing daily why not eliminate some of those slots? That would reduce the number of pitchers on rosters and would definitely reduce the waiver wire merry go round. That is if we say reduced rosters to 30 players instead of 35 and decreased the number of SP's in each lineup to 2 per day and RP's to maybe 4 per day. That would decrease the value of overall pitching and then we wouldn't see so many pitchers on rosters that no one has ever heard of. Or you could even leave rosters at 35 but if you are limited in the number of pitchers per day why would a team want to load up on them then? The last few seasons and especially last season there have been so many rosters with one starter at each offensive position, no reserve position players and a boat load of pitchers. With platooning in MLB becoming an artform now I think it would be good if we had room on rosters for for that purpose. For example lots of teams sit their catchers on Sunday. If a teams roster does not feel forced to load up on pitchers you could afford to carry a third catcher and play him on days when you know a catcher won't be in the lineup. Or if you have a Torri Hunter that always sits on Sunday or a guy like Curtis Granderson that sits a lot against lefties, if you have reserve players on your roster you have more options. I guess what I am trying to say is let's try and make it a situation where you have to be active and find points instead of grab as many SP's as possible and hope for the best.
|
|
|
Post by Mike - N.C. Pine Tar Sluggers on Jan 30, 2011 16:27:57 GMT -8
As an example of the pitching scoring weighting, this is what CBS default now is. Note that this is different from what I am used to, but includes the loss as a penalty. Personally I think a pitcher deserves 1 pt for a K, but this could provide a basis for trying to compare weighting. In addition, you could add holds and the other elements that have been used in the past.
Head to Head Point Values Pitching Category Point Value Win 7 points Save 7 points Quality Start 3 points Strikeout .5 points Base on Balls -1 point Inning Pitched 3 points Hits Allowed -1 point Earned Runs -1 points Hits Batsman -1 points Loss -5 points
I did read the Mudcats description and he may be on to something in terms of limiting SP per day. A typical weekly league (with weekly lineups) has 6 or so SP (just like Dennys). With the weekly lineup though you likely can only have up to 10 starts if you have a lot of two-starters. In his league, I could see teams having 15 plus starts in a week with streaming. This further overweights pitching points versus batters (instead of just being a matter of checking annual points).
In addition, including penalties for walks, hits, and ER will put the focus on good starters and not just a starter who has a 50% chance of winning.
In terms of the roster strategy, I also agree that part of the fun of a daily league is taking advantage of matchups (benched players, lefty righty matchups, etc). If you have only SP on the bench, this element is missing.
|
|
|
Post by Kenny - Carolina Mud Cats on Jan 30, 2011 17:45:27 GMT -8
Mike, exactly the point I was trying to make myself on SP's and reserves but you did a much better job than I. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Chris - D-Town Diamond Dusters on Jan 30, 2011 18:11:49 GMT -8
I ran through all of CBS' commish tools, and I am unable to locate any option for limiting starts (or IP for that matter). I know it used to be there. Does anyone else know where it is located? I am just curious what options they have.
The option of lowering the SP's who start on a roster has some merit. The total roster can't really be changed from 35, however, or it would throw the keepers/salaries completely out of whack.
|
|
|
Post by Mike - N.C. Pine Tar Sluggers on Jan 30, 2011 18:56:31 GMT -8
I tried to look it up, but did not have CBS Commish access. A also tried to submit a question, but they said I had to be the Commish. I did go to the ad on CBS Commish features and it included the following:
•Player/Position Options - Choose which positions you want to use in your league and how many of each a team can have. You can set the number of players each team starts each week, the size of the bench, and even setup a DL and Minor Leaguers. You can choose to use just American League players, just National League, or both.
Based on this, I would suggest you send a question to CBS if you are interested in looking into setting maximum starts.
In terms of roster size, I think 35 still works. Even if max starts does not work, you could reduce the number of daily SP & have a larger bench (although this could be cumbersome forcing daily lineup changes). The main idea seems to be to avoid teams carrying 9 SP and 1 hitter on the bench. Hopefully with fewer SP, there would be some additional hitters on benches.
|
|
|
Post by Kenny - Carolina Mud Cats on Jan 30, 2011 19:06:39 GMT -8
Instead of limiting the number of starts per week if we just eliminated the number of SP slot's on each roster per day that should take care of it. As it is now if you can start a max of 5 SP's per day you can load up on SP's on your roster but if you only have 2 SP slots per day that you can start a SP there would be no need to carry 12 or 13 SP's on a roster or play the waiver wire everyday. Chris could we change the settings to 14 pos players: 2-C 1-1B 1-2B 1-3B 1-SS 1-MI 1-CI 1-LF 1-CF 1-RF 2-OF 1-DH
And set the pitching up: 2-SP 4-RP That would give each team 15 reserves. If a team wants to load up on SP's that's fine but chances are you won't be able to use them and if we limit waiver claims during the week to 3 it won't be possible to play pitcher roulette. If owners think that is too much of a limit you could always go with: 2-SP 3-RP 1-P That way you could rotate a SP and RP.
Chris I looked through the commish tools and couldn't find a way to limit the number of pitching starts either.
|
|
|
Post by Chris - D-Town Diamond Dusters on Jan 31, 2011 11:20:30 GMT -8
My only issue with starting only 2 SP's is that often times your 3 main guys all start on the same day. I suppose that is where matchups come into play. I think if we add the negative points for H/W/HBP, that would prevent the wheel of SP's from spinning. I would even drop down to 4 SP and 5 RP, or 3 and 5 with a P spot, something along those lines.
I'd love to get more input on this from some others...
|
|
|
Post by Chris - D-Town Diamond Dusters on Jan 31, 2011 11:24:06 GMT -8
I am going to change the scoring on CBS temporarily, to reflect the following: IP - 1pt Hit Against - -0.5pt Walk - -1pt HBP - -1pt
To see what that does to stats/projections. Check it out for yourselves and LMK your thoughts... (This is kind of in line w/ the scoring Mike posted above, as IP are worth 3 in that system)
|
|
|
Post by Doug - Tatooine Tusken-Raiders on Jan 31, 2011 13:09:05 GMT -8
What is our main goal for making all of these changes? I hope we aren't changing scoring just to change it.
I thought we already had a vote for limiting pick ups, now we are going to limit IP too? If you don't want someone's bench to be all SP's, can you put a limit on how many pitching bench spots you have? Limiting weekly pick ups should stop streaming.
I'd hate to see reduced SP spots. Last year, I had to bench some of my starters because many started on the same day.
If we make any major changes, can they be implemented next year, 2012? I've already started building my keepers for this year and now I have too many RPs, which I had to trade for.
Are we still planning on raising the cost of extending players, from 3 to 5, in 2012?
|
|
|
Post by Doug - Tatooine Tusken-Raiders on Jan 31, 2011 13:13:11 GMT -8
Chris, I may be wrong, but I seem to remember Buerhle's perfect game and that he scored the GF point, perfect game, no hitter, SO, IP, K and the W, not just the perfect game (25pts). I was amazed that he scored around 60-70 points for someone in one day.
|
|
|
Post by Chris - D-Town Diamond Dusters on Jan 31, 2011 14:37:48 GMT -8
I'll have to go back and check on the PG/NH issue. I'll do that sometime later this evening, and post what I find. If what Doug said is the case, I'll change PG to 10 points, so it is technically still 25 w/ the NH added to it.
As far as the positions, Doug you bring a good point up about having changes take place in 2012, and I tend to agree with that. I will still check and see if there is a max starts that can be put into place, then I will figure out a good number (Somewhere around 210 - 5 SP slots average 2 starts per slot, that shouldn't be unrealistic. Without streaming I think that is about the average, if you figure each team should have 2 or 3 2-start guys, plus a couple reserve SP's). I'll contact CBS right now about that.
|
|
|
Post by Paul - Hanover Headhunters on Jan 31, 2011 14:58:42 GMT -8
Stupid question - would it be easier to adjust the hitters stats up rather than the pitchers stats down?
Also, I'm in agreement that any scoring changes be implemented 2012, as most of us are always positioning our keepers for the future.
I would like to see the minors draft this year however.
|
|
|
Post by Doug - Tatooine Tusken-Raiders on Jan 31, 2011 15:04:47 GMT -8
If we end up limiting waiver claims per week, will we get rid of the charges for free agent pick ups? I believe that we only implemented the charge to slow down streaming. I could see leaving it in place or getting rid of it.
|
|
|
Post by Chris - D-Town Diamond Dusters on Jan 31, 2011 16:51:37 GMT -8
Here is CBS' response to putting a limit on starts and/or IP:
Discussion Thread Response (Matthew Q) 01/31/2011 06:22 PM This option is only available in roto and ranked leagues and will not be available in leagues that use Head 2 Head scoring for their league. Customer (Chris King) 01/31/2011 05:43 PM My league would like to establish a maximum starts per postion limit. I know Yahoo offers this option, but I do not see anywhere in my commish tools that CBS offers it. This tool is vital to many leagues. A secondary option would be an innings pitched limit, either per week or per season. Please let me know where these options can be found, and if not, please let me know how I can suggest these additions.
|
|
|
Post by Chris - D-Town Diamond Dusters on Jan 31, 2011 16:55:02 GMT -8
Paul - I think the hitting stats are OK, as in there aren't really any areas or categories that should be adjusted or added. There are some fundamental pitching stats that are missing though (W, H).
Doug - I think we'll still keep the waiver claim fee in place, as it adds a little extra to the pot. With CBS charging $150/season for the league service, the pot seems somewhat small without the claim fees (IMO).
|
|
|
Post by Mike - N.C. Pine Tar Sluggers on Jan 31, 2011 18:09:23 GMT -8
I am going to change the scoring on CBS temporarily, to reflect the following: IP - 1pt Hit Against - -0.5pt Walk - -1pt HBP - -1pt To see what that does to stats/projections. Check it out for yourselves and LMK your thoughts... (This is kind of in line w/ the scoring Mike posted above, as IP are worth 3 in that system) Chris - I do not know if it is still set this way, but I just took a look at projections and Cliff Lee is barely at 300 pts. Below that there are some pretty goodpitchers (such a Cole Hamels) that are lower than 200 pts. I think this is why with penalties for hits and walks, the IP are typically given 2-3 points.
|
|
|
Post by Chris - D-Town Diamond Dusters on Jan 31, 2011 20:05:01 GMT -8
Yeah I saw that too. It actually worked out to no pitchers being projected to top 400, while 63 hitters are projected at 400 or more. I'll tweak with it a little more and see what happens. I'll try it w/ 3pts per IP, as well as a couple other combos.
|
|
|
Post by Chris - D-Town Diamond Dusters on Feb 1, 2011 8:45:20 GMT -8
I changed a couple of things around, and I think the pitcher's scoring if fairly accurrate right now. Check out the stats on CBS and let me know what you think. Here is the current pitchers stats:
Pitching Categories Setting BBI - Walks Issued (Pitchers) -1 point BS - Blown Saves -3 points CG - Complete Games 4 points ER - Earned Runs -1 point HA - Hits Allowed -.5 points HB - Hit Batsmen .1 points HD - Holds 2 points HRA - Home Runs Allowed -1 point INN - Innings 1.5 points IRS - Inherited Runners Scored -1 point K - Strikeouts (Pitcher) 1 point L - Losses -6 points NH - No-Hitters 15 points PG - Perfect Games 25 points RL - Relief Losses -4 points RW - Relief Wins 6 points S - Saves 6 points SO - Shutouts 5 points W - Wins 10 points
|
|
|
Post by Mike - N.C. Pine Tar Sluggers on Feb 1, 2011 10:22:18 GMT -8
I changed a couple of things around, and I think the pitcher's scoring if fairly accurate right now. Check out the stats on CBS and let me know what you think. Here is the current pitchers stats: Pitching Categories Setting BBI - Walks Issued (Pitchers) -1 point BS - Blown Saves -3 points CG - Complete Games 4 points ER - Earned Runs -1 point HA - Hits Allowed -.5 points HB - Hit Batsmen .1 points HD - Holds 2 points HRA - Home Runs Allowed -1 point INN - Innings 1.5 points IRS - Inherited Runners Scored -1 point K - Strikeouts (Pitcher) 1 point L - Losses -6 points NH - No-Hitters 15 points PG - Perfect Games 25 points RL - Relief Losses -4 points RW - Relief Wins 6 points S - Saves 6 points SO - Shutouts 5 points W - Wins 10 points I did a quick review of the projections. This is a breakdown of points that occurs. Point Range........Hitters.........Pitchers >600...................1..................0 > 500..................9..................1 >400...................84................10 >300...................84................36 >250...................54................30 >200............not on roster.......49 >150............not on roster.......54 >125............not on roster........30 Total..................232..................210 If you assume 420 players on rosters and 50% hitters/pitchers, the cutoff for draft would be 271 pts for hitters and 125 pts for pitchers. Pitching scoring 1. There is a pool of 11 elite pitchers (>400 pts). 2. The core of average pitchers has 66 pitchers between 250 and 400 pts. 3. Over 133 pitchers (that will be rostered) score less than 250 pts. 4. The cutoff for the last pitcher taken is approx. 125 pts. 5. The elite pitchers have a floor (400 pts) that is more than 3 times the bad pitcher floor of 135 pts. Hitting observations: 1. Hitting has higher elite points (approx 10 players > 500 pts) 2. The hitting core is solid with 168 players between 300-500 points. 3. There will be approx. 34 players scoring between 250 and 300 pts. 4. Cutoff for last hitter taken approx. 270 pts. 5. The elite hitters have a bottom (500 pts) that is approximately not quite double the cutoff of 271 pts. Conclusion? I am not sure what it means, but it seems to me that the pitching scoring is approx. 100 pts low. In addition, there is a severe drop-off in talent based compared with batters. This drop-off in pitching talent could easily lead to streaming in terms of a team's bottom tier of SP are bad so there is little incentive to keep week to week and to play matchups instead. Point Changes? Similarly, I am not sure how to adjust. I think part of it is increasing the point for innings from 1.5 to 2 or 2.5. My other suggestion may be re-looking at the pitcher penalties and adjusting them so they are maybe 1 or 2 pts less. Another possibility would be seeing what increasing holds to 3 pts might do to see if relievers gain value relative to bad SP. Note that looking at the numbers did let me know that the average scoring in this league for hitters is less than I am used to. At the same time, the hitting is also lower so it should fix itself (assuming that pitching points can be adjusted upward). If in the process of testing you end up with pitching points too high, the easiest fix at that time may be to increase hitting pts by changing the strike out penalty to 0.5. A couple questions on the scoring above. 1. Did you mean to give a .1 pt bonus for a pitcher hitting a batter? 2. Were you going to adjust the PG/No hitter scoring? Sorry for the long winded note.
|
|