MLB Roster Pitching Slots

[z - El Guapo - retired]

Any chance we adjust the current pitcher format on Fantrax? Right now we have 5 SP and 5 RP. Wondered if some sort of inclusion of P slots might help the diversity of how teams use their staffs. Maybe something like 4 SP, 4 RP and 2 P might give flexibility to teams that have relievers who also start or starters who can also contribute out of the pen. Figured it was worth asking if the current format, which appears pretty restrictive, might be tweaked a little.

For sure there will come a time during the season when every team gets stuck with a pitcher he can't get into his rotation or use out of his pen because he doesn't have the "correct" designation. Using a couple of P slots gives teams the flexibility to put their arms to better use.

[Deleted]

The problem with changing that now is that we drafted with that format in mind. I wouldn't have drafted the same way with the change you are proposing. If it were changed for next year...

[z - El Guapo - retired]

We don't see how it would effect your draft, since using a P for either SP or RP would work for all positions you draft... but next year would be fine, as well. We were just thinking aloud about how everyone's roster flexibility might improve by the tweak to current format.

[Deleted]

I drafted extra SP's knowing that some may become relievers as happens.
Changing it now would allow people that drafted too many RP's an advantage of allowing them to roster them all instead of picking the best ones weekly. If this was a daily lineup league I would agree with you, but being a weekly, it's kind of a big change.

[Deleted]

One could also argue that the new innings restrictions could have impacted the way a team drafted. I get that.

I only mean to say that I drafted with that specific lineup in mind, which meant that I might have drafted more relievers if I had known I would have been able to use them. Being that Finnegan is RP and Rodon is RP only, that affected the moves I made and those moves would have been different if two additional P slots might have been floating around.

It's not a big deal exactly, as I think the team that wins this season will be a team that cashes his prospects in, and I'm not that team, but I actually would have drafted differently. And I don't think we should be making so many changes for this season post-draft. Just my two cents.

[z - Gaz]

This for me is less of an issue than if it was a daily league. With it being weekly people will not change their pitching around so much, in my opinion.

[z - El Guapo - retired]

Perhaps you guys are right. We haven't played in a league in which rosters were set weekly for 15 years and have no idea how it is a positive thing. Seems as though it will have a restrictive impact on how owners use their rosters. We'll see... On most subjects/rules, we are for owners running their teams as they see fit. Don't get why the weekly limitation is in place. We like to move our pitchers around some... sitting there doing nothing all week while "moves" could be made seems like a waste of potential talent... but whatever.

[z - El Guapo - retired]

Seems like a lot of energy/effort has put forth to minimize owner impact on how their clubs perform than in any league we have participated in for quite a while. We had completely forgotten about weekly line-ups. Too, bad, as we really enjoy going to our team page and setting our line-up each morning -- sitting bats against same-sided pitchers and working relief pitchers into the day's line-up, watching for injuries and effective match-ups, etc.

Dunno... the format of this league is beginning to seem less interesting as we move further through the current rules and impending rules. More about fear of owner impact than about the normal excitement of managing a club.

In truth, we didn't really check the rules very thoroughly when we signed on. We expected more or less a normal league, with individual owner decisions the norm, not minimized. Basically, we enjoy running our teams.

[Brewers GM (Brad)]

I would posit that the format doesn't limit how you control your team, just that you do it in a different way. I like knowing that I won't pay a price if I can't get to my cpu 7 days a week for 4 months straight. And like you, every other league I'm in is daily. Nothing wrong with a little variety.

[z - Gaz]

To be honest I prefer daily lineups and find weekly lineup setting as very frustrating. It can also help the less active and hinder the GM's who want to "tinker" with their teams each day. However, it is less pressure on the commish and we all know how difficult a job they have to keep everyone happy.

[Deleted]

STOP CHANGING RULES AFTER THE DRAFT IS OVER!!!

[z - Tim]

The idea of weekly rosters was primarily to prevent starter streaming. So, you can't win the SP stats just based quantity. Its a pretty common theme in a lot of leagues like this that good teams will have double digit starting pitchers and just win not through quality guys so much as brute force streaming and sheer quantity. And there's not much skill in throwing 10 guys out there a week, so cutting that sort of strategy out only adds to the challenge. The gameability left in weekly lineups at least takes a bit more skill. Yes, you can't swap out hitters now, and to be honest, if we could make hitters daily lineups but pitchers weekly lineups we probably would, but the impact on hitters going from daily-weekly is far smaller than starters so the net result is a big positive.

Its possible we could have addressed the starter streaming by setting starts limits, but the fantrax way of doing that has a sizeable loophole, so the weekly rosters were chosen instead (the starts limit is assessed daily so if say the limit is 7 per week and you have 6 starts by the penultimate day, and you have 3 starters going on the last day, fantrax will allow allow those last 3, thus you'd have 9 starts for the week and go over the limit). If at the end of the season teams don't like the way the weekly thing functions, it's not impossible we could consider alternatives to limiting starter streaming like a starts limit, but teams have definitely drafted with streaming limits in place so I don't see us doing away with streaming limits altogether, whether its weekly rosters or whatever.  If there was a groundswell to use a different streaming limit other than weekly rosters after this season though, its not impossible we would consider it.

As for the P slots, the whole intention is for teams to run out 5 starters.  So the pitching slots match that.  We're definitely not looking to allow teams to have more starters, that was the point of the weekly rosters in the first place, and additional P slots would be spots for more starters. Having more than 5 relievers is a different story, maybe someone wants to punt starters, but i'm not sure we need to promote that strategy, and if someone wants to pursue it, they can go trade for relievers that have SP eligibility. A central sort of premise here was that this was truly going to be a 5 SP league where how you did with starters was ruled by quality not quantity.  

[Deleted]

Agree with Serge

[z - El Guapo - retired]

We agree with Serge, too. heh heh

We thought our suggestion about using a coupla P slots for pitchers was a simple thing that would help everyone run their club more easily. Had no idea our suggestion would get hammered. We will stop making simple suggestions -- promise.

[Deleted]

Nooooooooooo

I just didn't like these suggestions for the first few years of the League.
But your suggestions are certainly legit and in a vacuum I support them.

[Angels GM (Scott)]

I find it preposterous, the idea that rules can't be amended/changed/updated after the draft. The initial draft is one of the very first significant event to start a league. By virtual certainty, any rule change/addition/amendment, etc HAS to happen after the initial draft. All leagues will run into situations where rules will have to be changed for various reasons.

Draft order is still determined by reverse order as per league vote. So what rule changes are y'all referring too when you capitalize the word STOP?

Royals, you were one of the most vocal about having some sort of tanking enforcement in place, as were many others. So Rob put minimum requirements up to a vote and thus far not ONE person has voted to not have a minimum, even though that is an option.

Mets, you agree with Serge to stop changing rules but ironically are the one that started this thread proposing a rule change. You also previously said you would prefer minimum rostering as you were strogky against a lottery.

I am baffled that some folks want certain things different but don't want anything different at the same time. Does not compute.

Frankly, I've never seen a league where the admin has been more open about explaining the rationale behind any potential rule change. Not everyone will agree with any rule proposed, but at least the rationale is expressed in an open format. I am no fan of changing rules for the sake of changing rules. But addressing tanking was something that was always gonna have to be looked at, at some point. And Rob has, by and large, allowed the group to decide its fate. Frankly, changing rules causes a lot of headaches for league management for a variety of reasons so I would expect rules changes will be at a minimum as needed basis and addressing tanking was needed.

* the views expressed above are my opinion only and don't necessarily represent the views of the league or its administration.

[z - El Guapo - retired]

We like that the LMs are on their game -- watching that no owner is tanking; being mindful that streaming isn't used to skew pitching stats; etc.

But, we figure the league runs best when individual owners run their clubs as they see fit. And setting roster daily rather than weekly is so much more fun. Drafting according to where you fall in the standings. Positional flexibility for pitchers by using P slots. Stuff like that is what makes the league fun... more so than worrying about who's getting an undo advantage and tightening up the rules to prevent cheating. We think we have a good bunch of baseball savvy owners. Let's ease up and go to work on the mind game of fantasy baseball rather than worrying about who "gaming the system."

Doubt we have any cheaters or otherwise goofballs in here, anyway.

And we will stop making suggestions to improve the league -- promise.

[z - El Guapo - retired]

And we only agree with Serge so he feels better and will relax. heh heh

[Angels GM (Scott)]

Mets, there is nothing wrong with suggestions.

FWIW, I agree on weekly. I prefer daily settings as well, but I understand the rationale behind the decision. I would rather have IP limits as a means to control streaming but I get that Rob doesn't want people to be able to win pitching cats by starting a dozen SP all the time. It's a trade off, but as others have pointed out variety is nice.

I would imagine if it becomes wildly unpopular, we could look at a change next year. Will have to see how it plays out.

[Deleted]

Perhaps you didn't catch the sarcasm in my first post Scott.
If you read my second post I clearly supported Mets in his suggestions and ability to present them.
I thought I was clear when I said that his suggestions are valid...but Id prefer we roll with the basic structure we drafted for for a few years.

Suggestions and discussions are awesome bro.