Holds

[pittspiratesgm]

Could we add holds as a cat. in this league there are 36 rp spots and there are 30 MLB teams

What i was thinking about was switching saves to saves/holds so the league would still be 5X5

[Kansas City GM]

I like this idea too, but maybe someone can explain how the 3 RP's works with basically each team only having 2 closers?

[New York Yankees]

You will find that I actually agree with you about adding holds, because there really aren't enough pitchers who are going to get regular save opportunities. This is just some thing have been living with in this league so far.

[Arizona Diamondbacks]

I don't like the idea at all of combining saves and holds into a single category.

I have mentioned before the fact that we only have three RP slots with five SP slots as highly unusual. I even suggested we add holds and subtract a few SP slots and replace with P slots, but I believe that idea was shot down quite thoroughly when I brought it up. I don't like saves and holds being the same category, but adding an equivalent hitting category after adding holds is difficult as well. As it stands now things are probably better left as they are. I wouldn't be opposed to more RP or P slots but I'm not so sure about the other ideas.

This kind of goes hand in hand with the fact I was talking about possible roster expansions to add more OF and IF slots. I would've hoped for more RP slots as well. However, that idea was shot down in less than 24 hours and no one else seemed to have much of an opinion since no one said anything after I requested to hear what other people thought. This league is like that sometimes. It has good owners, but they aren't always the most talkative. That's fine in it's own way since I would rather have a quiet league than a league that is out of control with whining and crying about everything all the time.

[Kansas City GM]

In the other league I'm in with the Pirate's Gm (he runs it), we are adding Holds as a category and I believe OPS for hitting. I feel that if you don't have OBP or OPS as a hitting category, a hitter is cheated. All the walks and HBP are just lost, and for a guy who owns someone like Pujols would def want this. Just a thought.

[Arizona Diamondbacks]

I played in a league exactly like that this past season. A 6x6 league with OPS and Holds the additional categories. Personally, I didn't feel any huge difference in the league to the point where it would make a worthwhile difference. It certainly added a new crop of players with middle relievers gaining value, but it was a 16 team league anyway so all the quality middle relievers would have been owned regardless.

To be honest, I have grown quite fond of the standard 5x5 categories. I've had discussions with people who are big stat gurus, who talk about how the categories are outdated and aren't a true representation of the players. They've made arguments for things like total bases are better than home runs and quality starts are better than wins. That they show the true value of players over the other categories. Personally I think they're a little bit nuts, but I'll let them feel that way as long as they don't try to force it on me. It just wouldn't feel right without having home runs as a category.

I just want to throw this out there so everyone is clear. When changing league scoring settings I am a strong believer that the vote must be unanimous. In this league we would have to get a perfect 12-0 in favor of the change. If even one person disagrees I don't believe any change can be made. For lesser rules you can go with a simple majority vote, but scoring settings are the very core of the league.

[New York Yankees]

Although I would be for adding the holds and OPS as it would make some players, especially RP worth something, which that alone makes it a good choice imo, I do agree with Arizona that scoring changes are the heart of any league and must be a unanimous vote for change.

[LA ANGELS GM]

I would like to see us add the holds and the OPS if necessary to even out the scoring.

[redsoxgm]

I agree with Tom, I say we keep it the way it is. Adding holds waters down the value of closers. Also, adding catagories changes the way people should build their teams.

[New York Mets GM]

Do not add holds. They are the stupidest stat in baseball. They are the reason the term '8th-inning guy' exists. They are the reason that teams don't even use the 2nd best reliever in a big spot because they have to save them for a later inning... utterly ridiculous stat.

In the realm of fantasy though they are just as pointless. They are somewhat of a crap-shoot to who will get them and so many can be handed out in a game that it devalues the stat and we would be ranking it with the same value as a real stat like wins. You can earn a hold by coming in the game and being ineffective. Up 3 runs in the 6ths a RP can enter the game and allow 2 solo shots, not record an out and be pulled. That player would earn a hold if the team kept the lead... stupid stat.

I vote no.

[Atlanta Braves GM]

Pretty tough to argue the point much better than that. I think I'm going to fall in line with the Mets on this one.

No to holds.

And by the way, even if you have a relief pitcher that doesn't contribute in saves, there are some middle relievers out there that are fairly consistent at helping your SO, ERA and possibly Win categories.

Phil Hughes wasn't getting me any saves last year, but he did pitch fairly consistently every 2-3 days and contribute in the other categories. It wasn't world beating but it helped.

[New York Yankees]

Since this is a scoring issue change and it appears we do not have a unanimous agreement, there will be no change this season....Issue closed.