Scoring Rules

Here is what we currently use. Any changes for 2018?

Batter Points

Single +1
Double +2
Triple +3
Home Run +4
Run Scored +1
RBI +1
Base on Balls +1
Hit by Pitch +1
Stolen Base +2

Pitcher Points

Win +10
Save +6
Game Pitched +1
Inning Pitched +1
Earned Run -1
Strikeout +1
Complete Game +5
Shutout +5

Big changes for our mostly unchanging game the last couple of years. After the changeover to weekly scoring, we devalued the Win and the Save. Next we killed the penalty for a Loss. It's hard to know if we got it right. RPs get more and more unpredictable.

Our game is pretty good as is. We might consider just counting the top 6 weekly Pitchers regardless of whether they are SP's or RP's.

Gary

I have heard that "6 pitchers" idea floated around before. I can't say I have a strong opinion one way or another. Exactly 10 of the top 50 pitchers were relievers - which feels about right. The top salary reliever, Kenley Jansen at 3.1 million, finished 11th overall. I like the current scoring with the recent reductions in wins and saves and the elimination of the loss penalty.

I asked the league several years running about maintaining the RP as a unique position. The majority always vote to keep it and count it as usual.
The esteemed owner of the Waiver Wire Tappers has led the contingent for combining all pitchers. I hope he'll show up and explain his thoughts.

I feel that the categories and scoring are fine. It is like any game, we know the rules and compete the best we can under those rules. However, the Relief Pitching category does drive me crazy. It always seems volitable and damaging category. I generally pick 15 to 16 starting pitchers. I try to pick 4 or 5 hopefully solid pitchers, then a whole lot of prospects. If one of my solid pitcher has a problem or a bad week, I have quite a few backup pitchers. I feel that I need at least 3 relief pitchers. I try to get a quality RP and a couple of prospects. If my quality RP goes down, it can get dicey with my prospect RP's. Relief pitchers seem to be more subject to having a short leash, a trade, or an injury. This is probably just my perception because of the problems that I have had over the last few years. I feel that my team can handle problems with SP's better than RP's because of the backup in the SP category. Over the last 6 weeks of the season my SP's averaged 20.6 pts per week, my RP's averaged 12.5.

I feel that there are 3 options to the relief pitch category

1. Leave it the way it is at the present time. Relief pitching is a separate from starting pitching in the Major Leagues. Traditionalist would want it to be a category in our fantasy game. I am fine with this option. We all play by the same rules, and same challenges.

2. There will be six counting pitchings scores that would include the best SP's and RP's. I think that this would make it easier to play the game, and might make it more competitive. I could work with this option.

3. A relief pitching category that would include Saves and Holds. They would both be worth 6 points. This would help protect the category if a player gets demoted or promoted. The closer gets all of the attention, but the other relief pitchers have increasing become as important in todays game. Most starting pitchers barely go 5 innings anymore. Teams are heavily depending on the middle relief pitcher to a greater degree. Top five middle pitcher would have had the following point this last season- A. Swarzak-460, C Edwards 434, B. Shaw 442, A Miller 428
T Rodgers 423. I wouldn't mind seed holds and middle relief pitcher being part of the game.

I wouldn't mind leaving it alone. My strategy often involves taking one or two decent RPs (tho Mr. Oh let me down) and a bunch of cheap set-up guys, hoping for promotions.

But I like Don's #3 idea - of course I've been lobbying for holds to be added the last few years.
Knebel, Hand, Rivero, and Kintzler would have shot up as well with double-digit holds on top of double-digit saves.
But the price of lesser RPs would have to increase and pricing them would be a challenge.
Team-making would face a new challenge also.
What do you think about 3 or 4 points for a hold instead of the full 6?
I'd like to keep the RP position.

I agree with keeping the RP position. I have always wanted to include holds. We did have holds as a category in my Yahoo league, but most didn't like it. This is different though . . . the yahoo is a category in Yahoo that would have the same value as ERA or HR. We can play with the point value on Holds so that it seems right. There can be no more than one save in a game, and often there aren't any. There can be multiple holds in a game . . . even without a save occurring. I would lean towards maybe 3 points for a hold right now. More discussion needed.

Bruce brings up an excellent point. Figuring out player salaries if the holds are included would end up being nothing more than my best guess. I used 7-8 different projections for player stats that I used to write the formulas for player salaries, and none of them included projections for Holds.

Maybe we should use the "goose-egg" stat? Just kidding - too much work for me.