2018 FA Comp List:

[cjkalt]

25 out of 32... thats ridiculous... that would be rewarding people that go to 4 man rotations...u should go by %

[Kingdom]

4 man rotations FTW

[nick]

CJ makes a good point... a very good point. All 4-man rotos would likely have atleast 2-3 guys qualifying, if not 4... and that won't work.

% sounds good.

[Kingdom]

Just cause you have a 4 man rotation doesn't mean the 4 men in the rotation are any good.

[nick]

Yeah, but it does give an advantage... 5-man rotos result in an average of 32 starts per season. 4-man rotos, you see more like 40-42 per year.. that's about 10 extra games to earn QS's that the pitchers in 5-man rotos don't get. Even if the rotation was bad, chances are it would help too much...

[nick]

Looking it it further, maybe the advantage isn't too big.

I'll go through 4-man rotos from this year and see...

[nick]

det:
jurrjens 41 starts made, 24 qs
porcello 40 starts made, 26 qs
miller 41, 16 qs
prior 40, 23 qs

A very solid rotation, and only Porcello would qualify .. seems like 4-man rotos might not even matter that much... gonna edit this with more


cain- 40 starts, 30 qs
johan - 31 starts, 21 quality
christian garcia, 39 starts, 18 qs
peavy 32, 19 qs

there were injuries to johan and peavy, but they only 1 had elliglbe as well


frank engen, 37 starts, 26 qs
tug carlton, 37 starts, 18 qs
no one else on FLA really pitched more than 31, due to injuries and spot starting id assume..

james simmons, 40 s, 27 qs
benedicto 41, 26 qs
matzek 40, 23 qs
liriano and villanueva together had 22 qs... in about 40 gs

Ynoa, 39 s, 32 qs
thompson 37, 24 qs
grineke 38, 26 qs



There doesn't seem to be that much of an advantage to 4-man pitchers.

[Porter]

# TOP 10 Quality Starts QS
1 M. Cain (NYA) 30
2 D. Price (TBA) 26
2 R. Porcello (DET) 26

For the 3 A.L. Qualifiers: Cain 73.2%, Price 78.8%, Porcello 65%

# TOP 10 Quality Starts QS
1 M. Ynoa (SDN) 32
2 J. Crew (CHN) 27
2 J. Simmons (PIT) 27
4 F. Benedicto (PIT) 26
4 Z. Greinke (SDN) 26
6 Y. Gallardo (MIL) 25
6 R. Harden (ATL) 25
6 D. Crow (ATL) 25
6 F. Engen (FLO) 25

For the 9 qualifiers in the NL: Ynoa 82.1%, Crew 81.8%, Simmons 67.5%, Benedicto 63.4%, Grienke 68.4%. Gallardo 61%, Harden 75.8%, Crow 75.8%, Engen 67.6%

[nick]

Oh yeah, MIL runs a 4-man too... or did.

In theory, two guys who started 40 games (Simmons & Benedicto) both have high % despite getting more starts ... it seems that 4-man or 5-man wouldn't make a huge difference, whether you went by % or # of QS. Doesn't seem like it would help pitchers that much.

[Porter]

How bout 25 QS or 70% (Min 32 starts) for Class A

and 20 QS and 60% (Min for 32 starts) for Class B.

no matter if you get 25 QS in a 4 man or 5 man, its still well over 60 percent.

20 QS and 60 percent keeps a 4 man rotation guy from going 20 for 42 and qualifying.

[General]

25 out of 32... thats ridiculous... that would be rewarding people that go to 4 man rotations...u should go by %

4-man rotations require good pitchers to work.

[nick]

How bout 25 QS or 70% (Min 32 starts) for Class A

and 20 QS and 60% (Min for 32 starts) for Class B.

no matter if you get 25 QS in a 4 man or 5 man, its still well over 60 percent.

20 QS and 60 percent keeps a 4 man rotation guy from going 20 for 42 and qualifying.

I like the look of these numbers. Seems like it would work...

Question is now, do you guys (this is aimed at Zito actually, but anyone else's opinions are welcomed too) think it'd be a good idea to consider using QS and QS % as a new indicator for SP, and dropping ERA from the equation entirely?
We could still use ratings to determine guys who missed out due to down years, but I'd likely want to bump those up... koz listed a few good numbers earlier in here that could work.

For middle relievers, we could still use ERA and IP and a ratings system .. but perhaps those numbers could be tweaked a bit too, seeing as how the type-A qualifications are a bit steep (not the ratings part, but the ERA and IP/appearances requirement) and most MRs never meet type-A unless it's by ratings lately...

[Porter]

I like the look of these numbers. Seems like it would work...

Question is now, do you guys (this is aimed at Zito actually, but anyone else's opinions are welcomed too) think it'd be a good idea to consider using QS and QS % as a new indicator for SP, and dropping ERA from the equation entirely?
We could still use ratings to determine guys who missed out due to down years, but I'd likely want to bump those up... koz listed a few good numbers earlier in here that could work.

For middle relievers, we could still use ERA and IP and a ratings system .. but perhaps those numbers could be tweaked a bit too, seeing as how the type-A qualifications are a bit steep (not the ratings part, but the ERA and IP/appearances requirement) and most MRs never meet type-A unless it's by ratings lately...

Its mainly the ERA requirement.

League ERA is 4.77 for the AL and 4.55 in the NL.

The current requirement is 2.85 for Class A and 3.25 for Class B.

They seem low considering the league averages.

[nick]

Yeah, I mean, there have been seasons where ERA is lower than it was last year, but generally it seems like there is more offensive output as of late. The average is a lot higher than it could be, because some of the bottom feeder teams had team ERAs pushing 6.00 last year. But still, I would probably make type-A a little easier for MRs.

[Kingdom]

I don't see an advantage with 4-man rotations. We usually use them because we don't have a 5th guy we want out there, ever. Or we're smart enough to realize we have a 5th guy that should never be out there, ever. I would use a 3-man rotation, if I could. Hahahaha.