Is It Time To Discuss IP Minimums Going Forward?

[Navel Lint]

Replace wins with innings pitched and remove the IP minimum.

I agree. Much better idea than adding QS for a variety of reasons.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Replace wins with innings pitched and remove the IP minimum.

I agree. Much better idea than adding QS for a variety of reasons.

Wouldn't this just bring back the 'gamers' who punted W's and K's?
Instead of punting W's, they'd just punt INN.
Which is why we have the minimum innings.
It especially would not work for stand alone leagues such as the Diamond or Platinum.

Edit-
Upon further review, I don't think that QS is the answer either.
Like the Win is for average and below average Starters, even the Quality Start is dieing a slow death.
Soon, it will not be up to fantasy baseball to decide what to do with the Win. It'll be up to Major League Baseball.
They have three or four options....
They can lower the Wins bar to four innings for a Starter.
They can eliminate the Win altogether as analytics folks are pushing for.
They can leave each Win in the hands of the Official Scorekeeper.
They can eliminate the bar for a Starting Pitcher altogether.

Most things in baseball are trends that don't last long.
Right now, we have the 'extra' live ball period.
We've had 'Small ball' and Billy Ball'
The three run homer.
The steroid era.

All those things come and go.
What hasn't come and gone is starting pitchers throwing less and less innings per start.
It has decreased since Walter Johnson with a few exceptions.
Most pitchers, now, are averaging under six innings per start. No pitcher has averaged seven innings per start since Corey Kluber three years ago.
In a few years, no pitcher will even average six innings per start if looking at the downward trend.
Major League Baseball will, themselves, have to make a decision on the fate of the Win.

[Thurman15]

I believe that wins plus quality starts would be better. It still rewards the middle reliever who gets a win, or the starter who pitches "OK" but gets his win........but it rewards the real good pitchers with 2 points for doing both. The problem (as Mike mentioned) is that die hards may go for it, but we need the masses to stay on board. The number one aim is to have as much participation as possible. I'm almost certain that this is the only category that "might" be accepted as a change. I would not touch any of the other 9 categories, or even start a discussion about them.

Regarding innings pitched, I think the top leagues do indeed need to lower it, but for most leagues I would leave it the same.

Lastly, thanks a million once again to Greg, Tom, Darik, and all the behind the scenes workers who give us so much enjoyment. Once again, year after year, you guys go way "above and beyond" the call of duty.

[DOUGHBOYS]

Just running off at the mouth....

It's funny, but when roto baseball started, Wins was one of the solidest of categories. A Starter would throw well for seven, eight, or nine innings and most often, receive the W.
As Starters started throwing less innings and pitch counts started and have been reduced, the Win has changed.
Now, a Starter's bullpen is more involved with his fate.
Now, the Starter's offense, not only has to score more runs than the opposing team, they have to do so EARLIER.
After all, an offense scoring four runs in the seventh inning does a Starter little good if gone after 5 2/3 IP.

Yes, the Win has gotten a lot less stable.
And yes, the Win is a lot 'luckier' than in the past.
We laughed at the 'Quality Start' statistic that agents came up with for their clients.
Sadly, that is even becoming a hill too high for average pitchers to climb.
For now, the best solution is to sit tight and know that this category isn't the same as it once was.

[jvetter]

Replace wins with innings pitched and remove the IP minimum.

I agree. Much better idea than adding QS for a variety of reasons.

Wouldn't this just bring back the 'gamers' who punted W's and K's?
Instead of punting W's, they'd just punt INN.
Which is why we have the minimum innings.
It especially would not work for stand alone leagues such as the Diamond or Platinum.

Good point. I think this category would work as intended but you would still need a minimum innings pitched limit.

[KJ Duke]

On a related issue, the method for dealing with teams missing their minimums is unfair to those hitting their minimums which had ratios below the offending team. Since missing minimums is a growing problem, I'd like to see this fixed as well.

Currently, if a team is below the threshold they drop down to 1pt for both ERA and WHIP, but no other team is adjusted up. So if you have a team that closely trailed the illegal team in ratios, you probably would've passed them if they had played the crappy waiver wire SPs needed to hit their minimums. Thus, such non-offending teams are punished by not moving up in points under the current system.

I would propose penalizing teams that fail to meet the minimum IP differently, which would be more fair for the entire league:

• For each inning (or partial inning) below the minimum IP, add 1 ER and 2 baserunners allowed as a penalty stat, and move IP up to the min.

For example:
900 IP, 400 ER allowed, 1125 H/BB would become 1000 IP, 500 ER allowed, 1325 H/BB
Ratios for the offending team would go from 4.00/1.25 to 4.50/1.325.

Thus, the teams that were between 4.00-4.50 in ERA would move up, reflecting that they should've been ahead of the offending team.

Likewise, if the shortfall is smaller, say:
980 IP, the ratios would go from 4.00/1.25 to 4.10/1.265, thus the penalty better fits the crime and only teams that were slightly behind will gain ground.

[Wolfpac]

I like KJ Duke proposal