MBBRL Official Thread

[Reverend Jim]

Yes, that was a very bold move Rev.
I love that attitude: not winning this way, gotta do something big!
Could work out, I like your thought process.
And at the same time, I'd have done the trade from TKO side. Gotta love Cano!!
A cool trade guys imho.

I love Cano as well, but when I'm looking across the table at Lynn, Brown & Seager, that love started to waiver. Now if I can just stay even with you for this week, maybe I can start my comeback next week against Tlance.

 

[Reverend Jim]

My season so far.
3rd best ERA in the league, and yet I've won ERA 4 times in 12 weeks.
1st in Home Runs and yet I've won the HR category 3 times in 12 weeks.
1st in wins and 2nd in K's & Runs scored and I'm lucky to have a 50/50 split here.

One of you have a Reverend Jim voodoo loll under your bed.....and I'm gonna find ya.:target:

 

[tlance]

I think the Verlander trade will be very interesting.

Sarnia clearly gets more K's and more name value, but I really think something is wrong with JV. I could be wrong, but when we look back at this deal in October, it could be the reason that Sarnia does not win the title. Time will tell.

Either way, I like that neither or you guys are afraid of a little risk. This is what makes fantasy baseball fun.

 

[tlance]

I love Cano as well, but when I'm looking across the table at Lynn, Brown & Seager, that love started to waiver. Now if I can just stay even with you for this week, maybe I can start my comeback next week against Tlance.

Well, since my hitters seem to show up every other week, this could be bad for you. They clearly are out to lunch this week.

 

[Chef99]

Oswalt struck out 11 in 5 innings and didn't pull out his back. That's amazing right there.

 

[Chef99]

And the closer carousel continues...i'm beginning to think that drafting a high end guy fairly early might not be such a bad idea after all.

 

[Reverend Jim]

And the closer carousel continues...i'm beginning to think that drafting a high end guy fairly early might not be such a bad idea after all.

I'm lovin saves+holds in my other league. I've got 42 from my tandem of Mujica & Rosenthal.
No need to rush to the waiver wire to grab Tazawa or Benoit, much more relaxed.

 

[Yellow Fuzzies]

Detroit closer speculation- so far so good. Benoit in, Valverde out.

 

[TKOSpikes]

Who's this Zoilo Almonte character?

 

[Chef99]

"I’m very aggressive, that’s the player I am. I’m never going to walk a lot. Am I going to strike out? Yeah. But I’m going to get my money’s worth because I’m not up there to hit singles. I’m up there to drive in runs and use the park to my advantage.”


I think it might behoove Middlebrooks to rethink his philosophy...

 

[Reverend Jim]

By: Matthew Lutovsky
Published: Jun 21, 2013
» Get Matthew Lutovsky updates via Sportsmail

Every year -- sometimes more than once (OK, usually more than once) -- I talk about the ridiculousness of "wins" as a fantasy statistic and urge fantasy owners to switch over to quality starts. Stubborn owners, like our own Bill Bender, disagree wholeheartedly (check out the 39:25 mark of this podcast to hear some fireworks on the subject); others are mainly indifferent and just figure it's easier to keep the status quo.

But if you're still anti-quality start/pro-wins, hopefully James Shields's situation this year can sway you. The Royals' ace has a 2.72/1.12 line with 95 Ks in 102 innings this year. Even more impressive -- 13 of his 15 outings have qualified as a quality start (at least six innings pitched and no more than three earned runs allowed). That ties him for the league lead in QS, which is pretty impressive regardless of your feelings on the stat.

Yet Shields ranks tied for seventh on his own team in wins, trailing relievers Bruce Chen, Aaron Crow and Kelvin Herrera, who has a 5.19 ERA and starters Ervin Santana, Jeremy Guthrie and Wade Davis, who has a 5.18 ERA and the worst WHIP (1.74) among all qualified SPs.
Does that make any sense? Ironically, one of Shields's two wins came during one of his two non-quality starts. Does that make any sense?

Every year there's at least one good pitcher who's not getting a lot of wins (Cliff Lee, Felix Hernandez, Matt Cain and even Clayton Kershaw come to mind from recent seasons), but Shields's QS/win ratio is so disproportionate that hopefully it causes fantasy owners to rethink where they stand on the issue.
You can argue that that's just part of the game. After all, some hitters get a lot of solo homers and while others get more three-run homers -- does that mean we should get rid of RBIs? The big difference is that a three-run homer still requires the batter to do something positive (hit a home run). A win doesn't necessarily require a pitcher to do anything more than last five innings. He could get blown up but have his offense simply score more runs and his defense/relief corps hang onto the lead.

There will always be bad breaks and a certain amount of luck that goes into fantasy baseball, but I've always contended that the specific thing we're trying to measure with wins -- a pitcher's performance during a game -- is much more logical to do with quality starts. Then it's pretty much all about the pitcher. Defense still factors in, of course, but most fantasy categories have some dependence on a player's teammates.


Yup, still Pimpin for Quality Starts.

 

[tlance]

I agree 100%.

 

[TKOSpikes]

I totally agree as well. However, the only thing that pisses me off, is the QS requirement. I'll give CC Sabathia's complete game, 4 run outing a few weeks ago as an example. 9 innings, 4 runs is ...you guessed it, a lower ERA than a 6 inning, 3 run outing. That would be what becomes frustrating in the QS league. I wonder if there's a way for the two birds, one stone thing...?

 

[Philabuster5]

I agree ... I think the QS stat is almost as ridiculous as the W stat.
In points leagues it's simple: assign a value to each. In roto? Not sure. W+QS? I don't have enough experience with roto in recent years to offer up an alternative. But yep, CC's 9 inn 4 run win to me is infinitely more valuable than a 6ip 3 run loss.
Both stats likely better than the SV or HD though :P

 

[Reverend Jim]

I agree ... I think the QS stat is almost as ridiculous as the W stat.
In points leagues it's simple: assign a value to each. In roto? Not sure. W+QS? I don't have enough experience with roto in recent years to offer up an alternative. But yep, CC's 9 inn 4 run win to me is infinitely more valuable than a 6ip 3 run loss.
Both stats likely better than the SV or HD though :P

I wouldn't be opposed to having both, but that would mean adding a hitting category.
If I recall the pre-season voting we had a split vote between BA/OBP/OPS so we kept BA. Maybe have a vote between OBP & OPS and add that as a 6th category?

 

[Sam Sportboy]

Stupid question #68 (when I ask the next one I guess I have to eat it). If we have wins and QS, is it possible to score twice. Does a 9 inning shutout count as both?

 

[Yellow Fuzzies]

Yup, still Pimpin for Quality Starts.

I understand the argument, but I like it when fantasy is a little closer to real baseball. never seen a team get to the playoffs because their QSs were better than their wins.

 

[Chef99]

Stupid question #68 (when I ask the next one I guess I have to eat it). If we have wins and QS, is it possible to score twice. Does a 9 inning shutout count as both?

That's actually a good question. How exactly would that work?

I understand the argument, but I like it when fantasy is a little closer to real baseball. never seen a team get to the playoffs because their QSs were better than their wins.

Yep...those are the reasons I always liked W's...it's closer to real baseball and just as frustrating. On the other hand, it kinda pisses me off to see a closer blow a save and score a W (yes, you, Papelbon!).

 

[Reverend Jim]

I understand the argument, but I like it when fantasy is a little closer to real baseball. never seen a team get to the playoffs because their QSs were better than their wins.

If that's the case, baseball doesn't have weekly lineups.....they have daily.

 

[TKOSpikes]

I thought our trade was going through today, Jim? How are we supposed to have them in our lineups if they aren't on our team until the morning? Geesh, when did we make this deal? I thought it was Wednesday... speaking of stupid fucking rules, this trade delay is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of!