I’d love to leave it alone and stop trying to bang on it until it resembles someone else’s league and not the one it has been. I play in other leagues as well and enjoy them for what they are.
Awesome, dude. Thanks as always for your two cents.
“Hang up and listen.”
I was in this league the first several years of its existence. It wasn’t then what it is now. It has not always been what it is today, and it need not forever be what it is right now. I said I’d listen, you said “Get off my lawn,” I said thanks. If you have anything new to say, I’m all ears. Otherwise, I’m sorry you apparently won’t be voting with me, and I’m happy to wait to hear from everyone else.
My perspective is this:
-
Is it healthy for a league to allow its members to discuss things they think might improve the league and their experience? Yes.
-
We aren’t going to vote on a ton of action items.
-
Like Ron said, changes need to be minor in nature so that we maintain the foundation and integrity of what makes this league unique. Do not throw the baby out with the bath water.
I don’t have a problem with increasing the value of holds. Although it usually has a negative impact for me personally, I think scoring for wins and losses is important to keep the way it is because it is simply one of the cornerstones of how the game is played. I think keeper limits should be 5 or 6 at most. I agree with not waiting a year for changes to be made.
1 Like
To your proposals specifically, @Knoxbanedoodle.
I have no issue with having something for quality starts, but I don’t think wins and losses should be eliminated. They are always going to be part of baseball. If you want to make it where you get X points for a quality start, X points for a win, that’s different.
I’m not not in favor of increasing holds from two points when saves are five. Pitching the ninth inning with a lead is a different animal.
Also, I’m opposed to increasing the number of keepers. The entire purpose of flipping the draft style was to give those at the bottom a better chance of improving their keepers in the draft and moving up the standings quickly. Having 70 players off the board compared to 112 drastically helps with that.
Finally, Dale and his Wild Dogs team has traditionally been a bottom tier team, and he’s leading the league as we approach the All Star Break. @Idstrosfan is in the top 4, too. There is more parity right now in the league than we have had in a awhile.
1 Like
The difficulty with the question of W/L and QS is that most people are coming at it from a viewpoint of a decline in W spread among starters. The actual number of W is still the same, and they are spread more across all pitchers, mostly because starters don’t go as far as they used to in games. This provides opportunities to roster mid-game relievers or swing men to shore up that change. Where it gets tricky for using QS instead of W is that as the number of starters who go 6 or more innings declines, so too does the number of QS available for counting, whereas the overall total number of W is and will always be static.
Makes sense. If we did incorporate quality starts, my thought was to divide the current 10 points for wins into five for quality starts and five for wins. This way wins match losses, and quality starts turn into a bonus for pitchers like we do currently with complete games and no hitters.
2 Likes
W=7
L=-3
QS=3
That’s one option, as is my suggestion to split wins and quality starts to be worth five points apiece and keeping losses at a negative five points.
Not for nothing, but this is subjective. I voted for that change–as I know @Idstrosfan did as well–because it brings the league into alignment with MLB. (To say nothing of my appreciation for Sphinx’s persistence.)
Where are you on my final proposal, kind sir?
I like that idea a lot.
1 Like
Everyone has their motivations as to why they support or dislike a proposal. As a commissioner, I want to see everyone enjoy the league and feel like they can compete if they make the right moves. I try my best to look at the greater good in my thought process, and sometimes I’m wrong.
I already gave my vote to your three ideas.
No to increasing the value of holds from it’s current value of two. No to increasing keepers from five to eight. No to entirely eliminating points for and against wins and losses, but if we want to split the current 10 awarded to wins between wins and quality starts, I’m open to that.
Also, the reason any agreed upon proposal has a year before it’s implemented is to give all owners sufficient time to see how it impacts their roster and possibly changes their keeper approach.
1 Like
This was my fourth proposal, just so it’s clear. Make changes one year to go into effect the next. Not to go into effect the year after the next. That would give everyone an entire offseason and draft to plan and prepare.
Understood. We are doing that. If a vote following this discussion is necessary, that vote will occur in 2024, a month or two before our draft for the 2024 season. Therefore, any changes would take effect in the 2025 season. We voted to change the draft format in 2023, a month or two before the draft for the 2023 season. Thus, the change goes into effect for the 2024 season.
I’m not keen on voting on proposed rules changes during an existing season to take effect in the next.
Other than the delay, I don’t see any difference in outcome. Unless the purpose of the hesitancy is to allow time to rethink and change back.
I think holds are currently worth 2 points.
They are.
Yes, I have been roundly corrected on this point. I am still in favor of increasing their value by one or two.