Ditching saves as a league (1 Viewer)

[pollardsvision]

Any leagues ever done this?

It's a occurred to me (and others in the league) that chasing the closer carousel is way more annoying than fun.

It's a stupid stat in RL baseball and has no business determining 10% of a fantasy baseball league.

We're probably going to nix it. Is there any reason to keep this category, other than the good ol' "that's the way it's always been done" reason?

I wouldn't mind adding a 5th category for pitching, but I can't think of the perfect one. I don't mind going 5X4, so I won't add one just to even it up (it probably make sense for hitters to account for 20% more anyway).

 

[Zeff]

I'm with ya.

Saves used to be cool.

You'd have Goose rolling out there with that hellstache, straight up scaring guys.

Lee Smith out-Goosing goose.

Rollie with the epic handlebars.

Even Teke with the old man specs and filthy submarine.

It all went to crap about a decade ago, when Rivera became the gold standard for the closer position. If you're going to have a one-pitch repertoire, it's got to at least be a 98mph heater. Him and his cutter have been putting out fires the whole century with all the rockstar charisma of a tax accountant.

At least Eck wore a leather jacket.

If you're going to get awarded a BS stat, you need to offer a little something interesting to the fans.

I say punt it. Maybe replace it with hit batters.

 

[E-Z Glider]

Is there any reason to keep this category, other than the good ol' "that's the way it's always been done" reason?

It rewards people who are willing to put in the work and penalizes people who arent. You're eliminating an entire position.

 

[pantagrapher]

Might as well eliminate wins, too.

 

[Zeff]

Might as well eliminate wins, too.

Totally in favor of exchanging wins for quality starts.

 

[E-Z Glider]

Might as well eliminate wins, too.

Totally in favor of exchanging wins for quality starts.

we did this last year and the league voted to change it back to w's this year. some didnt like the fact that you lost out on w's from closers/middle relievers (which i disagreed with - i liked taking luck out of the equation). others felt that you just ended up basically counting WHIP and ERA twice (which I did agree with).

 

[guru_007]

Saves are 10% of your total score

Normal rosters have 23 players with 2 or so players being closers, or 10% of your roster



I think it's silly to just eliminate saves, I'm pretty sure the addition of WHIP to the standard 4 scoring categories has further reduced the impact of closers.

Steals aren't really that important either, why not eliminate them?

 

[Zeff]

Might as well eliminate wins, too.

Totally in favor of exchanging wins for quality starts.

we did this last year and the league voted to change it back to w's this year. some didnt like the fact that you lost out on w's from closers/middle relievers (which i disagreed with - i liked taking luck out of the equation). others felt that you just ended up basically counting WHIP and ERA twice (which I did agree with).

I feel like the QS stat is more of a way to factor in durability/overall effectiveness.It certainly factors in ERA and WHIP heavily, but at the same time, it only rewards guys who post good ratios if they also eat innings, which is an entirely separate skill from posting them as a reliever.

If strikeouts measure dominance in some way, the QS measures effectiveness. It says, "as a SP, you did what we asked you to do for our team, regardless of how you got it done."

I don't care much for the argument that it rewards guys who eat innings AND post good ERAs and WHIPs too much. I think, where SP's are concerned, it's impossible to do that. If a guy pitches into the seventh every game while giving up few runs and keeping guys off base, he OUGHT to be seen as more valuable than a good, solid MR. That's why he gets paid a #### load more than the MR's by his team.

 

[Zeff]

Saves are 10% of your total scoreNormal rosters have 23 players with 2 or so players being closers, or 10% of your rosterI think it's silly to just eliminate saves, I'm pretty sure the addition of WHIP to the standard 4 scoring categories has further reduced the impact of closers. Steals aren't really that important either, why not eliminate them?

No saves and no SB's?Sounds like every league, everywhere in the universe before about 1990.(Edit: or was that runs that was missing in those days?)

 

[proninja]

QS instead of W is, imo, a good thing. Did it last year for the first time. It was grand.

 

[Zeff]

QS instead of W is, imo, a good thing. Did it last year for the first time. It was grand.

Makes more sense, imo. But sense isn't always good for the game, I suppose.Best league I was ever in was a 4x4 sabermetric type that lasted about five years. But for a "guys down at the bar" league, it would have been boring as hell all year. There's something to be said for focusing on "Sportscenter Stats."

 

[pantagrapher]

Might as well eliminate wins, too.

Totally in favor of exchanging wins for quality starts.

I can actually understand that. At least your exchanging one rough, maddening category with another one.

 

[guru_007]

Saves are 10% of your total scoreNormal rosters have 23 players with 2 or so players being closers, or 10% of your rosterI think it's silly to just eliminate saves, I'm pretty sure the addition of WHIP to the standard 4 scoring categories has further reduced the impact of closers. Steals aren't really that important either, why not eliminate them?

No saves and no SB's?Sounds like every league, everywhere in the universe before about 1990.(Edit: or was that runs that was missing in those days?)

incorrect4x4 leagues always had saves and sb'sWHIP & runs were added later

 

[oso diablo]

incorrect4x4 leagues always had saves and sb'sWHIP & runs were added later

the original 4x4 had WHIP but not Strikeouts

 

[pollardsvision]

Thanks for the input, guys.

We did do the QS instead of W's last year. Guys liked it and the thought of ditching saves is part of the same mindset.

I agree, QS is like doubling up on ERA and WHIP, but I actually like that. Ultimately, a pitcher's job description is very simple. Pitch a bunch of innings without letting guys on base or letting them score. If there are going to be 4 or 5 pitching categories, I don't mind if they all grade how well they do their job.

I thought about the SB thing too and the idea that they are as useless as saves.

I can see the argument, but they, in part, measure an actual skill.

Also, that stat is not completely dependent on one role on the whole team (certain roles help, but there's not a designated "steals" guy).

Ultimately, I just don't think it's fun having to worry about such an arbitrary stat. I'm one of the guys in the league that jumps on spec. saves pretty early. It's more nerve-wracking than fun though.

To me, it would be like if winning in fantasy football required having at least 3 kickers (with 2-3 more back-up kickers) that regularly got hurt or lost their job.

It just doesn't feel like it's in the true spirit of the game.

 

[Spartans Rule]

Quality starts are almost as arbitrary as wins. 5 2/3 shutout innings is not a quality start. A complete game with 4 earned runs is not a quality start. 6 innings, 3 earned runs is a quality start, even if you allow 12 unearned runs.

 

[pollardsvision]

Quality starts are almost as arbitrary as wins. 5 2/3 shutout innings is not a quality start. A complete game with 4 earned runs is not a quality start. 6 innings, 3 earned runs is a quality start, even if you allow 12 unearned runs.

I agree that QS aren't perfect and that pitchers can get screwed when a "good" start doesn't count as a QS.But they are generally a better indicator of whether or not a SP is doing his job than wins and have less luck involved.A SP can get screwed out of a QS just as easily as a hitter can get screwed out of HR, but at least there is some measure. A pitcher that routinely goes deep into games and pitches effectively while doing so will rack up a lot of QS's (and more predictably than wins) just as a hitter that routinely drives the ball hard in the air will rack his share of HRs over the course of a season.BTW, making the QS stat better would be simple, I can't believe it hasn't been done. Simply make ititch 6 or more innings with a 4.50 or lower ERA. That would solve the CG, 4 ER issue.

 

[Captain Hook]

Any leagues ever done this?It's a occurred to me (and others in the league) that chasing the closer carousel is way more annoying than fun. It's a stupid stat in RL baseball and has no business determining 10% of a fantasy baseball league. We're probably going to nix it. Is there any reason to keep this category, other than the good ol' "that's the way it's always been done" reason?I wouldn't mind adding a 5th category for pitching, but I can't think of the perfect one. I don't mind going 5X4, so I won't add one just to even it up (it probably make sense for hitters to account for 20% more anyway).

So you are going to drop it thus putting even more weight on hitters just because you don't like it?If you don't like the stat, use another one that people think will give some weight to either RP or SPK/9 increases value of best relievers as well as startersNet S+H would give relief pitchers weight but make people more careful than just rostering the closerPlenty of others - WHAT do your leaguemates think?

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Any leagues ever done this?It's a occurred to me (and others in the league) that chasing the closer carousel is way more annoying than fun. It's a stupid stat in RL baseball and has no business determining 10% of a fantasy baseball league. We're probably going to nix it. Is there any reason to keep this category, other than the good ol' "that's the way it's always been done" reason?I wouldn't mind adding a 5th category for pitching, but I can't think of the perfect one. I don't mind going 5X4, so I won't add one just to even it up (it probably make sense for hitters to account for 20% more anyway).

So you are going to drop it thus putting even more weight on hitters just because you don't like it?If you don't like the stat, use another one that people think will give some weight to either RP or SPK/9 increases value of best relievers as well as startersNet S+H would give relief pitchers weight but make people more careful than just rostering the closerPlenty of others - WHAT do your leaguemates think?

K/9 and Ks are too correlated imo. I think Saves+Holds would be the better replacement.

 

[pollardsvision]

Any leagues ever done this?It's a occurred to me (and others in the league) that chasing the closer carousel is way more annoying than fun. It's a stupid stat in RL baseball and has no business determining 10% of a fantasy baseball league. We're probably going to nix it. Is there any reason to keep this category, other than the good ol' "that's the way it's always been done" reason?I wouldn't mind adding a 5th category for pitching, but I can't think of the perfect one. I don't mind going 5X4, so I won't add one just to even it up (it probably make sense for hitters to account for 20% more anyway).

So you are going to drop it thus putting even more weight on hitters just because you don't like it?If you don't like the stat, use another one that people think will give some weight to either RP or SPK/9 increases value of best relievers as well as startersNet S+H would give relief pitchers weight but make people more careful than just rostering the closerPlenty of others - WHAT do your leaguemates think?

They are open to other options. We're still discussing.It's not that I simply don't like saves. I'm just wondering how necessary they are or if they add more to the experience than they take away.At this point, it's likely we'll just keep them.The interesting part about saves/closers is how they force you to allocate resources during the auction and in the form of roster spots during the season. As annoying as it is, it probably does add more to the experience.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Is there any reason to keep this category, other than the good ol' "that's the way it's always been done" reason?

It rewards people who are willing to put in the work and penalizes people who arent. You're eliminating an entire position.

Might as well just play fantasy football where you draft your team and do nothing the rest of the year. Another option is joining TRE's HR league.

[*]ERA is some luck, so are wins so if you are ditching saves might as well drop these as well.

[*]Saves are annoying for sure but a challenge.

[*]K's are dangerous because high K guys tend to be high WHIP guys, so you have to balance it out with the Tim Stauffer's of the world.

[*]Not a huge fan of OBP leagues, prefer OPS or avg

[*]The other hitting cats are fine, like leagues with 2Bs and 3Bs

 

[Eephus]

Certainly rotisserie rules overvalue the closer role and the SV statistic but it's just one of the idiosyncrasies of the game. Any category based scoring is an abstraction; changing them doesn't make fantasy baseball any closer to real baseball.

Chasing saves is one of my hobbies. I'm a connoisseur of crappy closers. For me, removing the category entirely would take away one of the more fun in-season pursuits. It's almost unheard of to chance upon a top bat or SP after draft day. But every year, there are closers who come out of nowhere for a half-season or a month. I have fond memories of guys like Derrick Turnbow and Clay Hensley who singlehandedly changed the outcome of leagues.

 

[MAC_32]

I think a 7x7 i'm in is as close to fun + fair as I've seen

Standard 5x5 + QS and relief wins for pitching and OBP and 2B/3B combined for hitting. De-values the speed guys a bit, but I'm fine with that as they have less value in real life if they can't get on base than they do in our game.

 

[Spartans Rule]

Certainly rotisserie rules overvalue the closer role and the SV statistic but it's just one of the idiosyncrasies of the game. Any category based scoring is an abstraction; changing them doesn't make fantasy baseball any closer to real baseball.Chasing saves is one of my hobbies. I'm a connoisseur of crappy closers. For me, removing the category entirely would take away one of the more fun in-season pursuits. It's almost unheard of to chance upon a top bat or SP after draft day. But every year, there are closers who come out of nowhere for a half-season or a month. I have fond memories of guys like Derrick Turnbow and Clay Hensley who singlehandedly changed the outcome of leagues.

Try playing in a dynasty league with this guy where he laughs as he beats you to every Turnbow and Hensley and you have to decide whether to punt saves or pay through the ear to pry away other people's closers.

 

[Spartans Rule]

The above said, I like the idiosyncracies of the 5x5 game. It isn't that close to approximating real baseball, but that's why we have WIS Back to the Future. Chasing closer candidates, finding the right balance between cheap steals guy and legit bats... these things make the game what they are.

 

[pollardsvision]

Is there any reason to keep this category, other than the good ol' "that's the way it's always been done" reason?

It rewards people who are willing to put in the work and penalizes people who arent. You're eliminating an entire position.

Might as well just play fantasy football where you draft your team and do nothing the rest of the year. Another option is joining TRE's HR league.

[*]ERA is some luck, so are wins so if you are ditching saves might as well drop these as well.

[*]Saves are annoying for sure but a challenge.

[*]K's are dangerous because high K guys tend to be high WHIP guys, so you have to balance it out with the Tim Stauffer's of the world.

[*]Not a huge fan of OBP leagues, prefer OPS or avg

[*]The other hitting cats are fine, like leagues with 2Bs and 3Bs

Good points. We will probably keep saves. We did ditch W's and AVG last year (for QS and OBP) and loved it.

We might look at some other hitting categories down the road, but we'd have to decide how far out of balance to go (hitting vs. pitching).

I couldn't possibly imagine being convinced that anything more than 5 pitching categories make sense.

Anything more seems like adding cats for the sake of adding them.

A guy in the league did suggest FIP (as a replacement if we ditched saves), but I'd be very reluctant to start using advanced stats as categories themselves. Like BABIP, I'd prefer to leave those to be used as analysis tools to try to predict who's going to produce in the roto categories.

 

[Zeff]

Any leagues ever done this?It's a occurred to me (and others in the league) that chasing the closer carousel is way more annoying than fun. It's a stupid stat in RL baseball and has no business determining 10% of a fantasy baseball league. We're probably going to nix it. Is there any reason to keep this category, other than the good ol' "that's the way it's always been done" reason?I wouldn't mind adding a 5th category for pitching, but I can't think of the perfect one. I don't mind going 5X4, so I won't add one just to even it up (it probably make sense for hitters to account for 20% more anyway).

So you are going to drop it thus putting even more weight on hitters just because you don't like it?If you don't like the stat, use another one that people think will give some weight to either RP or SPK/9 increases value of best relievers as well as startersNet S+H would give relief pitchers weight but make people more careful than just rostering the closerPlenty of others - WHAT do your leaguemates think?

K/9 and Ks are too correlated imo. I think Saves+Holds would be the better replacement.

With 40 IP set as a minimum qualifying standard, only 2 of the top 30 in K/9 are also in the top 30 in total K's.Up it to 60 IP, and the number rockets to 3.The correlation is purely alphabetical.