Week 21 Drops

overyourshoulder · Post by **overyourshoulder** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 8:56 am

Now let me see, how many of you jumped in the fracas and piled on? But only Chest and Sheep had the guts to apologize? Step and be men about this boys! You guys are like lemming, one person has an issue and the rest of you jump in like hyena's. Ah, the smell of blood is irresistible I guess.

[ August 22, 2007, 02:58 PM: Message edited by: overyourshoulder ]

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 9:16 am

The mystery is solved. I kind of figured it was something like that when I found out he was ranked 7th.

Interesting also to hear that the lead in the $1000 satellite is using the all RP strategy.

Personally, I find it distressing when people set out to manipulate their scoring via the throwing some categories to succeed in Ratio categories (Whip, ERA, and BA). This is not a slam on Crazytown or anyone else using variants strategy. They are certainly playing well within the current rules of the NFBC.

In the real world, they don't give the Batting title to the person who got a 1.000 with 1 atbat. All baseball achievements have some minimum levels of activity to qualify. Greg has cleaned up some of the greatest abuse by having the 600ip rule but it seems that that hasn't really stopped the RP strat much at all (as was predicted).

To me, calling yourself the champion of a NFBC league should mean that you picked the best offense and the best pitching staff, not figured out how to avoid things like Starting Pitchers and gain points from the avoidance. Remember, these strategies not only allow people to overbalance on draft day, but throughout the entire year as they can focus their FAAB $s in the fewer number of places they chose to compete in.

Spy

ToddZ · Post by **ToddZ** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 9:40 am

To me, calling yourself the champion of a NFBC league should mean that you picked the best offense and the best pitching staff, not figured out how to avoid things like Starting Pitchers and gain points from the avoidance. Just curious, but what's the difference between this and a team like the Yankees having a superior offense with mediocre pitching or the Angels utilizing speed and a great bullpen? Seems to me the idea is to win using your available assets however you see fit to do just that -- win.

You can extend this to all sports. Super Bowls have been won with superior defenses and ball control offenses with just enough passing to get by.

Stanley Cups have been won using a trap defense and a decent power play unit.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 9:41 am

Originally posted by Spyhunter:

The mystery is solved. I kind of figured it was something like that when I found out he was ranked 7th.

Interesting also to hear that the lead in the $1000 satellite is using the all RP strategy.

Personally, I find it distressing when people set out to manipulate their scoring via the throwing some categories to succeed in Ratio categories (Whip, ERA, and BA). This is not a slam on Crazytown or anyone else using variants strategy. They are certainly playing well within the current rules of the NFBC.

In the real world, they don't give the Batting title to the person who got a 1.000 with 1 atbat. All baseball achievements have some minimum levels of activity to qualify. Greg has cleaned up some of the greatest abuse by having the 600ip rule but it seems that that hasn't really stopped the RP strat much at all (as was predicted).

To me, calling yourself the champion of a NFBC league should mean that you picked the best offense and the best pitching staff, not figured out how to avoid things like Starting Pitchers and gain points from the avoidance. Remember, these strategies not only allow people to overbalance on draft day, but throughout the entire year as they can focus their FAAB $s in the fewer number of places they chose to compete in.

Spy Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I have NO problem with unique strategies in fantasy baseball. Some may disagree, but the rules are lenient enough to allow for unique strategies and refined enough to let the best teams win. Good luck all.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 1:46 pm

Originally posted by ToddZ:

quote: To me, calling yourself the champion of a NFBC league should mean that you picked the best offense and the best pitching staff, not figured out how to avoid things like Starting Pitchers and gain points from the avoidance. Just curious, but what's the difference between this and a team like the Yankees having a superior offense with mediocre pitching or the Angels utilizing speed and a great bullpen? Seems to me the idea is to win using your available assets however you see fit to do just that -- win.

You can extend this to all sports. Super Bowls have been won with superior defenses and ball control offenses with just enough passing to get by.

Stanley Cups have been won using a trap defense and a decent power play unit. [/QUOTE]And how many times have the Yankees won with out any Starting Pitchers? Or has Anyone yet won a Super Bowl with out starting an Defense? - this is my whole point. Professional teams CHOOSE where to spend their money, as should fantasy baseball players, BUT, professional teams don't no start a pitcher.

I respect Greg's right to set the rules, I am just voicing my opinion

Spy

[ August 22, 2007, 07:48 PM: Message edited by: Spyhunter ]

GOD Loves You · Post by **GOD Loves You** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 2:07 pm

Spy, just curious, if this method bothers you due to the perceived advantage, why don't you play the angle as well?

I'm in 3 leagues where owners have attempted this strategy, yet none of them have a chance to win the league. Why complain if owners are forfeiting points in 2 categories? And please don't say, "well they're guaranteeing 1st place in 2-3 cats" because it's not always true.

SluggoJD · Post by **SluggoJD** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 2:39 pm

I'm just biting my tongue for now on, on this matter.

[ August 22, 2007, 08:56 PM: Message edited by: SluggoJD ]

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Wed Aug 22, 2007 9:05 pm

Would more than one person attempting that strategy in ONE NFBC Main Event league be enough to be considered NOT in the best interest of the NFBC?

Being that it's such a successful strategy for those trying to get their money back at the expense of the entire event?

~Lance

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 3:57 am

Originally posted by GOD Loves You:

Spy, just curious, if this method bothers you due to the perceived advantage, why don't you play the angle as well?

I'm in 3 leagues where owners have attempted this strategy, yet none of them have a chance to win the league. Why complain if owners are forfeiting points in 2 categories? And please don't say, "well they're guaranteeing 1st place in 2-3 cats" because it's not always true. I was going to this year in the Don Mathis league, where the backdating of stats makes this a no-brainer. If I hadn't my baby's due date 6 days before the draft I would have joined and played that strat just to show the power of the strategy and how abusive it is.

Last year in that league, we had people starting entire lineups of 2 or 3 closing pitchers, with the rest being in in the Minors or Injured. In that league it WAS a guarantee to get 40+ points w/o spending hardly any picks on pitching.

That abuse led to Greg adding the 600ip rule. I applaud that decision and wish he had gone to 900 IP, this would still allow various strategies such as focus on whip/era vs. starting pitching, but by requiring an average of 100 innings per pitching slot, it would make comparisons on ERA/Whip much more appropriate. Again, to use the previous posts point, it would still allow people to under invest in Starting Pitching and over invest in Offense / Closers, but it would remove the ability to not invest in all in what I think all will agree is a HUGE PART OF ANY BASEBALL TEAM, The Starting Pitcher.

Doesn't it seem crazy to anyone else that a fantasy team can easily not have a starting pitcher in this model? Forget whether or not it is a winning strategy, Starting Pitching is the single most important role on a baseball team, and under the current rules, not only can you play a team, you can win a league with out one.

Spy

mgk2004 · Post by **mgk2004** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 5:16 am

Some day, some team in major league baseball WILL try to use a "No SP" strategy. In fact, the Brewers should be trying it right now! How often does a SP get through four/five/six pretty solid innings, and then get lit up? Why? Because they are starting to tire, and the opposing hitters have seen them a couple of times and have an opportunity to zone in on them ...

Solution -- have a staff consisting of all closers and middle relievers (this is where Spy cringes). Each pitcher throws 1 or 2 innnings per day, every-other-day. The hitters are confused because they never face the same pitcher twice in a row. The cost of the pitching staff would probably be less because you don't have any prima donna starting pitchers to worry about. And best of all, Spy couldn't keep making the same argument regarding fantasy teams using this strategy!

I am somewhat joking about the above, but I would give that a try if given the opportunity. I have never heard of any team thinking of doing that, but I've got this message time-stamped if it happens within my lifetime!

Sheep · Post by **Sheep** » Thu Aug 23, 2007 6:49 am

My home league (Head to Head) requires 4 SP and 3 non-SP. No all reliever or all SP allowed.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 4:41 am

Originally posted by mgk2004:

Some day, some team in major league baseball WILL try to use a "No SP" strategy. In fact, the Brewers should be trying it right now! How often does a SP get through four/five/six pretty solid innings, and then get lit up? Why? Because they are starting to tire, and the opposing hitters have seen them a couple of times and have an opportunity to zone in on them ...

Solution -- have a staff consisting of all closers and middle relievers (this is where Spy cringes). Each pitcher throws 1 or 2 innnings per day, every-other-day. The hitters are confused because they never face the same pitcher twice in a row. The cost of the pitching staff would probably be less because you don't have any prima donna starting pitchers to worry about. And best of all, Spy couldn't keep making the same argument regarding fantasy teams using this strategy!

I am somewhat joking about the above, but I would give that a try if given the opportunity. I have never heard of any team thinking of doing that, but I've got this message time-stamped if it happens within my lifetime! When and if this happens and becomes the approach for a real MLB for more than a 1 or 2 week period, I will officially stop complaining about the all closer/rp strat

I maybe mistaken, but I think someone did try in the 50s? Any baseball historian remember this?

Spy

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 5:45 am

Originally posted by mgk2004:

Some day, some team in major league baseball WILL try to use a "No SP" strategy. In fact, the Brewers should be trying it right now! How often does a SP get through four/five/six pretty solid innings, and then get lit up? Why? Because they are starting to tire, and the opposing hitters have seen them a couple of times and have an opportunity to zone in on them ...

Solution -- have a staff consisting of all closers and middle relievers (this is where Spy cringes). Each pitcher throws 1 or 2 innnings per day, every-other-day. The hitters are confused because they never face the same pitcher twice in a row. The cost of the pitching staff would probably be less because you don't have any prima donna starting pitchers to worry about. Interesting. A "group rotation" of say three groups of three different pitchers pitching every three days on a 35-40 pitch count each. It would yet be another reason to prolong the careers of certain left-handers long after they have left there prime. Plus another two or three "relievers relievers".

One draw back if it caught on (like five starters or 11/12 pitchers). If it worked and the hitters were indeed kept off-balance (too off-balance maybe) and the offensive stats took too much of a dive, baseball would only lower the mound again (like it did in 1968 and this time maybe so much that the pitchers are pitching UP to the batters) or move the mound back to 62 or 64 feet.

Baseball fans love those offensive stats!

[ August 24, 2007, 11:46 AM: Message edited by: Edwards Kings ]

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Fri Aug 24, 2007 10:22 am

Would the first group of this RP rotation be called something like the "Losers"...since they would never be allowed to pitch into the 5th, and thus could only get a ND or L?

~Lance

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Sat Aug 25, 2007 1:58 am

Hmmmm....anyone catch the KC game last night?

viper · Post by **viper** » Sat Aug 25, 2007 3:52 am

Interesting in KC. My guess is that Greinke was on a short pitch count but, in effect, they did a MR/Closer strategy.

I seem to think the St. Louis did a game or two that way a few years back.