CS/eGriz Fantasy Baseball

[clenz]

As of right now, I have grabbed a tie for first with Willie.

Should be fun right down to the end.

If I wouldn't have reached the stupid fucking 200 inning limit, I'd be way ahead by now.

You want any of my batters?


I'm out of it, haven't been checking it much because I'm out of it and am willing to sell my players off for literally nothing.


Unless, that is it is a keeper league.

[AZGrizFan]

As have I. You and I are the only ones that this is occurring to. Maybe we're that far ahead in the pitching stats that it's giving others a chance to catch up.

Fuck, I don't know how to fix that.

From the settings page...

GAMES PLAYED LIMITS (MAXIMUMS)
Batters
No Limit
Pitchers
200 GS

You can only have 200 games started for your team for the season, maximum. You guys have used that, so you can't use any more starts.

W
T
F
?

What kinda goddamned half-assed league you runnin' here, Willie? A STARTS limit? Who EVER heard of such a thing?

Next year, either that gets removed or I don't play.

[ToTheLeft]

Well, there's a reason for the starts limit...

If you don't have one, then wins and K's go to the most active person, rather than the best drafter/best scouter of talent.

All you have to do is constantly stream pitchers and start 5+ each night and you'll run away with the K's and the Wins and have a decent ERA and WHIP (because it all averages out and you'll be middle of the pack). You just draft a bunch of batters and a couple closers, then pick up a few average pitchers at the end of the draft and stream them all season.

So really, it's an issue of fairness. However, it's probably something someone should have brought up/reminded everyone of earlier.

[AZGrizFan]

Well, there's a reason for the starts limit...

If you don't have one, then wins and K's go to the most active person, rather than the best drafter/best scouter of talent.

All you have to do is constantly stream pitchers and start 5+ each night and you'll run away with the K's and the Wins and have a decent ERA and WHIP (because it all averages out and you'll be middle of the pack). You just draft a bunch of batters and a couple closers, then pick up a few average pitchers at the end of the draft and stream them all season.

So really, it's an issue of fairness. However, it's probably something someone should have brought up/reminded everyone of earlier.

Pure BS.

Unless you're looking for people to draft and then forget about the game for 6 months.

LIMITING ROSTER SPOTS LIMITS STARTS AND K'S. Otherwise, let's just all draft until there are no more players, right?

And your theory about WHIP and ERA doesn't pan out. It doesn't "average out". In another league I'm in, I'm in FIRST PLACE in WHIP, FIRST PLACE in ERA and LAST place in the league. In this league, I drafted Tim Lincecum expecting a 2.0 ERA and 250 K's...have I gotten that? Nope.

I've played in rotisserie leagues for 15 years. I've NEVER seen a MAXIMUM # of starts as a limiter. I've seen MINIMUM #'s of innings, but NEVER a maximum.

[ToTheLeft]

So you're telling me if I started 30+ starting pitchers a week, I wouldn't have a respectable ERA and WHIP with an insanely high K and Win count? 4-5 per day, 7 days a week.

That's what it prevents.

To get 200 starts at this point, you would have needed to get 10 starts a week. We have 9 pitcher spots. Assuming you want to carry 2-3 relievers, 7 pitchers with an average of 1.3 starts a week would only be at the low 170's right now. 8 starters and 2 closers without a missed start and you'd get to 200 later this week. And again, this assumes no injuries. So to get to 200 as early as you guys did, you had to stream in starters.

I agree that minimums are good too, but they're not as important as maximum.

[AZGrizFan]

So you're telling me if I started 30+ starting pitchers a week, I wouldn't have a respectable ERA and WHIP with an insanely high K and Win count? 4-5 per day, 7 days a week.

That's what it prevents.

To get 200 starts at this point, you would have needed to get 10 starts a week. We have 9 pitcher spots. Assuming you want to carry 2-3 relievers, 7 pitchers with an average of 1.3 starts a week would only be at the low 170's right now. 8 starters and 2 closers without a missed start and you'd get to 200 later this week. And again, this assumes no injuries. So to get to 200 as early as you guys did, you had to stream in starters.

I agree that minimums are good too, but they're not as important as maximum.

We're LIMITED to the # of pitchers we can have on our roster. If I want to go with all starters, I'm giving up saves as a category. Just like if I want to go with all power hitters, I'm giving up stolen bases (or average, or whatever) as a category. It's called MANAGING. I streamed in starters because they qualified as RELIEVERS.

Setting it up this way is like baseball for dummies.

[ToTheLeft]

"qualified as relievers" doesn't matter. All 9 pitching spots are open to any pitcher. There were no "SP" or "RP" only spots.

And so you would have streamed in pitchers all season, wound up with a ton of K's and Wins, and been far ahead of those of us who have been less active with the league so far. That's why there's a limit. It actually makes it tougher. Any idiot can see who is supposed to start on a given day and load up their roster with starting pitching. It's another thing to pick pitchers who won't get hurt and will be good all year, and will give you the most out of their starts.

I think you're not exactly arguing the right point here. I'm actually kind of confused as to a couple of the comments you've made. Yeah, you're limited on how many players you can have. But it's not "managing" to just see who the starters are for a given day, start a bunch of them, and know you'll get some wins and k's, then get rid of them and do it again. That's just being able to read the probables and being active.

[Willie]

So you're telling me if I started 30+ starting pitchers a week, I wouldn't have a respectable ERA and WHIP with an insanely high K and Win count? 4-5 per day, 7 days a week.

That's what it prevents.

To get 200 starts at this point, you would have needed to get 10 starts a week. We have 9 pitcher spots. Assuming you want to carry 2-3 relievers, 7 pitchers with an average of 1.3 starts a week would only be at the low 170's right now. 8 starters and 2 closers without a missed start and you'd get to 200 later this week. And again, this assumes no injuries. So to get to 200 as early as you guys did, you had to stream in starters.

I agree that minimums are good too, but they're not as important as maximum.

We're LIMITED to the # of pitchers we can have on our roster. If I want to go with all starters, I'm giving up saves as a category. Just like if I want to go with all power hitters, I'm giving up stolen bases (or average, or whatever) as a category. It's called MANAGING. I streamed in starters because they qualified as RELIEVERS.

Setting it up this way is like baseball for dummies.

I did the default setting, I had no way of knowing this. So don't cry to me.

[AZGrizFan]

"qualified as relievers" doesn't matter. All 9 pitching spots are open to any pitcher. There were no "SP" or "RP" only spots.

And so you would have streamed in pitchers all season, wound up with a ton of K's and Wins, and been far ahead of those of us who have been less active with the league so far. That's why there's a limit. It actually makes it tougher. Any idiot can see who is supposed to start on a given day and load up their roster with starting pitching. It's another thing to pick pitchers who won't get hurt and will be good all year, and will give you the most out of their starts.

I think you're not exactly arguing the right point here. I'm actually kind of confused as to a couple of the comments you've made. Yeah, you're limited on how many players you can have. But it's not "managing" to just see who the starters are for a given day, start a bunch of them, and know you'll get some wins and k's, then get rid of them and do it again. That's just being able to read the probables and being active.

Yeah, well I can't "load up the roster with 30 pitchers" either, so what point are YOU arguing, exactly? Limiting the # of pitchers ALREADY limits the # of starts you have available. Why have some arbitrary limit?

[ToTheLeft]

"qualified as relievers" doesn't matter. All 9 pitching spots are open to any pitcher. There were no "SP" or "RP" only spots.

And so you would have streamed in pitchers all season, wound up with a ton of K's and Wins, and been far ahead of those of us who have been less active with the league so far. That's why there's a limit. It actually makes it tougher. Any idiot can see who is supposed to start on a given day and load up their roster with starting pitching. It's another thing to pick pitchers who won't get hurt and will be good all year, and will give you the most out of their starts.

I think you're not exactly arguing the right point here. I'm actually kind of confused as to a couple of the comments you've made. Yeah, you're limited on how many players you can have. But it's not "managing" to just see who the starters are for a given day, start a bunch of them, and know you'll get some wins and k's, then get rid of them and do it again. That's just being able to read the probables and being active.

Yeah, well I can't "load up the roster with 30 pitchers" either, so what point are YOU arguing, exactly? Limiting the # of pitchers ALREADY limits the # of starts you have available. Why have some arbitrary limit?

Because you can add/drop pitchers as much as you like. Using the waivers. I think that's the point missing in translation here.

I figured that's what you had done. If you managed to get to 200 starts using only guys who were mainly on your roster, that's impressive. I figured you did the typical "streaming" technique and drop/added guys to keep starters in there.

So yes, roster space is limited. But that doesn't prevent people from picking up/dropping players to get maximized starts.

Usually the best way to combat this problem is to set a limit on waiver moves per week/per season. But you can also combat it by setting a games started or innings pitched maximum. A lot of leagues do the same for position players.

[AZGrizFan]

Yeah, well I can't "load up the roster with 30 pitchers" either, so what point are YOU arguing, exactly? Limiting the # of pitchers ALREADY limits the # of starts you have available. Why have some arbitrary limit?

Because you can add/drop pitchers as much as you like. Using the waivers. I think that's the point missing in translation here.

I figured that's what you had done. If you managed to get to 200 starts using only guys who were mainly on your roster, that's impressive. I figured you did the typical "streaming" technique and drop/added guys to keep starters in there.

So yes, roster space is limited. But that doesn't prevent people from picking up/dropping players to get maximized starts.

Usually the best way to combat this problem is to set a limit on waiver moves per week/per season. But you can also combat it by setting a games started or innings pitched maximum. A lot of leagues do the same for position players.[/quote]


NEVER heard of it, and I've been doing this for 15 years.

Again, I've heard of MINIMUMS, but never maximums.

[ToTheLeft]

I've been playing fantasy baseball for 11 years and I've certainly heard of it.

Ignorance is not always bliss my friend.

[AZGrizFan]

I've been playing fantasy baseball for 11 years and I've certainly heard of it.

Ignorance is not always bliss my friend.

It is where I come from.

[Willie]

I realize it may be too late for this season, but I found out how to set the pitchers limits to no limit. Dunno if it'll help much now.

[AZGrizFan]

I realize it may be too late for this season, but I found out how to set the pitchers limits to no limit. Dunno if it'll help much now.

sure, if you've got a hot-tub time machine and can go back to about August 15th.

[Willie]

At least it got fixed dammit.

[ToTheLeft]

Usually not kosher to change rules mid-season, but I am right there with Willie and I admit I had no idea about the rule, so it's not like I was playing to the rule or anything. So I don't care...

I guess I have to stream pitchers to try and catch up.

[ASUMountaineer]

Usually not kosher to change rules mid-season, but I am right there with Willie and I admit I had no idea about the rule, so it's not like I was playing to the rule or anything. So I don't care...

I guess I have to stream pitchers to try and catch up.

At least I didn't finish last. Congrats to Tom for the title.

[ToTheLeft]

Yeah, but can someone admit that, if the pitchers rule hadn't been changed, I'd have run away with the league?

Regardless, I stopped paying attention for like 3 whole months and still wound up 2nd. Can't complain too much.

[AZGrizFan]

Yeah, but can someone admit that, if the pitchers rule hadn't been changed, I'd have run away with the league?

Regardless, I stopped paying attention for like 3 whole months and still wound up 2nd. Can't complain too much.

I'll admit it. In fact, my "complaining" wasn't meant to get willie to change the rule...just something I'd never heard of. Glad we got it straightened out....I'll try not to spend the winners check all in one place. Because the winners check and will buy me a cup of

[clenz]

So did I finish last? ESPN is blocked at work

[AZGrizFan]

So did I finish last? ESPN is blocked at work

Nope.

1 AZ AZGrizFan 54.5 -0.5
2 ToThe Left 50 +0
2 Montana Willie 50 +0
4 Spaceballs T... 46.5 +0.5
5 Drunken Slugger 46 -1
6 TC Panther 43 +0
7 ASU Mountaineer 42 +1
8 Team Mann 28 +0

[clenz]

YES!!!!


After the first 2 months I had, I'm just happy I didn't finish in last. At one point I was like 10 points from behind 7th place.

[Willie]

Yeah, but can someone admit that, if the pitchers rule hadn't been changed, I'd have run away with the league?

Regardless, I stopped paying attention for like 3 whole months and still wound up 2nd. Can't complain too much.

Maybe. I had a 6 point lead when I did that, and after I did, my pitchers shit the bed for me and cost me big time. So I actually fucked myself more than anyone else.