Innings min

[Former Angels GM (Mike C.)]

Originally I thought the rule in the off season was going to eliminate an Innings min. It was reviewed and the innings min stayed 30 innings.

What changed is if you don't hit the min, only 2 out of the 6 categories would be voided as a penalty for not getting 30 innings in.

In week 1, 2 teams, Cleveland and Atlanta won their game but did not make the min of 30 innings. They did however win, this season, because of the new rule in place that allows teams to use the other pitching categories, even in light of not putting in enough players to get the min amount of innings. They would have lost under last years rule on Innings.

A 30 inning min- now without enough penality to even bother having it.

So now teams can live with 1 to 3 SPs, if they want, if they get hurt, doesn't matter...just punt 2 out the 12 categories and no need to get SPs if you don't want to. Just stating the impact of the Inning min rule change and two great examples of that rule in place in week 1.

Maybe just crying since I wasted alot of time trying to get SPs, giving up good prospects to make sure I hit 30 innings and now realize, I didn't need to at all to win games. Also realizing after seeing the impact of the off season rule changes, the old Brewers owner was right and I was wrong...now I just have to tell him..

[Nationals GM (Preston - Old)]

Getting SPs helps you with W and K automatically. This is a ridiculous complaint. If their team was good enough to win the other categories then so be it. If you build a good stock of RPs, you'll still compete/win in HD/Sv and to a lesser extent ERA/WHIP automatically.

Look, this league has worked with the tiebreakers, etc that we've had and in my opinion (under the discretion of others, mind you, and my limited advisement) they've been made better. The complaints of the tiebreaker and this change just come off as sour grapes. If your team deserves to win, it will win. We play a long season, the teams that should be in the playoffs and compete for a title will be there. Whatever happens then - as we saw with the White Sox run last year (not to discredit it!) - happens. If your team is good enough, it will work out.

[Former Angels GM (Mike C.)]

sour grapes? niether rule change has affected me AT ALL, yet, lol...

Look at the two games it affected at least before you talk...the teams who did not hit the min innings actually won w and ks and shoot your "theory" right out of the water.

Just like the 1st week tie shot your "theory" out about a tie breaker that works, even the post season tie breaker has already been disproven to not be complete.

"If your team deserves to win, it will win." that is the best line you have stated in all of the discussions and EXACTLY what I stated of why its pointless to run 4 more categories for a tie breaker...finally your at least making a statement that makes complete sense.

[Pirates GM (Hollar)]

Do I have to say it? I'm gonna say it.

Small sample size.

[Deleted]

Here's a suggestion that plays in with the tiebreaker discussion:

If you don't meet an innings or at-bats minimum and you tie your matchup, you automatically lose the tiebreaker.

[Reds GM (Pat H.)]

The Indians did not win.

There were no 1st week ties.

How is the tie-breaker in post season not complete?

The on-going problem is the 40 man roster doesn't allow every team to have enough starting pitchers. Why should they be penalized so harshly that they lose all pitching stats?

[Pirates GM (Hollar)]

I view Pat's last point as the most important one in this whole discussion. Part of the problem with the old system was that it was sometimes impossible for teams to sign enough players to make the innings minimums. Therefore the goal was to get slightly less Draconian so as not to penalize teams with no chance at avoiding said penalties. This will hopefully in turn spread starting pitching out slightly more, though we'll obviously need more than two weeks to see that.

[Guardians GM (Matt)]

I most certainly didn't win (and if I had gotten one more out to the minimum then it would have changed nothing as I lost ERA and WHIP).

The only point of minimum innings limit is to prevent a team from going with just a couple elite relievers and win ERA, WHIP, H, Sv every week. So by punishing teams in ERA and WHIP only, you remove that strategy. By skirting the line (because I don't want to give up my farm for a guy who will kill my ERA and WHIP every week anyway), I put myself at risk of having two losses if none of my starting pitchers don't start twice.

But as it has been said many times, there are only 150 SPs total in the game, in real life my team would call up a top prospect, but I can't make the Rockies start Eddie Butler. So as many teams have had happen, injuries and demotions rebalance the SP pool so some teams really only have access to 3 SPs. There are no FAs to sign now. Under the old system you essentially damned half the teams to automatic losses if they had an injury or a starter get knocked out early.

Ideally everyone builds a balanced team, but unless you are going to have strict roster limits on major leaguers it isn't going to happen

[Former Angels GM (Mike C.)]

not sure why the score says Cleveland 6.5 and white sox 5.5 when I click on last weeks scores, when I look at the categories its clear the white sox won...I just looked at the score, my bad.


If you apply an Innings limit so teams DON'T just run elite relievers....then the penality for not hitting the innings min should at the VERY least be the categories ONLY relievers get..Saves/Holds...

The point is allowing Saves/Holds to count is actually encuraging the ability to just run elite relievers...and there is already an example of that after 1 week that it can work.

The change actually works against the purpose of the inning limits.

[Former Angels GM (Mike C.)]

Apr 9, 2014 8:40:09 GMT -8 @jamesonfleming said:

Here's a suggestion that plays in with the tiebreaker discussion:

If you don't meet an innings or at-bats minimum and you tie your matchup, you automatically lose the tiebreaker.

love the way your thinking but if you don't hit your min, you should lose all your categories and that should elminate any ties.

Well, before the new rule this year, it could actually work at times now.

[Pirates GM (Hollar)]

With the cost of elite relievers in this league, is it actually possible for someone to stockpile enough of them for this strategy to work while hitting the minimum of 8 pitchers? It seems unlikely. And I still feel running only relievers can win you three categories, though one (Ks) is very unlikely, while automatically losing you two. This seems like a bad plan.

[Pirates GM (Hollar)]

Apr 9, 2014 16:01:47 GMT -8 Former Angels GM (Mike C.) said:

if you don't hit your min, you should lose all your categories and that should elminate any ties.

Mike, you're deliberately ignoring the fact that in a league this deep, it has often been impossible for many teams to make the minimum. The old system essentially destroyed these teams. How do you feel this should have been fixed?

[Former Angels GM (Mike C.)]

Apr 9, 2014 7:58:41 GMT -8 Pirates GM (Hollar) said:

Do I have to say it? I'm gonna say it.

Small sample size.

Thanks for sharing, your point definately makes sense of why these rules are already being discussed.

So what your saying is, these "rules" were changed and basically being "tested" to see if it works?

Nobody took a second to think through different scenarios before deciding on a change?

You didn't KNOW if the rule changes would work BEFORE the season began?

[Former Angels GM (Mike C.)]

dude, I play currently in a 58 players per team dynasty league for 8 years now, I understand deep...we haven't had to change a rule in 8 freakin years, because our rules actually work. The brewers old owner saw these rule changes and just left, I am trying to stick it out til someone gets it.

I get that 30 inning make it tough...

1) move it down to 25 innings

2) We have 13 MLB pitchers available to use in any given week...we have more in our "minors" but can't use them unless you drop one from your active roster, If an injury to a pitcher, you can call one up and have the choice to send them back down after the DL stint. If you have a top pitching prospect come up and you want to use him, our system forces you to either not use him or get rid of a MLB pitcher.


The reason so many teams can't hit the 30 inning min, is SP hording and trying to manipulate the system to get great players in other positions with them...you remove the min innings and then you have RP horrding...it can go either way

Block the real issue...pitcher hording...if you truly want to fix the problem once and be done with it...

And I can tell you right now, I saw it this season, changed my strategy because of it and can tell you over 50 percent of my team is now pitchers...I hate pitchers and can't stand wasting so many roster spots on pitchers...but THATs the way this leagues system forced me to go to make sure I got my Innings and not get caught again looking for bottom dwelling pitchers for top prospects and have bargaining power.

thought of #3...put a max amount of pitchers on a roster 16, 18 max....teams can run 8 MLB and 8 prospects or 10 and 6, 12 and 4....you get the point....and that ABSOLUTELY would work to spread the pitching out.

That total includes SPs AND RP's...now that forces balance, not allows stockpiling SPs or RPs and allows enough pitchers to go around.

[Pirates GM (Hollar)]

Now that was a constructive post. Thanks for that.

[Former Angels GM (Mike C.)]

Your welcome, just wish you would have asked before changing the rules in the off season. I offered to help and still will help if you want rule ideas that are proven to work on any topic you wish.

We use just ERA as a tie breaker in the other league and we have 30 categories to create balance..personally like ERA+Batting average or WHIP+sluggin with the info in this league...and yes 2nd tie breaker is home/away..its a 2nd tie breaker, its more than fair no matter how the schedule is.

[Rays GM (Donavan)]

I dont get the whole, not being able to get to minimum innings stuff.

I have tried to move starting pitchers for the past couple of weeks without any takers.

In addition, whilst there are only 150 starting pitchers, any team should be able to put together enough pitching to meet the 30 innings minimum on most weeks. The average MLB team plays 5-6 times per week, so averages in excess of 50 innings pitched per week, 30 innings should not be a stretch, unless you have a few guys injured all at once, or are intentionally building for the future, and are not prepared to part with any talent to meet the current rules.

I think the 2 category (RBI & WHIP)punishment is adequate, for fantrax scoring, but we also need to ensure that repeat offenders do not benefit in terms of draft picks, for losses that dont meet the minimum innings or at bats rules. Repeat offenders should have their picks for each round of the draft after those teams that play within the rules.

It is a choice to structure our teams to meet the rules. I am in rebuild mode, and could quite easily tried to fill more roster spots with prospect talent, but instead decided to get guys through free agency that would help me meet the minimum innings rule.

[Nationals GM (Preston - Old)]

I could be wrong but it seems everybody understands and likes the system we have now except for one person.

[Deleted]

I'm getting a little confused with all the banter so can someone just make sure I'm understanding everything correctly without ripping my head off?

1. The current tiebreaker we are using for this season is the cumulative total of HR, SB, W and SV? If that still does not break the tie then the tie will not be broken. (If this is the rule I am in favor of it).

2. If a team does not reach 30 IP in a week they forfeit ONLY ERA and WHIP, and if they do not reach 100 AB they forfeit ONLY AVG and OPS. (Also a fan of this rule if I have it correct).

Lastly, when I made the schedule I did not choose a home and away team, I just did it in a way that was easy for me while still making the schedule fair, so the home/away split is definitely not balanced. If we are discussing this as a possible rule change I need to be aware of it before I make the schedule for next year.

When will we stop debating and enjoy baseball season?

[Nationals GM (Preston - Old)]

Apr 10, 2014 7:29:38 GMT -8 @emoney1818 said:

When will we stop debating and enjoy baseball season?

+1