|
Post by tony on Mar 23, 2017 8:42:59 GMT
From LAST YEARS' draft thread:
01. Matthew (matthew) (GMT) (Matthew gets Troy's 11th round pick) 11. Troy (thutch) (GMT) (Troy gets Matthew's 7th round pick)
How is the status quo a no pick trading league when there is a precedent from the previous season?
My reason for QS over W was that all types pitchers now have a counting stat (QS - SP, H - MR, SV - CL) and values are somewhat evened out as SPs had their value somewhat artificially diminished, W's are generally decided on luck rather than the pitcher.
|
|
darthchris
Sophomore
Joined: January 2013
Posts: 178
|
Post by darthchris on Mar 23, 2017 8:53:14 GMT
Not a place for W v Qs. As I single metric Qs is better at measuring P.
We use 7.
Qs is era and innings. We already count that. We don't count wins anymore.
As for pick trading. Bad choice of words by me. Should be keepers as was in ref to that.
|
|
Will
Sophomore
Joined: January 2015
Posts: 104
|
Post by Will on Mar 23, 2017 9:39:28 GMT
I suggested to Steve that we switch the QS for two reasons. The first was that it means all the pitching categories are controlled by the pitchers (and defense), not by the offence. It means you can draft pitchers based on how good they are, not if they play for the Cubs. Secondly, QS can only be achieved by starters, whereas wins can be achieved by all pitchers. As Tony said, now each type of pitcher has a counting stat and the rest of the pitching categories get contributions by every type of pitcher.
QS are not independent from ERA, but there are ample examples of categories that are linked, but they all differ slightly. A high strike out rate of a young pitcher with an innings limit could see an exceptional Era, but few QS. Pitchers that walk too many batters can keep their era down but likely won't get to the end of the 6th inning as often, so the category does add a different dimension.
We only count innings in terms of an innings limit. No other stats take innings into account.
I'm voting with the majority. Trading for picks in the first 6 rounds gets a bit messy so I while I wasn't against the trade happening in the first place, I do think a rule should be put in place.
|
|
darthchris
Sophomore
Joined: January 2013
Posts: 178
|
Post by darthchris on Mar 23, 2017 10:03:45 GMT
The value of a pitchers era is directly linked to the innings they throw.
|
|
Will
Sophomore
Joined: January 2015
Posts: 104
|
Post by Will on Mar 23, 2017 10:56:40 GMT
This is not true, a pitcher can have the same era if he throws 10 innings or 1000 innings.
|
|
ben
Batboy
Joined: February 2014
Posts: 16
|
Post by ben on Mar 23, 2017 17:26:47 GMT
A couple of points from me, I’m just stating where I stand and why. Sorry for the length of this post.
1. I don’t think anyone cheated. Draft picks have just never been traded before. It was never a written rule, but top 6 picks were always kept untouched. Hence the fuss.
2. In my opinion they should remain untouched. The point of a keeper league is to enter the draft with the best keepers you can in order to gain an advantage. Allowing teams with stronger keepers to double-down that advantage by trading the excess for early picks is not a good idea for the league. They, in a practical sense if not ‘technically’, enter the draft with more keepers then the other teams. They could have 7 players in rds 1-6, or 8, or more as the stronger teams acquire more keeper level players to trade. This is what I meant about competitive balance. We should not be building in extra advantages for teams that are already stronger. They already have their ‘reward’. Confusing this with strength of keepers misses the point.
3. I strongly disagree with the idea that having an extra player in the keeper rounds is not a big advantage. It is. That’s the point of the trade. It doesn’t automatically mean that person will win, but look at your team and tell me it wouldn’t be greatly strengthened by having Cruz (or De Grom, or Dee Gordon etc.) waiting in the last round.
4. A couple of people have referred to the fact that me and Chris (plus some other teams) have a strong set of keepers. That’s exactly why things should not be changed. Pre-2015 draft we traded Yu Darvish for Bryant and Buxton and entered that draft with only those two as keepers. Two players who hadn’t played in the majors yet. We ‘reached’ with our next picks for decent, dropped, young players to build a new keeper core- Springer, Bogaerts, Machado- and through that and trades ended up with the keepers we have now. That’s why the league works. That year Jacob had a ridiculous set of keepers and won the league. We picked up his scraps because he was not able to trade them for picks and get even stronger. Next year it could be someone else who has the best keepers. The setup of the league allows for fairly swift change depending on how you play.
5. I don’t think trading of draft picks should be allowed because it benefits the strongest teams too much in a 6 keeper league. This isn’t dynasty. At the moment the league is fair and different teams seem to win every year. I vote to keep it like that.
|
|
darthchris
Sophomore
Joined: January 2013
Posts: 178
|
Post by darthchris on Mar 23, 2017 22:22:56 GMT
This is not true, a pitcher can have the same era if he throws 10 innings or 1000 innings. Let's trade!! If your team has pitched 1500 innings of 3.60era, adding an additional 180innings of 3era will lower your era by more than 45inns of 2 era. We're measuring era and innings twice with QS.
|
|
|
Post by tony on Mar 23, 2017 22:54:35 GMT
This is not true, a pitcher can have the same era if he throws 10 innings or 1000 innings. Let's trade!! If your team has pitched 1500 innings of 3.60era, adding an additional 180innings of 3era will lower your era by more than 45inns of 2 era. We're measuring era and innings twice with QS. The same can be said of all stats, Avg, Slg etc by PAs and Era, Whip, K/BB with IP. Don't see your gripe.
|
|
Will
Sophomore
Joined: January 2015
Posts: 104
|
Post by Will on Mar 23, 2017 22:58:49 GMT
You are right that in the context of the league era is dependent on the number of innings pitched (along with WHIP and k/bb) and what has happened is we have different definitions of the word "value". Whereas I thought you meant the value of the statistic era which is not affected by the volume of innings but the ratio to earned runs and you meant the value in terms of the actual category.
But you are wrong that we're measuring innings and era twice with QS. Your 84 relievers that you've drafted with get you 0 QS, yet they'll still pitch innings, still contribute to your era. They might have got the odd win too, but that counts for nothing this year.
Quality Starts add a new metric and benefits pitchers that throw fewer pitches per out, and still allowed to have an era of up to 4.50. This is surely better than having a metric that is totally reliant on the performance of the pitchers' offence. I'm not saying QS isn't a flawed metric as the 6 IP 3 ER ruling seems a bit arbitrary and not of particularly high quality.
But it is a huge improvement on Wins, which is a hideous way to value a pitcher and serves no benefit to anybody beyond the Cy Young voters. I've asked Kate Upton and she agrees.
|
|
darthchris
Sophomore
Joined: January 2013
Posts: 178
|
Post by darthchris on Mar 24, 2017 6:15:11 GMT
While the enthusiasm for Qs is cute, for roto it's a bad fit.
Most of its support comes from Keith Law and his fanatics - and how can the guy who had Delmon Young and Joba Chamberlain as his top prospects ever be wrong - but in 5x5 or whatever Qs simply measures what's already being scored (era and innings).
Is wins a single perfect metric? Of course not but nobody says it is.
Is W a different way to measure a P that combines well with the rest? Of course it is.
Saying Qs is better because it measures the individual rather than the team is also a beautiful oversimplification of things.
It ignores defence and park factors. - as does era - (let's move to xfip - let's not as that would be silly...) You can also make same argument about hitting cats being affected by team rather than hitter (it's part of their value)
Runs depends on rest of batter's line up. Home runs - park factor (team they play on. RBI - hitters in front. Baa - park factor Obp / park and line up protection. Slugging - park. Sb - team/manager - place in line up (the oriels stopped running last year)
As for pitching
W - team S - being the last reliever H - random Qs - innings and era Era - innings and era K:bb strike zone and defence (willingness to throw strikes v nibble Whip Pitcher control/ defence (babip)
They all have flaws. Except they all measure dif things apart from Qs which measures the same.
W make for better roto. If we just want to see who the best player is let's just play WAR.
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Apr 2, 2017 17:59:35 GMT
OK so the poll has closed and the resounding winner is option C (allowing draft pick trading only for round 7 or later) so that will be the new rule from now on. Thanks everyone who voted.
|
|