pitching scoring modifications

[stitchface]

I think I've got a good read on it now. I will send a spreadsheet with old and new scores.

 

We will use the new scores in keeper roster determination.

[Guest]

the keeper limit will be increased slightly to accomodate the new higher scores.

[BigbadB]

the keeper limit will be increased slightly to accomodate the new higher scores.

 

Why base it on new scores? I've been fiddling with my roster this offseason based off of old scores.

[cbbryan]

the keeper limit will be increased slightly to accomodate the new higher scores.

 

Why base it on new scores? I've been fiddling with my roster this offseason based off of old scores.

 

I would tend to agree w/ this.

[Guest]

the keeper limit will be increased slightly to accomodate the new higher scores.

 

Why base it on new scores? I've been fiddling with my roster this offseason based off of old scores.

 

I would tend to agree w/ this.

 

you have two months to tinker some more. using new scores is far more fair.

[BigbadB]

the keeper limit will be increased slightly to accomodate the new higher scores.

 

Why base it on new scores? I've been fiddling with my roster this offseason based off of old scores.

 

I would tend to agree w/ this.

 

you have two months to tinker some more. using new scores is far more fair.

 

I'm in the middle of making a trade. Tim has already made one. I can't go through with my trade now, because I don't know what this new points system will do to my cap space.

 

The league is already dealing with a lower cap. This throws a whole new wrinkle into the offseason.

[BigbadB]

Nevermind. I'm still one of the new kids on the block. I've put a stop on my trade until this gets ironed out. I'll let the seasoned vets decide what is and what shall be.

 

But, I did have a lot of time invested in a trade. That's what frustrates me the most.

[Guest]

Nevermind. I'm still one of the new kids on the block. I've put a stop on my trade until this gets ironed out. I'll let the seasoned vets decide what is and what shall be.

 

But, I did have a lot of time invested in a trade. That's what frustrates me the most.

 

using new or old scores shouldn't impact your trade much. I hate to be argumentative, but this change was announced a long time ago.

[Guest]

If the cap is adjusted upwards in concert with the change in scoring, it shouldn't impact things too much at all.

 

Of course, I'm the one trying to trade away pitching points. :D

[BigbadB]

I hate to be argumentative, but this change was announced a long time ago.

 

Can you point me to where you said the new points would be figured into the cap?

 

All I remember is that the cap was being lowered.

[Guest]

as has already been pointed out several times, the keeper limit has been raised in conjunction with using the new scores. therefore, the impact is minimal. what moves have you made that are affected?

[BigbadB]

as has already been pointed out several times, the keeper limit has been raised in conjunction with using the new scores. therefore, the impact is minimal. what moves have you made that are affected?

 

The moves that I made or didn't make are not the point. I've spent mega hours working on trades based on the points I currently have and assuming the cap was 2250.

 

It certainly doesn't answer my question. I know all about the rule that you created that lowered the cap to 2250.

 

Where is the announcement (prior to your announcement yesterday) that says that the 2250 cap is being kicked to the curb and will be recalculated based on new pitching points?

 

When you point me to that, I'll shut up.

 

I appreciate all of your efforts to improve the league. But, I don't appreciate being talked down to when I don't understand something or I don't agree with a change being made.

 

I value my time and I wouldn't waste if I can avoid it. The trade I'm making does not affect the points, but my concern isn't about just me. It's about fairness to the rest of the managers who have possibly wasted tons of their own precious time working on cap space based off of old pitching points.

 

I was aware you were changing the pitching points. I don't ever recall you saying that the new pitching points would count towards the cap. I just want it clarified that you said this somewhere so that I can see that I missed a very valuable piece of information. And I'm not referring to yesterday's announcement.

[Guest]

it does not say that anywhere. I'm sorry you spent time on a faulty premise. However, everyone knew the rules were changing and I asked for a little patience.

[BigbadB]

it does not say that anywhere. I'm sorry you spent time on a faulty premise. However, everyone knew the rules were changing and I asked for a little patience.

 

I've been patient. I was also aware the rules were changing.

 

The cap was reduced to 2250

An outfielder was eliminated from the starting roster

Pitching points were being looked at for adjustment for next year

 

You put the rule changes out there for discussion. You adjusted rules based on the opinions of the rest of the league.

 

Out of the blue, and in mid-December, the new pitching points now count towards the cap. I don't even know what changes were made to the pitching points.

 

You claim it won't make much of a difference, but one of the guys I was trading for just took on more than 100 points by himself.

 

Every other manager in the league may not be like me when it comes to how I work my roster, but I've spent a lot of time playing with numbers to figure out who my keepers will be this offseason, based on 2250 points. Based on the rule changes you published.

 

Like I said, it didn't change anything with my team and I can still make the trade. But, assuming that this change you are making this late in the ball game doesn't affect anyone is asking for trouble.

 

Trades are already being made. One was officially made prior to your announcement. What if one of the teams that made that trade didn't need to make that trade now that they have more cap room?

 

I just think a change this significant, this late in the offseason, should be put up for discussion.

 

If it's not open for discussion, can I ask why?

 

I think you're doing an awesome job running the league. I want to make that clear. I also don't want to sound like a whiner. I'm just trying to understand why a change to the pitching points (which I agree with) has to count towards a season that is already over. Change the points and then have the affected change count towards the next season, which is what all the aforementioned rule changes are supposed to affect.

 

Using it to change the cap now would be akin to going back and recalculating the entire 2006 season's head to head match ups.

 

I don't think I'll be alone in this opinion. If I am, then once again, I'll shut up.

[Guest]

Using it to change the cap now would be akin to going back and recalculating the entire 2006 season's head to head match ups

 

I don't really understand what you are saying here.

 

I do understand your frustration. My intent had been for everyone to wait until the changes were in place to make moves. The reason to count the points toward the limit is that if we don't, pitching oriented teams are gaining a huge advantage for no reason. By counting the points, the playing field is leveled for everyone. I think the 250 extra points will account for virtually all rosters. Unless you were planning on keeping 5 pitchers or something.

 

None of the trades have been executed. If you feel that you traded with a misunderstanding of the situation, we can negate the trade.

 

There is no good way to implement these changes. I needed time to make the adjustments and I asked for you guys to give me some time. I thought that was understood, but apparently I was mistaken.

[BigbadB]

The reason to count the points toward the limit is that if we don't, pitching oriented teams are gaining a huge advantage for no reason. By counting the points, the playing field is leveled for everyone. I think the 250 extra points will account for virtually all rosters. Unless you were planning on keeping 5 pitchers or something.

 

Fair enough. But, I'm not sure how moving the cap from 2250 back to 2500 takes away a huge advantage teams carrying a lot of pitchers solves.

 

To me, one negates the other. Reducing the cap to 2250 and not changing the pitching points is not much different than keeping the cap at 2500 and using the pitching point changes.

 

Maybe there is a significant difference and I just haven't reseached it enough to see it.

[Guest]

Using it to change the cap now would be akin to going back and recalculating the entire 2006 season's head to head match ups

 

I don't really understand what you are saying here.

 

I do understand your frustration. My intent had been for everyone to wait until the changes were in place to make moves. The reason to count the points toward the limit is that if we don't, pitching oriented teams are gaining a huge advantage for no reason. By counting the points, the playing field is leveled for everyone. I think the 250 extra points will account for virtually all rosters. Unless you were planning on keeping 5 pitchers or something.

 

None of the trades have been executed. If you feel that you traded with a misunderstanding of the situation, we can negate the trade.

 

There is no good way to implement these changes. I needed time to make the adjustments and I asked for you guys to give me some time. I thought that was understood, but apparently I was mistaken.

 

I hate waiting.

 

[Guest]

My thinking was by raising the cap, people who have pitchers to keep aren't punished, but others have the opportunity to keep up pointswise. Therefore, there isn't a significant advantage gained.

 

We need to implement a salary and contract system but I haven't quite figured out how to make that work yet. Expect that for 2008.

[BigbadB]

My thinking was by raising the cap, people who have pitchers to keep aren't punished, but others have the opportunity to keep up pointswise. Therefore, there isn't a significant advantage gained.

 

We need to implement a salary and contract system but I haven't quite figured out how to make that work yet. Expect that for 2008.

 

I think that would be awesome. Not sure how the contract part would work, but it sounds good.

[cbbryan]

My thinking was by raising the cap, people who have pitchers to keep aren't punished, but others have the opportunity to keep up pointswise. Therefore, there isn't a significant advantage gained.

 

We need to implement a salary and contract system but I haven't quite figured out how to make that work yet. Expect that for 2008.

 

HBC fans wouldn't have to wait for their fiery owner to re-up w/ Z!!!!

[cbbryan]

WWOOOOWWWWW!!! Z jump over 100 pts!!!! Jesus!!!!