Desipio Baseball Keeper League 2008 Extravaganza (League Info on page 10)

[Three times a JD]

If I remember correctly, we were trying to determine how exactly a 24-team league would work. I know I had said that you could get away with every team having a 20-man roster. C, 1B, 2B, SS, 3B, OF, OF, OF, Util, SP, SP, SP, SP, SP, RP and five bench players was my suggestion. 24 times 20 is 480 players, which would be stretching it a bit out of MLB's 750 rostered players but probably doable. Drop the Util and it is 460, drop one of the SP positions and it is 440.

More relievers fewer starters. There's too many damn teams for 5-man rotations. Fuck Marquis.

I was thinkin' C, first, second, third, short, LF, RF, CF, Ut, SP, SP, SP, RP, RP, P with 3 bench spots and 1 DL.  I don't know how many---what's the word---players that would be, but I think that's how it should be.  I'm danged near always right about this stuff, too. 

[BC]

Well, Apex might very well be right with his suggestion of limiting the starting pitchers to four. With four starting pitchers on 24 teams, that would be 96 starters. My thought is that all but maybe two of the 30 MLB teams have at least three good enough, in terms of fantasy anyhow, starting pitchers. 3 times 30 is 90. With some teams having more than three, that means having four starters is close enough to reality to draft efficiently. However, barring the inclusion of holds, I feel having two relievers would just be a disaster to deal with. I don't know how everyone else feels about including holds, I would lean toward being against including holds but I wouldn't be that upset if they were included. Holds are still kind of a gimmicky stat when it comes to fantasy, in my humble opinion.

I know that everyone hasn't chimed in, but I at least am feeling comfortable with the idea of one 24-team league with each team having a 20-man roster. We still need to work around the edges of how those rosters would look, but I think it is starting to get there.

[Internet Apex]

Well, Apex might very well be right with his suggestion of limiting the starting pitchers to four. With four starting pitchers on 24 teams, that would be 96 starters. My thought is that all but maybe two of the 30 MLB teams have at least three good enough, in terms of fantasy anyhow, starting pitchers. 3 times 30 is 90. With some teams having more than three, that means having four starters is close enough to reality to draft efficiently. However, barring the inclusion of holds, I feel having two relievers would just be a disaster to deal with. I don't know how everyone else feels about including holds, I would lean toward being against including holds but I wouldn't be that upset if they were included. Holds are still kind of a gimmicky stat when it comes to fantasy, in my humble opinion.

I know that everyone hasn't chimed in, but I at least am feeling comfortable with the idea of one 24-team league with each team having a 20-man roster. We still need to work around the edges of how those rosters would look, but I think it is starting to get there.

You have to include holds or a huge segment of the best pitchers in MLB will be rendered useless. Every team has at least two holds guys and a closer. It's not difficult.

[Simmer]

I like how the rosters are shaping up.  The only sticking points that we all would have to agree on are:

--Using LF/CF/RF instead of OF/OF/OF (I prefer LF/CF/RF but I want your guys' approval)
--The # of SP vs. RP vs.  P (I prefer 5 SP but that won't work with this league, I think 4 SP, 1 RP, 1 P would work)
--The # of bench spots (I prefer longer benches, but, again, that probably won't work with this league). 

I personally like holds, and I do like using them in fantasy baseball, but I'm not sure if we can shoehorn them to fit with our league.  If we are going 5x5, they would be on the outside looking in.  If people aren't objected to adding OPS for hitters, then I could see H being added for pitchers.  I want us to go with the majority opinion.

[Internet Apex]

I like how the rosters are shaping up.  The only sticking points that we all would have to agree on are:

--Using LF/CF/RF instead of OF/OF/OF (I prefer LF/CF/RF but I want your guys' approval)
--The # of SP vs. RP vs.  P (I prefer 5 SP but that won't work with this league, I think 4 SP, 1 RP, 1 P would work)
--The # of bench spots (I prefer longer benches, but, again, that probably won't work with this league). 

I personally like holds, and I do like using them in fantasy baseball, but I'm not sure if we can shoehorn them to fit with our league.  If we are going 5x5, they would be on the outside looking in.  If people aren't objected to adding OPS for hitters, then I could see H being added for pitchers.  I want us to go with the majority opinion.

I think we should go 3 SP, 1 RP 2 P. Give a guy flexibility if he wants to go balls out for holds and saves since his starters are teh suck or stack his starters if he's lucky enough to scour the waiver wire for some good ones.

[Simmer]

I like how the rosters are shaping up.  The only sticking points that we all would have to agree on are:

--Using LF/CF/RF instead of OF/OF/OF (I prefer LF/CF/RF but I want your guys' approval)
--The # of SP vs. RP vs.  P (I prefer 5 SP but that won't work with this league, I think 4 SP, 1 RP, 1 P would work)
--The # of bench spots (I prefer longer benches, but, again, that probably won't work with this league). 

I personally like holds, and I do like using them in fantasy baseball, but I'm not sure if we can shoehorn them to fit with our league.  If we are going 5x5, they would be on the outside looking in.  If people aren't objected to adding OPS for hitters, then I could see H being added for pitchers.  I want us to go with the majority opinion.

I think we should go 3 SP, 1 RP 2 P. Give a guy flexibility if he wants to go balls out for holds and saves since his starters are teh suck or stack his starters if he's lucky enough to scour the waiver wire for some good ones.

The cut of the jib that you present is about as juicy as dribbled rib sauce down the ol' chin.  I LIKE.

How about the rest o'yas?

[BC]

I like how the rosters are shaping up.  The only sticking points that we all would have to agree on are:

--Using LF/CF/RF instead of OF/OF/OF (I prefer LF/CF/RF but I want your guys' approval)
--The # of SP vs. RP vs.  P (I prefer 5 SP but that won't work with this league, I think 4 SP, 1 RP, 1 P would work)
--The # of bench spots (I prefer longer benches, but, again, that probably won't work with this league). 

I personally like holds, and I do like using them in fantasy baseball, but I'm not sure if we can shoehorn them to fit with our league.  If we are going 5x5, they would be on the outside looking in.  If people aren't objected to adding OPS for hitters, then I could see H being added for pitchers.  I want us to go with the majority opinion.

I think we should go 3 SP, 1 RP 2 P. Give a guy flexibility if he wants to go balls out for holds and saves since his starters are teh suck or stack his starters if he's lucky enough to scour the waiver wire for some good ones.

Apex, you genius! Great idea. We could go 4 SP/1 RP/1 P but 3/1/2 gives more flexibility and more strategy.

Simmer, I personally like OF/OF/OF over LF/CF/RF. We might need a vote.

Actually, I will volunteer a hopefully kind-of sort-of "Virginia Plan" for the league, and if anyone has suggestions or changes they like they can suggest them for a couple days and then we can put all the ideas up to votes. We can use the following as a template. My goodness I feel like James Madison now! Here goes:

24-team league, five keepers per team to be decided within one week of end of regular season.
No divisions, top eight teams make playoffs, regular season ends after games of Sept. 7 are completed. Playoffs start Sept. 8.
Rosters may look like the following:
C, 1B, 2B, SS, 3B, LF, CF, RF, Util, SP, SP, SP, RP, P, P (15 starters)
BN, BN, BN, BN, BN (5 bench)
DL, DL (2 DL positions that can only be filled by those currently on the DL, if this is allowed by the service we use for the league. If this isn't allowed by the service, this idea is no good)
Live draft, with draft order this year determined randomly.

I have one other proposal for all of you to consider. I talked about this on the earlier thread but unfortunately that is now gone so I have to suggest it again:

If the Commissioner has the time and werewithal, I propose draft lottery for all future years, with maybe the worst 8 teams from the previous year getting a graduated number of chances (From worst record to best record) for the first pick in that next year's draft.

[Al Yellon]

I like how the rosters are shaping up.  The only sticking points that we all would have to agree on are:

--Using LF/CF/RF instead of OF/OF/OF (I prefer LF/CF/RF but I want your guys' approval)
--The # of SP vs. RP vs.  P (I prefer 5 SP but that won't work with this league, I think 4 SP, 1 RP, 1 P would work)
--The # of bench spots (I prefer longer benches, but, again, that probably won't work with this league). 

I personally like holds, and I do like using them in fantasy baseball, but I'm not sure if we can shoehorn them to fit with our league.  If we are going 5x5, they would be on the outside looking in.  If people aren't objected to adding OPS for hitters, then I could see H being added for pitchers.  I want us to go with the majority opinion.

I think we should go 3 SP, 1 RP 2 P. Give a guy flexibility if he wants to go balls out for holds and saves since his starters are teh suck or stack his starters if he's lucky enough to scour the waiver wire for some good ones.

Apex, you genius! Great idea. We could go 4 SP/1 RP/1 P but 3/1/2 gives more flexibility and more strategy.

Simmer, I personally like OF/OF/OF over LF/CF/RF. We might need a vote.

Actually, I will volunteer a hopefully kind-of sort-of "Virginia Plan" Connecticut Compromise for the league, and if anyone has suggestions or changes they like they can suggest them for a couple days and then we can put all the ideas up to votes. We can use the following as a template. My goodness I feel like James Madison now! Here goes:

24-team league, five keepers per team to be decided within one week of end of regular season.
No divisions, top eight teams make playoffs, regular season ends after games of Sept. 7 are completed. Playoffs start Sept. 8.
Rosters may look like the following:
C, 1B, 2B, SS, 3B, LF, CF, RF, Util, SP, SP, SP, RP, P, P (15 starters)
BN, BN, BN, BN, BN (5 bench)
DL, DL (2 DL positions that can only be filled by those currently on the DL, if this is allowed by the service we use for the league. If this isn't allowed by the service, this idea is no good)
Live draft, with draft order this year determined randomly.

I have one other proposal for all of you to consider. I talked about this on the earlier thread but unfortunately that is now gone so I have to suggest it again:

If the Commissioner has the time and werewithal, I propose draft lottery for all future years, with maybe the worst 8 teams from the previous year getting a graduated number of chances (From worst record to best record) for the first pick in that next year's draft.

3/5 (Starters) Compromise'd

[BC]

Well, of course Chuck. No trades for 20 years either!

[Corn-fed]

Now how about a Missouri Compromise that outlaws BC north of the Mason-Dixon Moran-Dolan line?

[Dan]

ok,
here's my thoughts on this keeper league extravaganza. 
24 teams, no matter how you look at it, is a big ass league.  doesn't mean it can't work, but it's fucking big.  Think about it, you could be in 18th place and be better than 5 other teams. Again, I suggest we consider breaking it up into two sister leagues.  one could be nl only , the other al only.  Or we could just have 2 mixed league but with different settings, because it may be hard to get 24 people to agree on the same format.  for example one could be roto and the other H2H** one could be keeper, one non keeper.  one could be 5x5 the other could have 7x7 with holds or saber metric stats. 
IF it does end up that we have one league, I think the rosters absolutely have to be smaller.  if 25 is the norm, we should make it 20 or 21 man rosters.  less bench and pitching spots.  only one dl slot. and 5 keepers would be too many, there'd be nobody good left in the draft.  it'd have to be 2 or 3 keepers.  the more I think about it... the league is just too fucking big.

if we split it up. here's how i would like to set it up if it were up to me.
traditional 5x5 categories.  25 man rosters
roto scoring. 5 keepers.(determined at the beginning of spring training)  12-16 teams in a league.  (10-12 for NL or AL only, 12 or more for  mixed)

I don't know if JD was trying to nominate me as a comish or if I'm just flattering myself, but if so I would consider it, but would prefer to just play, and maybe be a vice comissioner or special assistant to the commish.

**I personally don't like head to head leagues nearly as much.  the playoffs are too much of an anticlimatic crap shoot, and there is too much randomness involved week to week.  plus it rewards people for tinkering constantly with matchups more than those who draft well. it's more work intensive, and less rewarding.   I could go off on a rant on why roto scoring is the superior format, but I know some people are always going to find it "funner" ( see 'cause, the people that prefer head to head fantasy baseball leagues are the kind of people who use words like funner).   so i'll save my rant.

on a separate note, I've been wanting to organize a little league which is a pitchers only league, and it only counts pitcher's offensive stats. pitchers offense is so neglected in the fantasy world...but not in this leauge.
there would be like 5 teams, say 3 man rosters and the categories would be 5x0, (no pitching stats, just offense). think about the possibilities!   you could win the league with a 180 average and 8 homeruns on the season.  jason marquis could be the 3rd overall pick!
who's in?

[Internet Apex]

**I personally don't like head to head leagues nearly as much.  the playoffs are too much of an anticlimatic crap shoot, and there is too much randomness involved week to week.  plus it rewards people for tinkering constantly with matchups more than those who draft well. it's more work intensive, and less rewarding.   I could go off on a rant on why roto scoring is the superior format, but I know some people are always going to find it "funner"

No shit. The idea is to tinker with your  team constantly. You know? Actually play fantasy baseball. Every. Day. For six months. That's what makes it cool.

You want to talk about a crap shoot? How about the draft? Injuries can turn half your team to a complete mess and you need to have a way to come back from that. It's a chess game. You make moves. Sometimes you eat the bar and sometimes the bar, why, eats yeew.

Have fun with your pitchers-only emo poetry league though, Dan. Let us know how it turns out. I know that you will.

[Dan]

simmer down apex. no need to make it personal.
just for that I'm not allowing you in my emo leauge. 
and for the record, I like to obsess and tweak my fantasy team as much as anyone.   I've played both formats, and there are advantages to both H2H and roto.   But I like that roto scoring places more emphasis on the draft, and rewards the team that did the most over the course of the whole season.  There's less emphasis on the playoffs and on playing matchups.  But it's cool if you like to play H2H.   ok...sheesh.  this is now officially the dorkiest. argument. ever.

[Oleg]

1.  Why limit the number of DL slots?  Who cares if you have 1, 2, 5 or unlimited?  As long as the commish is strict with who can be on it (say, a 3-5 day grace period to move someone off the DL or they get dropped into the free agent pool), what difference does it make?

2.  I always thought the way to make closers and middle relievers be more equal statistically is to eliminate saves, not add holds.  I'm sure we can come up with something to replace saves that doesn't necessarily skew the stats towards starters more (because they pitch more innings).  Perhaps upping the number of relievers you must have active?  Maybe separating the reliever stats from the starter stats?  I don't know.

3.  I'm a proponent of using OBP over BA.  We need to find a middle ground between counting stats and average stats.  If there are 6 offensive stats, 3 average and 3 counting stats seems good.

4.  It hasn't been brought up, but, I'm definitely against using any stats in which the lowest number wins, like losses.

5.  I'm with Dan on the roto thing.  The pitcher league?  Good luck with that.

OK...what else?

[Three times a JD]

24-team league, five keepers per team to be decided within one week of end of regular season.
No divisions, top eight teams make playoffs, regular season ends after games of Sept. 7 are completed. Playoffs start Sept. 8.
Rosters may look like the following:
C, 1B, 2B, SS, 3B, LF, CF, RF, Util, SP, SP, SP, RP, P, P (15 starters)
BN, BN, BN, BN, BN (5 bench)
DL, DL (2 DL positions that can only be filled by those currently on the DL, if this is allowed by the service we use for the league. If this isn't allowed by the service, this idea is no good)
Live draft, with draft order this year determined randomly.

2 DL spots are too many for a league this big.  I say just 1.  If you've got 2 people injured, then you're gonna have to waste a bench spot to keep one or drop him.  And I don't know what service won't allow you to have DL spots.  It sounds like a service I'm not interested in using.  I think divisions would be cool, but I guess it depends on what we can do.  I agree with Dan about 5 keepers being too many.  I like 3.  Also, I don't see why we need to freeze keepers until a week or two before the next draft.  Then people can trade during the offseason.  Me and MikeC do it in the TCR league and I've taken apart my team for better or worse the past two offseasons.