CT Fantasy Baseball - Interested?

[Quincy Varnish]

Again, I'm not proposing to upend everything. I'm talking about one, very specific substitution - OBP for AVG. And, as already stated, using OBP does not do away with AVG, as most players' AVGs are a large component of their OBPs. By using OBP you are ADDING TO AVG, not subtracting from it.

If you want to have a conversation about adding "holds" as a compliment to "saves," that's a different discussion that could be had. If you had the capability to have a category something like "0.5 * Holds + Saves," maybe that would be something to think about given the emphasis today being put on deeper bullpens to pitch more middle relief innings and their importance.

I think you've already recognized the accuracy of what I'm saying with respect to actual baseball games. Why do we need to be more rigid/traditional in our fantasy baseball thinking than what we are when it comes to discussing actual baseball?

Perhaps a reminder is needed - this IS Cards Talk fantasy baseball

I do feel like most of the people, both you and AOF included obviously, who want to participate in the fantasy league are smarter than the average bear when it comes to a modern recognition of what goes into actual winning baseball in 2024. Which is why this particular conversation about hanging onto "traditional values" so perplexes me.

If, like, CardsFan4Life were dying on this hill, I'd say it was in character. Not so much the two of you, however.

I’m not dying on any hill… I’ve even proposed an alternate plan that would include OBP.

The league was formed with the intention of preserving the original 5x5 roto categories, and I’m inclined to keep it that way. I’m open to adding on, but I think it needs to be done thoughtfully.

How about adding additional categories for BB & XBH?

I just added you back as co-commish but it doesn't look like we can adjust settings yet. I'm not sure what all categories are available but it feels like there are a billion to choose from these days.

To Matt's compliment about baseball acumen... noted and appreciated... trying to think of a good analogy... I like older video games like Tecmo Super Bowl, Super Mario Bros 3, Mario Kart... I used to be super into Madden (pre-marriage / kids / life getting actual busy), and the newer ones on PS5 are so complex that they're not as fun. I like the simplicity of fantasy baseball.

Did you finally bone up for a PS5?

Regarding Matt’s compliment, it was appreciated. I will also note that those who are ‘smarter than the average bear’ are also less prone to ‘group think’. Why are we obligated to alter the league to mimic the thinking of basically everyone in the industry? Aren’t they the same dudes that are desperately trying to make the game interesting again?

The HIT is the driving force of all offense, and IMO is deserving of its own category.

[mattmitchl44]

Again, I'm not proposing to upend everything. I'm talking about one, very specific substitution - OBP for AVG. And, as already stated, using OBP does not do away with AVG, as most players' AVGs are a large component of their OBPs. By using OBP you are ADDING TO AVG, not subtracting from it.

If you want to have a conversation about adding "holds" as a compliment to "saves," that's a different discussion that could be had. If you had the capability to have a category something like "0.5 * Holds + Saves," maybe that would be something to think about given the emphasis today being put on deeper bullpens to pitch more middle relief innings and their importance.

I think you've already recognized the accuracy of what I'm saying with respect to actual baseball games. Why do we need to be more rigid/traditional in our fantasy baseball thinking than what we are when it comes to discussing actual baseball?

Perhaps a reminder is needed - this IS Cards Talk fantasy baseball

I do feel like most of the people, both you and AOF included obviously, who want to participate in the fantasy league are smarter than the average bear when it comes to a modern recognition of what goes into actual winning baseball in 2024. Which is why this particular conversation about hanging onto "traditional values" so perplexes me.

If, like, CardsFan4Life were dying on this hill, I'd say it was in character. Not so much the two of you, however.

I’m not dying on any hill… I’ve even proposed an alternate plan that would include OBP.

The league was formed with the intention of preserving the original 5x5 roto categories, and I’m inclined to keep it that way. I’m open to adding on, but I think it needs to be done thoughtfully.

How about adding additional categories for BB & XBH?

I just added you back as co-commish but it doesn't look like we can adjust settings yet. I'm not sure what all categories are available but it feels like there are a billion to choose from these days.

To Matt's compliment about baseball acumen... noted and appreciated... trying to think of a good analogy... I like older video games like Tecmo Super Bowl, Super Mario Bros 3, Mario Kart... I used to be super into Madden (pre-marriage / kids / life getting actual busy), and the newer ones on PS5 are so complex that they're not as fun. I like the simplicity of fantasy baseball.

Did you finally bone up for a PS5?

Regarding Matt’s compliment, it was appreciated. I will also note that those who are ‘smarter than the average bear’ are also less prone to ‘group think’. Why are we obligated to alter the league to mimic the thinking of basically everyone in the industry? Aren’t they the same dudes that are desperately trying to make the game interesting again?

The HIT is the driving force of all offense, and IMO is deserving of its own category.

Really, noting the completeness of OBP over AVG is "group think"?

Again, every hit is being recognized three times over (twice in OPS and once in either AVG or OBP) anyway. I don't think we are underappreciating hits.

[Quincy Varnish]

Really, noting the completeness of OBP over AVG is "group think"?

No, but a good potion of your arguments have relied upon a “this is how we think now”-type philosophy.

Again, every hit is being recognized three times over (twice in OPS and once in either AVG or OBP) anyway. I don't think we are underappreciating hits.

As of now, we aren’t. I’ve suggested a variety of ways to preserve the existing categories to accomplish essentially the same thing you’re after… yet for some reason, you have rejected them all. At this point I have to conclude that some part of your motive is that batting average simply makes you feel icky. Maybe yucky and icky.

[DJ Davis]

When is The Draft???

Hehe… sometime in March. I can’t even schedule it yet.

We should try to do it the last weekend before the season starts. I don’t want another Garrett Cole situation again.

[Quincy Varnish]

When is The Draft???

Hehe… sometime in March. I can’t even schedule it yet.

We should try to do it the last weekend before the season starts. I don’t want another Garrett Cole situation again.

I’m not sure our draft day can prevent pitchers from getting injured

I’d like to get it in before the Tokyo Series, which starts March 18th.

[An Old Friend]

Again, I'm not proposing to upend everything. I'm talking about one, very specific substitution - OBP for AVG. And, as already stated, using OBP does not do away with AVG, as most players' AVGs are a large component of their OBPs. By using OBP you are ADDING TO AVG, not subtracting from it.

If you want to have a conversation about adding "holds" as a compliment to "saves," that's a different discussion that could be had. If you had the capability to have a category something like "0.5 * Holds + Saves," maybe that would be something to think about given the emphasis today being put on deeper bullpens to pitch more middle relief innings and their importance.

I think you've already recognized the accuracy of what I'm saying with respect to actual baseball games. Why do we need to be more rigid/traditional in our fantasy baseball thinking than what we are when it comes to discussing actual baseball?

Perhaps a reminder is needed - this IS Cards Talk fantasy baseball

I do feel like most of the people, both you and AOF included obviously, who want to participate in the fantasy league are smarter than the average bear when it comes to a modern recognition of what goes into actual winning baseball in 2024. Which is why this particular conversation about hanging onto "traditional values" so perplexes me.

If, like, CardsFan4Life were dying on this hill, I'd say it was in character. Not so much the two of you, however.

I’m not dying on any hill… I’ve even proposed an alternate plan that would include OBP.

The league was formed with the intention of preserving the original 5x5 roto categories, and I’m inclined to keep it that way. I’m open to adding on, but I think it needs to be done thoughtfully.

How about adding additional categories for BB & XBH?

I just added you back as co-commish but it doesn't look like we can adjust settings yet. I'm not sure what all categories are available but it feels like there are a billion to choose from these days.

To Matt's compliment about baseball acumen... noted and appreciated... trying to think of a good analogy... I like older video games like Tecmo Super Bowl, Super Mario Bros 3, Mario Kart... I used to be super into Madden (pre-marriage / kids / life getting actual busy), and the newer ones on PS5 are so complex that they're not as fun. I like the simplicity of fantasy baseball.

Did you finally bone up for a PS5?

Regarding Matt’s compliment, it was appreciated. I will also note that those who are ‘smarter than the average bear’ are also less prone to ‘group think’. Why are we obligated to alter the league to mimic the thinking of basically everyone in the industry? Aren’t they the same dudes that are desperately trying to make the game interesting again?

The HIT is the driving force of all offense, and IMO is deserving of its own category.

Haven’t gone PS5, waiting for GTA and then will do it, probably Madden ‘25 too… hopefully Bears will be better

Alright, getting ready to board, gonna be a 3 day bender. See y’all soon

[DJ Davis]

When is The Draft???

Hehe… sometime in March. I can’t even schedule it yet.

We should try to do it the last weekend before the season starts. I don’t want another Garrett Cole situation again.

I’m not sure our draft day can prevent pitchers from getting injured

I’d like to get it in before the Tokyo Series, which starts March 18th.

Definitely true, but I think doing it as late as possible gives you as much information on that kind of thing as possible, which is only helpful.

[An Old Friend]

Should we invite ecleme? He’d finish in last and then pretend he didn’t play.

Ok, see ya!

[Quincy Varnish]

When is The Draft???

Hehe… sometime in March. I can’t even schedule it yet.

We should try to do it the last weekend before the season starts. I don’t want another Garrett Cole situation again.

I’m not sure our draft day can prevent pitchers from getting injured

I’d like to get it in before the Tokyo Series, which starts March 18th.

Definitely true, but I think doing it as late as possible gives you as much information on that kind of thing as possible, which is only helpful.

Agreed. It’s best to wait out spring training and all the early injuries… and recently, to learn which teams will have Scott Boras’ clients.

[Quincy Varnish]

Haven’t gone PS5, waiting for GTA and then will do it, probably Madden ‘25 too… hopefully Bears will be better

Alright, getting ready to board, gonna be a 3 day bender. See y’all soon

d00d… that’s another year, and the PS6 will probably be coming out not long after that. But go ahead and slam PS5 games anyway?

[Dazepster]

AOF,
Great trip wherever u might be headed.
Super Mega Baseball on Switch, assume you have one as you mentioned many Nintendo Titles. A solid baseball game bobble head characters notwithstanding.

[mattmitchl44]

No, but a good potion of your arguments have relied upon a “this is how we think now”-type philosophy.

Yes, because baseball has evolved to value what we know should be valued - which is getting on base however you can do so. Why is getting onboard with that somehow "bad"?

You can easily play the "group think" card in reverse - the "group think" was happening for however many decades people went along thinking that the ability to take a walk wasn't very valuable, until someone had the sense to put it into a context (e.g., linear weights) of how close walks are in value to singles.

As of now, we aren’t. I’ve suggested a variety of ways to preserve the existing categories to accomplish essentially the same thing you’re after… yet for some reason, you have rejected them all. At this point I have to conclude that some part of your motive is that batting average simply makes you feel icky. Maybe yucky and icky.

I've declined your suggestions because I think they are unnecessarily complicated. Occam's Razor - the simplest solution is almost always correct.

Wholesale adding more categories (like hits, BB, XBH, etc.) to go to 7x7 or whatever just to preserve "AVG" as a category is not the simplest approach. You don't think going to 7x7, or whatever, is a bigger break from "tradition" than just swapping OBP for AVG?

Again - my proposal to simply substitute OBP for AVG takes nothing away, AVG is still right there embedded within OBP, it just adds walks (and HBP) into AVG to get OBP.

[Quincy Varnish]

No, but a good potion of your arguments have relied upon a “this is how we think now”-type philosophy.

Yes, because baseball has evolved to value what we know should be valued - which is getting on base however you can do so. Why is getting onboard with that somehow "bad"?

You can easily play the "group think" card in reverse - the "group think" was happening for however many decades people went along thinking that the ability to take a walk wasn't very valuable, until someone had the sense to put it into a context (e.g., linear weights) of how close walks are in value to singles.

As of now, we aren’t. I’ve suggested a variety of ways to preserve the existing categories to accomplish essentially the same thing you’re after… yet for some reason, you have rejected them all. At this point I have to conclude that some part of your motive is that batting average simply makes you feel icky. Maybe yucky and icky.

I've declined your suggestions because I think they are unnecessarily complicated. Occam's Razor - the simplest solution is almost always correct.

Wholesale adding more categories (like hits, BB, XBH, etc.) to go to 7x7 or whatever just to preserve "AVG" as a category is not the simplest approach. You don't think going to 7x7, or whatever, is a bigger break from "tradition" than just swapping OBP for AVG?

Again - my proposal to simply substitute OBP for AVG takes nothing away, AVG is still right there embedded within OBP, it just adds walks (and HBP) into AVG to get OBP.

We’ll put it to a vote when the league is formed again, next year.

You don’t strike me as the type to shy away from complexity, so I’m sticking with my icky/yucky theory.

[mattmitchl44]

No, but a good potion of your arguments have relied upon a “this is how we think now”-type philosophy.

Yes, because baseball has evolved to value what we know should be valued - which is getting on base however you can do so. Why is getting onboard with that somehow "bad"?

You can easily play the "group think" card in reverse - the "group think" was happening for however many decades people went along thinking that the ability to take a walk wasn't very valuable, until someone had the sense to put it into a context (e.g., linear weights) of how close walks are in value to singles.

As of now, we aren’t. I’ve suggested a variety of ways to preserve the existing categories to accomplish essentially the same thing you’re after… yet for some reason, you have rejected them all. At this point I have to conclude that some part of your motive is that batting average simply makes you feel icky. Maybe yucky and icky.

I've declined your suggestions because I think they are unnecessarily complicated. Occam's Razor - the simplest solution is almost always correct.

Wholesale adding more categories (like hits, BB, XBH, etc.) to go to 7x7 or whatever just to preserve "AVG" as a category is not the simplest approach. You don't think going to 7x7, or whatever, is a bigger break from "tradition" than just swapping OBP for AVG?

Again - my proposal to simply substitute OBP for AVG takes nothing away, AVG is still right there embedded within OBP, it just adds walks (and HBP) into AVG to get OBP.

We’ll put it to a vote when the league is formed again, next year.

You don’t strike me as the type to shy away from complexity, so I’m sticking with my icky/yucky theory.

I recognize the validity of the point AOF made - that adding unnecessary complexity would maybe make the game more unapproachable for some league members.

Look at it another way. If you expand it to 7x7 just to keep AVG, AVG is now just one of 14 categories (7.1% of the total points) instead of one of 12 categories (8.3% of the total points), so you've reduced the importance of AVG by ~14-15% (7.1/8.3 = 0.855). And you have to come up with some valid, really worthwhile pitching category that you want to add to keep the balance (don't know what that would be exactly).

Across MLB, AVG (.243 ML average) is about 78% of OBP (.312 ML average), so you could say the simple OBP for AVG swap lessens the importance of AVG by, maybe, 22%. Which is not a big difference from how much you are "watering down" AVG anyway by going from 1 of 12 to 1 of 14 categories.

[Quincy Varnish]

No, but a good potion of your arguments have relied upon a “this is how we think now”-type philosophy.

Yes, because baseball has evolved to value what we know should be valued - which is getting on base however you can do so. Why is getting onboard with that somehow "bad"?

You can easily play the "group think" card in reverse - the "group think" was happening for however many decades people went along thinking that the ability to take a walk wasn't very valuable, until someone had the sense to put it into a context (e.g., linear weights) of how close walks are in value to singles.

As of now, we aren’t. I’ve suggested a variety of ways to preserve the existing categories to accomplish essentially the same thing you’re after… yet for some reason, you have rejected them all. At this point I have to conclude that some part of your motive is that batting average simply makes you feel icky. Maybe yucky and icky.

I've declined your suggestions because I think they are unnecessarily complicated. Occam's Razor - the simplest solution is almost always correct.

Wholesale adding more categories (like hits, BB, XBH, etc.) to go to 7x7 or whatever just to preserve "AVG" as a category is not the simplest approach. You don't think going to 7x7, or whatever, is a bigger break from "tradition" than just swapping OBP for AVG?

Again - my proposal to simply substitute OBP for AVG takes nothing away, AVG is still right there embedded within OBP, it just adds walks (and HBP) into AVG to get OBP.

We’ll put it to a vote when the league is formed again, next year.

You don’t strike me as the type to shy away from complexity, so I’m sticking with my icky/yucky theory.

I recognize the validity of the point AOF made - that adding unnecessary complexity would maybe make the game more unapproachable for some league members.

Look at it another way. If you expand it to 7x7 just to keep AVG, AVG is now just one of 14 categories (7.1% of the total points) instead of one of 12 categories (8.3% of the total points), so you've reduced the importance of AVG by ~14-15% (7.1/8.3 = 0.855). And you have to come up with some valid, really worthwhile pitching category that you want to add to keep the balance (don't know what that would be exactly).

Across MLB, AVG (.243 ML average) is about 78% of OBP (.312 ML average), so you could say the simple OBP for AVG swap lessens the importance of AVG by, maybe, 22%. Which is not a big difference from how much you are "watering down" AVG anyway by going from 1 of 12 to 1 of 14 categories.

That would barely value a single more than a walk. You can claim that a single would “count” three times, but it’s only 1/4 of max total slugging.

[Quincy Varnish]

Alright, getting ready to board, gonna be a 3 day bender. See y’all soon

Why didn’t you mention you were going to Ballpark Village?