[USML Announce] Roto Musings ...

[springkerb at aol.com]

A somewhat more serious response--given the relatively larger number of holds than saves available, I'd be inclined to go with a weighted measure (e.g., 2S + H) if we go in this direction.  Otherwise, the scoring would put an artificial premium on the 7th and 8th inning guys.  I'm not sure what the right ratio would be, but it should probably track the actual relative numbers of expected holds and saves across the league.

I don't have a really strong reaction either way for the moment.  (But did I mention how much I've enjoyed watching your closers flame out?)

Mark

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: springkerb--- via Announce <announce at usml.net>
To: announce <announce at usml.net>
Cc: springkerb <springkerb at aol.com>
Sent: Mon, Feb 12, 2018 12:05 pm
Subject: Re: [USML Announce] Roto Musings ...


I've really enjoyed watching your closers flame out, so I'd miss that.

Mark

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Klein <anrklein at gmail.com>
To: USML Announcements <announce at usml.net>
Sent: Mon, Feb 12, 2018 11:54 am
Subject: [USML Announce] Roto Musings ...



The Yu Darvish signing and publication of the Winick Magazine have my roto juices flowing.  So here's a topic for conversation.


Should we consider changing from Saves as a category to Saves+Holds?  Of course, we would need to do this with a year's notice to make things fair, so likely starting with the 2019 season.


Here's my thinking ...


Saves have always placed an obvious premium on 9th inning guys over good middle relieves.  But it seems the disparity between roto value and real value is growing given that way that managers are using bullpens in recent years.  More and more managers utilize top relievers in "high leverage" situations rather than just the 9th inning.  And increasing numbers of managers are hesitant to let starters go through a lineup for a third time, which makes bullpen depth extremely important in real baseball.  Little of this is captured using our rules.  We chase whoever currently has a 9th inning gig, and do so all year with FAAB dollars.  Meanwhile, most middle relievers -- who are in real life quite valuable -- get ignored.  There are a few exceptions (e.g., Andrew Miller went for $16 last year), but they are few and far between.


Saves plus holds would make a much larger universe of pitchers valuable and reduce the dice-rolling aspect of fishing for saves. The only downside I can think of is that the pool of valuable relievers might be too big and could simply depress the price for all relievers.


Finally, I admit that some of this might relate to my own miserable attempt to compete in Saves during the past few years.  I've tried everything -- buying a high-priced stud (injured or traded); buying closers-in-waiting (never happened or injured); buying low-end closers (flame out or injured).  Etc.


Interested in others' thoughts.  And eagerly awaiting the draft!


-Andy

_______________________________________________
Announce mailing list
Announce at usml.net
http://usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce_usml.net


_______________________________________________
Announce mailing list
Announce at usml.net
http://usml.net/mailman/listinfo/announce_usml.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://usml.net/pipermail/announce_usml.net/attachments/20180212/c059c02b/attachment-0001.html>