never rat on your friends, and always keep your mouth shut

Thursday, January 19, 2006

Please Vote







Stats Straw Poll: Which of these do you prefer? This is NON-BINDING
Classic 5x5 (HR, RBI, BAVG, R, SB, WIN, SAV, ERA, WHIP, K)
5x5 with traditional hitting stats but mixed pitching stats
5x5 with traditional pitching stats but mixed hitting stats
Totally mixed 5x5 (what we usually have done)
Different roto style (6x6, NxN...)
Head to head
Cumulative Points
I want something EVEN MORE NIHILISTIC





Free polls from Pollhost.com




I took the liberty of ending the flame war that we started. Please express your preference in this poll, so that we have some idea of where to get started. I apologize for deleting your posts, but that shit was TOTALLY pointless.

11 comments:

Morcy said...

if ever there was a poll that needed IRV, this might be it. I voted for something nihilistic, but that doesn't take into account the fact that I basically would be ok with 3-4 other things here. Should I IRV by voting multiple times?

Saud said...

Hmmm...agree with mo, cuz there are specific things I want to suggest that might not fit into any of these cats. Like I know I like OBP cuz it rewards players that pitchers are scared shitless of and always walk (ah, even Big Hurt in the downward spiral had great OBP...Trot Nixon?) Anyway, it rewards being a scary mutha fuka, and I like that.I guess just adding walks makes sense too, if you are looking for a straight forward stat...

On the other hand I hate Slugging, nothing rewards mediocrity like slugging, esp. for the players in the bottom of the pack.

Also: there is no reason why we should have the same number of stats in both pitching and hitting. Like I know a lot of guys like to think they are managing a real team and part of the game is figuring out 'balance', but to be honest, all it rewards is people who pick historic under-performers who have a break-out year. (Loaiza anyone?) Just putting it out there.

Got a feeling you guys will discuss this to death, but here is my .02 dinarius

Omar said...

lets just remember that yahoo has only so many stats so we can't think too far outside the box.

and the reason i think we should have equal number of stats is that in a roto league with uneven stats, players become over/under valued. if we have 7 hitting stats and 5 pitching stats (standard 5x5, obp and ops for this example) then a mediocre hitter gets you higher to 120 points than an equally mediocre pitcher.

and yes, as you can see from the keepers debate, this could possibly be argued to death.

pedrag said...

omar,
you kind of made saud's point for him, which is that maybe a mediocre hitter or pitcher is worth more (or less) than his respective counterpart. i'd love to have a slight emphasis on hitting, because i think there is a really tiny middle class on pitching - you're either great or league average or crap, which means there's less room for artisanal GMship, if you know what i mean.

you might also stop using the fallacy that yahoo doens't let you do 'weird' stats. you probably can't do like "quality starts" but you can do almost any permutation of popular sabermetrics stats. i don't mind you thinking that yahoo! is narrow-minded, but i don't like you using it as a campaign tool for vanilla 5x5.

Omar said...

im not saying we can't use differnet stats, im just point out there are limits. like how you cant have opponents batting average for pitchers. thats not really a SABR stat but none the less, not there.

and i dont think saud realizes that our league is all about picking up the next esteban loaiza. thats the whole point of this keeper debate. who is going to get the historic underperformer?

and my choice of standard 5x5 not withstanding, we can structure the pitching stats so that we can create a larger middle class. no holds, but im willing to talk about other things. a larger emphasis on rate stats (k/9 etc.) maybe?

lets see how many comments we can get in before ben starts saying its turning into a clusterfuck of comments.

Morcy said...

Omar, as we decided last year, all pitching stats are rate stats. Even "K"s is "Ks per max innings allowed." I'm just saying.

BTW, I dunno if Pete was talking about me in his PS, but my point is about IRV. I vote for, in descending order:

1. Something nihilistic
2. Diff roto style
3. Mixed 5x5

I dunno how exciting any other variant would be.

Omar said...

yeah, i realized that after i posted it. well i actually realized it before i posted it but i was hoping people wouldn't realize it. can't sneak anything by you guys.

Omar said...

petes a cocksucker who deleted my post. the revolution is now going underground.

carter said...

I find it interested that people argue that all pitching stats are rate stats in fantasy, but do not argue the same thing for hitters. we have playing time limits there too, i.e. games per position, right? So, HRs is really HR/games...

In any case, I fail to see the insight...

Also, choosing stats probably would be easiest if the commish (Ben?) just created a system, which we then critiqued, rather than attempting to vote from scratch.

Morcy said...

Carter, the hitting stats are sort of rate stats, but the limit is on "games," not, say, PA. Theoretically a player could have infinite PAs in a season and still fall short of the games maximum. Every rate hitting stat we track is based on PAs (or ABs, which is just PAs - stuff), so using "games" as the metric means that you can't guarantee a rate.

Omar said...

uh oh... the simple 5x5 plan is coming on strong. and if ben hasn't voted it could get even stronger.

i hope its not just being weary of debate.