|
Post by Arizona Diamondbacks on Mar 25, 2008 15:22:17 GMT -5
Valid point Cardinals, but in all fairness to me I did bring this up a month ago when we had barely started the MLB draft. It's not my fault over a month passed by with no response from the LM on a decision. It's too bad because I really think this would make the league more enjoyable, but it doesn't sound like any of you guys are up for it.
All I really want added are holds and walks though to make it a 6x6. Holds would just make relievers that aren't closers relevant, that's not so bad is it? And walks are something every hitter in the league gets, obviously some better than others, it's not SB's or something where only certain guys get it. I don't think that would change players values enough to have somebody jump 4 rounds in the draft or be enough to complain about or stop us from doing it, but that's just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by New York Mets GM on Mar 25, 2008 15:36:38 GMT -5
I wouldn't mind a different setting, but before drafts had happened. Holds I think are a bad choice because they really don't show any ability, when a reliever goes 0.2 4 ER making a 0-5 game turn 4-5 he receives a hold, it's not the best stat.
|
|
|
Post by Arizona Diamondbacks on Mar 25, 2008 15:49:19 GMT -5
Sorry dude, but that's completey wrong. A hold is just like a save. The score has to be within 3 runs and you can't pitch your way into a hold, the same way you can't pitch your way into a save. And it is a testament to ability, a guy with 40 holds is just as rare as a guy with 40 saves. You know how many great set-up men are out there with sub-2 and sub-3 ERA's? Most of these guys are probably owned, but under the current settings have little value other than their solid numbers, adding holds gives these guys a little relevance because when you think about it, the guy getting the ball to the closer is just as valuable as the closer in real life. So, why not close the gap in value in fantasy? It's just something I would like, it adds more depth to the league because 5x5 is so bland. There's so much more out there that you don't even know about until you try it.
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees on Mar 25, 2008 17:42:08 GMT -5
Surprisingly I am in full agreement with AZ on this one.
|
|
|
Post by Atlanta Braves GM on Mar 25, 2008 18:52:33 GMT -5
News Flash: Arizona and New York agree!
In other news grass is now red, the sky is pink, and women pee standing up.
My world no longer makes sense.
For what its worth, I stated this weeks ago when this was first brought up (that's sad that this has been goin on for weeks). I would not be opposed to a 6 x 6 as stated above.
|
|
|
Post by New York Mets GM on Mar 26, 2008 1:18:43 GMT -5
Ok, I was wrong about the 4+ run difference. But to record a hold a player doesn't even have to record an out, thats a stupid stat. I have seen more than once a lefty specialist come in to face a guy, walk him or give up an hit and get credited with a hold. The definition also varies because it is not an official MLB stat. I just personally think it is the most pointless stat in baseball and shouldn't be included.
|
|
|
Post by New York Mets GM on Mar 26, 2008 1:21:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Arizona Diamondbacks on Mar 26, 2008 16:05:08 GMT -5
Let me ask you a question, how many of those guys that you used as examples would actually be on someone's fantasy roster? I can't say for sure, but the chances are none of them, maybe one of them if someone was desperate.
When I talk about holds, I'm not talking about the middle reliever with a 4+ ERA or the lefty specialist who comes in a pitches to one batter. Those guys, even with holds, would still be borderline worthless. When I talk about holds, I'm talking about the the Heath Bell's, the Pat Neshek's, and the Jonathan Broxton's of fantasy. Those elite setup men who more often than not will pitch fantastic, not like the guys you showed in your example.
Also, it's not fair to use that one example. It's only showing one side of the story. What about the guy who comes in with runners on 2nd and 3rd with only 1 out and a 1 run lead? What happens when he K's the next two batters and saves the lead for the SP? Is that a pointless, stupid stat? Doesn't he deserve a little something special for that? Often times, the guys getting the ball to the closer have to pitch better than the closer himself. Setup men many times inherit baserunners that they need to strand, but closers usually get to start with a fresh inning and no one on. You have to look at the whole picture before you make a decision on how important or not important something is.
And I'll just throw this last piece out there. I consider setup men a valuable pool of players. Saying you don't want holds is like basically eliminating that whole pool of players from the fantasy game. It would be like deciding not to play with catchers this year. Deciding that catchers are the most worthless offensive position and saying you don't want to play with them because of that. That is basically what you're doing if you're eliminating setup men from fantasy baseball.
Well, I've said more than my share. Hopefully I've opened some eyes. If you actually read all that, thank you, I know a lot of people decide it's a waste of their time to spend 3 minutes reading something.
|
|
|
Post by New York Mets GM on Mar 26, 2008 18:11:39 GMT -5
I've read it, and I understand that at times holds show a good performance. My point is that they often don't and can be awarded to pitchers for doing nothing. Also a save like stat that can be theoretically given to every reliever on the roster outside the closer in one game is one of the reasons I don't like that stat.
The biggest point here though is that we did our dynasty draft and MLB draft without considering holds and are doing a non-auction type free agency period. So whoever wakes up earliest on the day of free agency gets a monopoly on the Broxtons and Bells?
In general I think it's too late to change the format because we already drafted.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs GM on Mar 27, 2008 7:51:40 GMT -5
I need a favor. I'm doing all I can to get people to make their MiLB picks, yet we still have way too many skipped picks. Can we take some of this energy and put it into flooding those OTC and on deck w/ emails or IM's to get them to make their d**n picks.
As far as this topic, most of my leagues are 6x6 factoring in holds and OBP. He wanted to set it up this way. We can make the suggestions to him, but ultimately it's what he thinks is best for his vision of the league that will be done. He set the league up, he has that right. We have the right to suggest ideas then see what happens.
|
|
|
Post by New York Mets GM on Mar 27, 2008 8:10:56 GMT -5
Cubs, could you also suggest an added round to the draft so there is a fair shot at the Okajimas and Bells?
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs GM on Mar 27, 2008 8:33:13 GMT -5
If he decides to change the scoring to add anything, then I think that's a valid suggestion and will recommend it.
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees on Mar 27, 2008 8:39:45 GMT -5
I truly think the problem here once again lies in the fact that the LM doesn't seem to be making any input one way or the other on any/all of the suggestions made in this league.
I have been also sending emails to those going over the OTC time, but it doesn't look good at all when the LM is one of the main culprits. And the Mets owner needs to go, plain and simple, he may want to continue to participate, but he sure hasn't shown it with his actions in the last month or more.
|
|
|
Post by Chicago Cubs GM on Mar 27, 2008 9:02:17 GMT -5
I sent an email to the LM regarding the Mets this morning. Basically saying the same thing you just said NY. I'm in total agreement with you on that.
|
|
|
Post by New York Yankees on Mar 27, 2008 11:12:48 GMT -5
I do think it is real hard for the LM of this league to penalize anyone else for inactivity tho....
|
|