|
|
Post by mozeknows (Mets Head of OMG) on Oct 1, 2017 14:34:21 GMT -5
Do we need to adjust pitching wins/losses or leave the scoring as is?
|
|
|
|
Post by mozeknows (Mets Head of OMG) on Oct 1, 2017 15:29:26 GMT -5
I do not believe we should adjust pitchers' scoring away from wins and losses. We have QS as a sta to help ensure that if a good pitcher plays for a bad team, they can pitch well, lose, and still retain value for the start. Most SP are not Sale or Scherzer, and are not guaranteed a QS nearly every time, so wins help balance them out with the guys on top.
As it stands now, the 50th best SP is Michael Fulmer at 523 points. Sale and Kluber are both over 900 points. Fulmer ppg is 20.9, Kluber is 31.6, and Sale 29.3. The 98th overall SP, Blake Snell is at 345/15.0ppg. It seems reasonable to me that the best of the best should be 50% better than the 50th best SP, and the ~100th SP should be 25% worse than that. With the scoring as it now, there is more separation between the elite and 50th than 50th and 98th. If we take away wins/losses, it would further separate the bottom and top, making many more not-valuable SP.
I do not believe we should adjust the scoring; I believe the top and bottom are balanced well as it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by ch435 on Oct 3, 2017 8:31:04 GMT -5
- Fantasy baseball measures individual performance. Wins are almost entirely out of the pitcher's hands, particularly when compared to a QS. Every other stat aims at individual performance. Otherwise mediocre pitchers on good teams are useful, even if they give up 5 runs in 5 innings if they pitch for the Dodgers. (How would you feel about "wins" as a statics for QBs in fantasy football?)
- Goal of fantasy should be player analysis, scouting guys who will improve THEIR performance, not the performance of the offense around them.
- We shouldn't be interested in "balancing out" the top and lower tier of pitchers -- that's playing on easy mode. We should reward those managers who can find / sign / play talented pitchers and not help those who can't by letting them just pick up a garbage pitcher on the wire who happens to pitch for the Dodgers.
- It adds more randomness to the league, when things are ALREADY incredibly random because we're in a weekly league where whether you win/lose a matchup is dependent on an incredibly small sample of the performance of your team. Yes, it's fun to play against an opposing manager every week, but will it still be fun if you put together an amazing team only to lose every week because of just random luck? Ask Cam (just due to pure randomness, he had the most points against out of all of us for a solid two months of the season - due to random factors. Shouldn't we try to reduce that randomness, and let manager skill play more of a role?)
- Do you know any actual real baseball GM who says "Oooo, but that pitcher had 17 wins last season so they must be an ace!!@!"? Isn't it time we caught up with the times? Everyone else in baseball has recognized wins is essentially a meaningless statistic when evaluating pitcher performance -- shouldn't we do the same?
The choice here is between letting random factors play an outsized role in the performance of our teams and between rewarding manager skill in finding talented pitching. I know where I stand.
|
|
|
|
Post by mozeknows (Mets Head of OMG) on Oct 12, 2017 12:01:55 GMT -5
League Voted 9-5 to keep as is; no adjustments in 2018 to pitchers scoring
|
|
