Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 03 Sep 2017, 12:05 pm

Actually, My concern was not streaming. It was simply stockpiling pitchers to win categories based on volume. Again, it's an effective strategy, as long as you forego any prospects or back-ups for your hitters. There is nothing wrong with the strategy--all I wondered is if there should be some minor limitations put on it to keep things within limits. It has the same basic effect of streaming--more starts giving a better chance at winning ks and ws and actually is better than streaming because you can get better pitchers.

If you are going to talk about the Wolfdog strategy...why not talk about another "unrealistic" strategy that actually works? Yeah, when George goes against top echelon teams the strategy falters because those teams are loaded offensively and they may be able to still compete in volume pitching categories because they have high strikeout relievers and starters and several h/s saves guys. But it's a good enough strategy to almost ensure entry into the play-offs. And of course we want to allow a broad range of strategies, but I was just wondering if we might consider a minor limitation on it. Especially when there is concern raised over an all or almost reliever strategy that never works. But it's not that big of a deal to me. Maybe I'll just get three stud relievers and 11 starters next year so I can show George how to really execute that strategy...
User avatar
Dignitary
 
Posts: 3365
Joined: 02 Oct 2000, 9:01 am

Post 03 Sep 2017, 4:17 pm

You realize that this is also the same basic strategy Mike and other excellent players use. Mike's got zero offense on the bench. I keep at least I keep a bench of one O player, but he's got zero, just pitchers. He's also got more Ks. Coincidence? I think not. Bombers have more wins though. Wanna know why? See previous post on winning!

If you want to improve your game Freeman, you should feel free to learn from us!
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 04 Sep 2017, 5:22 am

No I had not noticed that Mike was doing the same thing. I guess if the commish is doing it...then it must be ok. I just don't see why that strategy should be considered any different than going with almost all relievers and only a few starters.

The downside is that it if you use it full-time it caps your upside as a team. It limits your ability to get elite talent when it comes into the league or trade for rentals with stashed prospects. Late in a year when you bear down for the play-offs it makes more sense.

George is like Stanford football. While college defenses have evolved to deal with the spread by going with faster lighter players...Stanford exploits that by going to power football. Here most teams stash some prospects for the future and can't have as many SPs as George does. If you're going to sort of ignore that this is a keeper league...then it is the only possible strategy.

But if you want to win a league...you have to get and trade prospects. So I guess I'll stick with my strategy.
User avatar
Indy Car Driver (Pro IV)
 
Posts: 6441
Joined: 08 Apr 2002, 9:45 am

Post 04 Sep 2017, 10:45 am

I suppose you'd have to put a limit on the number of pitchers you can carry. You can propose that, if you like. It is certainly possible at ESPN.

Regards the strategy, I carry a mix of RP & SP. The ratio of the two is probably league average but I just have more since I've opted out of an offensive bench. By the way, I did carry a small bench earlier on but I grabbed another RP last week to compete in SV/HD (unsuccessfully).

Also, it wasn't really that effective for me. I have 3 stud SP but the back half of my rotation was a mess. I hope it's stable now so I can compete in the ratios against Nick.
User avatar
Indy Car Driver (Pro IV)
 
Posts: 6441
Joined: 08 Apr 2002, 9:45 am

Post 04 Sep 2017, 10:47 am

Something else you could do would be to set a minimum number of position players (1) to prevent owners from completely abandoning any pretense to compete during a re-building season. Not advocating, just saying.
User avatar
Indy Car Driver (Pro IV)
 
Posts: 6441
Joined: 08 Apr 2002, 9:45 am

Post 04 Sep 2017, 10:48 am

Scratch that last post. I don't think you can set position minimums, just max.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 04 Sep 2017, 11:33 am

I am not going to propose any changes. I just thought I would tweak George's nose a little...

I think as far as competing in rebuilding seasons...I think for hitters you should not go less than 11 hitters who are playing. Pitching...we have the innings minimums which should take care of that.

Obviously, my team got considerably weaker as I decided to not try for a play-off spot and rebuild. I just don't know where you draw a line on that.
Adjutant
 
Posts: 77
Joined: 22 Apr 2014, 5:27 pm

Post 04 Sep 2017, 5:04 pm

I'd say there's nothing wrong with having three starting pitchers and also that there's nothing wrong with having nine starting pitchers, but clearly if we think it shouldn't be allowed to have zero starting pitchers, then we've decided there's some kind of balance we need to maintain. The obvious way to address a team's loading up on starters is to set RP slots in the lineup and mandate that they be filled. A team could still have nine starters though.

I don't see a problem with George and Mike's strategy. Just like having eight relievers and three starters, you are sacrificing dominance in certain categories for competitiveness in others. Sure, it's a viable strategy and probably part of what enables George and Mike to make the playoffs, but it's hardly the main reason. And of course their strategy is available to everyone.The offensive equivalent is loading up on fast leadoff hitters. I like to keep strategy options as open as possible.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 04 Sep 2017, 6:30 pm

Here are George's stat ranks:

Runs 8th
Rbis 12th
Sb 9th
OB 14th
Slug 13th
W 1st
Ks 2nd
Era 9th
WHIP 9th
S 7th

Pretty hard to argue that George being in the play-offs is not related to his using this strategy. He has a weak offense and he is mediocre in the pitching categories--except for Ks and ws. If he started fewer starters would we do better in the ratios? Not likely. He only has two starting pitchers that are good in those ratios--Godley and Gonzalez--and only Gonzalez's era is really exceptional. Dropping 3 pitchers to get better ratios would not move the needle in the ration much.

So he is basically losing back-ups for hitters and the ability to develop and trade prospects. Otherwise, it is pretty much a cost-free strategy.

All three of the non-powerhouse teams that made the play-offs used this strategy. Do other teams (that aren't powerhouse teams) now have to now adapt, not stash keepers, and go volume pitching to compete? It just seems dull to me--winning by having more mediocre pitchers. And if enough teams start doing it...it makes it difficult to stash prospects. Which is one of the fun parts of the league.
Adjutant
 
Posts: 77
Joined: 22 Apr 2014, 5:27 pm

Post 05 Sep 2017, 7:02 am

I'm not disagreeing that having a lot of pitchers is what made George's team, and to a lesser extent Mike's, competitive statistically. But I think the reason George makes the playoffs a bunch is that we have several owners who never make the playoffs. If we had more competitive balance, I don't think George would make the playoffs. I see it less as an issue of strategy and more of one of competitiveness.
User avatar
Indy Car Driver (Pro IV)
 
Posts: 6441
Joined: 08 Apr 2002, 9:45 am

Post 05 Sep 2017, 10:03 am

George, I think Nick just said you suck less than many other owners.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 05 Sep 2017, 10:41 am

I would note that Mike has a good offense and he has three very good starting pitchers. He did a good job developing his team and frankly must have had some real bad luck with his scrubs. So his going volume pitching doesn't bother me--he had a good team anyway. What bothers me a little is the idea of making the play-offs with mediocre players based on a simple strategy.
User avatar
Dignitary
 
Posts: 3365
Joined: 02 Oct 2000, 9:01 am

Post 05 Sep 2017, 9:16 pm

SLOTerp wrote:George, I think Nick just said you suck less than many other owners.


Heh, I think he's impressed. Freeman too. Mike we have so much to teach these newbies.
Adjutant
 
Posts: 77
Joined: 22 Apr 2014, 5:27 pm

Post 06 Sep 2017, 7:06 am

I'm sorry that George has become the poster child (whipping boy) here. The stats don't lie. The question is whether it's a problem. I guess I think it will sort itself out. Marcos is a strong owner. We can find a strong owner to replace Kal. I don't think it will be a guarantee to make the playoffs for George if he uses the same strategy.
User avatar
Dignitary
 
Posts: 3365
Joined: 02 Oct 2000, 9:01 am

Post 06 Sep 2017, 11:20 am

schulni wrote:I'm sorry that George has become the poster child (whipping boy) here. The stats don't lie. The question is whether it's a problem. I guess I think it will sort itself out. Marcos is a strong owner. We can find a strong owner to replace Kal. I don't think it will be a guarantee to make the playoffs for George if he uses the same strategy.


This year came down to the final day of the final week! But more than that, I don't think anyone is a guarantee to make the playoffs. That's what makes it fun.