Apolyton Fantasy Baseball - Weekly League

[snoopy369]

Don't have AVG and OBP both, same for Wins/QS ... one or the other. They have too high of a correlation. SLG instead of AVG is alright, though.

You know me, I always prefer fewer categories than you Berz... less complexity means less imbalance. I'd very much prefer to have no more than 8 categories on either side. But I'll play whatever...

[SlowwHand]

Whatever. All it means to me is which brand can of whoop ass I need to use.

[jdd2007]

Scrap Holds and replace it with W.

[EPW]

Scrap Holds and replace it with W.

[SlowwHand]

I agree with jdd.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I agree with EPW

QS instead of Wins. Holds add value to relievers who are not designated starters.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Don't have AVG and OBP both, same for Wins/QS ... one or the other. They have too high of a correlation. SLG instead of AVG is alright, though.

You know me, I always prefer fewer categories than you Berz... less complexity means less imbalance. I'd very much prefer to have no more than 8 categories on either side. But I'll play whatever...

I agree with everything in this post.

[jdd2007]

I disagree that OBP and AVG are highly correlated. Look at players like Grady Sizemore and Bobby Abreu. AVG is an overrated stat, but it is a classic one, so we should keep it. If we are going to scrap OBP, then we should at least have Walks as a stat.

[snoopy369]

Highly correlated != identical. Though I don't know why you bring up Abreu and Sizemore, both have a high average and a high OBP... particularly Sizemore, in fact (one of the best at either). They're great examples of the correlation, I'd suggest Adam Dunn is a much better example if you want one where they aren't correlated (terrible average, good OBP).

I have no problem keeping OBP instead of AVG certainly - i'd expect it of this league - but you shouldn't have both. Balance in a Fantasy Baseball league comes almost entirely from ensuring that there is no primary group of players that too large, or too small, a portion of the stats come from.

For example, you could have:
OBP, AVG, H, Doubles, Triples, HR, R, RBI, SB
and
QS, W, K, IP, ERA, WHIP, SV, H

Those are arguably a fine set of stats, except that I could trivially make a team that pounded the floor with the rest of you, assuming you drafted 'normally' (ie, an even split between 1-2 and 3-4-5 hitters, and the normal 4 SP 1 RP 2 CP with the 2 CP drafted in the middle of the pitchers) by drafting in the first 8 rounds 4 starters and 4 leadoff hitters.

In general, pay attention to how the hitters or pitchers in the appropriate rankings fall. In a balanced setup you will have a split between power hitters and OBP hitters [and of course the top is always the hitters who give you both]. In particular, balance (power hitter [HR, RBI, SLG] vs. leadoff hitter [SB, AVG, OBP, R, 3B] vs. middle of the lineup on-base machine [AVG, 2B, OBP, R, RBI, OPS], and pitchers (SP vs CP, and K-Machine vs Stat Mahcine [low ERA/WHIP] vs potentially Win Machine (a pitcher who wins more than his stats indicate, perhaps due to his offense; some people intend for this pitcher to not be a good choice).

A potential combination:
OBP, SLG, R, HR, RBI, 2B, 3B, SB
and
QS [starter, stat machine], K/9 [K-Machine], K/BB [K-Machine, Stat Machine], ERA [Stat Machine], WHIP[Stat Machine], SV [CP], H [RP]

although that somewhat unbalances in favor of Stat Machine, but in the scheme of things that's probably the least significant balance problem [that's the best pitcher, anyway, so it's not entirely a bad thing] and ignores Win Machine [as I think should be].

One thought on the RP issue ... we could always just have a mandatory RP slot [say, SP SP SP RP CP CP P] assuming Yahoo! allows that. It's not any more odd than having a mandatory 2B slot, after all.

[SlowwHand]

Walks is important; and I'd rather do Starters over Long Relief, is the reason for my opinion.

[snoopy369]

OBP gets walks just as well. It sounded to me like JDD (and you) are arguing "AVG is lousy, so let's have OBP"; so scrap AVG and be done with it No reason to keep it around "because it's traditional"; we've never gone by that rule here before

We can scrap holds if you don't like holds, but having both QS and W(in) is even worse than AVG and OBP - higher correlation. Relievers don't get enough wins for the fact that they COULD get wins to affect things in the slightest (I'd never use a long reliever in a non-hold league anyway unless I really, really wanted to scrap wins and K's and go straight for ERA/WHIP).

Also note that holds has nothing to do with long relief - they almost exclusively apply to SHORT relief, specifically 8th inning guys (and occasionally 7th inning guys). LR both have usually much worse ERA/WHIP, and less reliable usage in hold situations. Holds are for the almost-closers like Carlos Marmol on the Cubs last year.

[Berzerker]

Stat Categories:

R, H, HR, RBI, SB, TB, OBP, SLG
W, SV, ERA, WHIP, K/BB, K/9, QS

CHIME IN ON THE STATS

we can combine OBP with SLG (OPS) to make room for a different stat but I kinda like separating OBP from SLG to give the guys who get on base by any means their own category. They deserve it...

And I'm not too keen on K/9, K/BB is a better stat imo. So we can replace K/9 if y'all want something else, maybe Holds. I dont know, just trying to avoid imbalance except where we need it, like SPing. I'd rather have Wins and Quality Starts, there are RPs who can get 10-12 wins and we need some incentive for non closing RPs if we drop Holds. Maybe we could drop K/9 and Holds and add Losses. As much as I dislike categories that tend to cancel each other out Losses are relevant to the game of baseball

yech, I remember why I dont like commishing

where's Jaguar? We still need 1 more person and I'd hate recruiting someone if Jaguar shows up, then we'd have to go to 14 people and find someone else.

[OzzyKP]

Are extra base hits covered by any of those stats? Or are they not worth keeping track of?

[Berzerker]

We can scrap holds if you don't like holds

Used to like em, but its basically just a 2nd "closer" role. I dont mind them, I typically delay nabbing enough closers to get hitters and Holds allowed me to wait and I didnt care for the mad rush to get Closers anyway.

but having both QS and W(in) is even worse than AVG and OBP - higher correlation.

AVG is nice, but OBP is what counts. QS are for SPs and Wins covers SPs and RPs used to keep games close.

Relievers don't get enough wins for the fact that they COULD get wins to affect things in the slightest (I'd never use a long reliever in a non-hold league anyway unless I really, really wanted to scrap wins and K's and go straight for ERA/WHIP).

There are 3 classes of relevant RPs - Closers (SV), set up men (Holds), and RPs (Wins) designated to keep games close. The Holds guys and closers are more susceptible to losses than the RPs who get more wins by virtue of coming from behind. Adding Losses will hit SPs, closers and set up men more, but we'd need Holds in the mix.

We could get rid of K/9 and put in Holds and Losses, that would spread our range to RPs beyond closers and even set up men.

[snoopy369]

I'd prefer to remove TB and replace it with something else - either 2B, or whatever. Something that rewards semi-power-hitters a bit more and HR hitters a bit less.

I'd really rather not include W and QS for the above reason - keeping W does NOT give you any real incentive to have a RP on your roster, they rarely get that many wins, and the wins they do get are highly random (unpredictable). Holds, as much as I dislike them, are still better for capturing relievers; they're somewhat less random, and they don't overemphasize starters like W do. Wins bias towards SP over RP nearly always, particularly with a high IP requirement; the top RP is less likely to benefit you than some waiver wire SPs, and adding W will actually shift that more in favor of the waiver wire SP, particularly if you favor pitchers who get 2 starts in a week.

K/9 or K/BB are better for relievers, of course, in some cases; it's possible/likely that having both K/9 and K/BB might be enough incentive to use some relievers. Holds would be better, and appearances is best, though that's sort of a silly stat in my opinion.

If I remember I'll bug Jaguar on gtalk tonight.