Best mix of 6X6 stats

[onejayhawk]

Don't get too exotic. These need to be stats that a mainstream host like Yahoo or CBS will have. For example, these are the stats in a 5x5 ROTO league I play. What would be a reasonable additional category for both hitters and pitchers?

Runs (R), Runs Batted In (RBI), On-base Average (OBA), Slugging Average (SLG), Net Stolen Bases (NSB)
Strikeouts (K), Earned Run Average (ERA), (Walks + Hits)/Innings Pitched (WHIP), Quality Starts (QS), Net Saves plus Holds (NSVH)

[The Feral Slasher]

such a random group of categories your league has. Just add HR and split holds and saves. Or do Quality Starts if you don't want so much reliever oriented stats...wait you have QS and not wins apparently. Just add wins.

[Ken]

What's the point of tricking it up?

[onejayhawk]

such a random group of categories your league has. Just add HR and split holds and saves. Or do Quality Starts if you don't want so much reliever oriented stats...wait you have QS and not wins apparently. Just add wins.

Random, how?

It already has Quality Starts, for example. The point of QS has always been to replace W. It has SLG to replace HR and OBA to replace BA. In any event, this league is not looking to expand stats. It was an example of a league looking toward newer stats.

The interest is more to modernize leagues with the traditional 5x5 stats plus, say, OBA and Holds.

What's the point of tricking it up?

Some leagues go back 20 years or more. The stat categories may still be as initially set up. For example, my oldest league still uses Complete Games.

For a 6x6 format, what is the best mix of stats?

[The Feral Slasher]

for a 6x6 format, what is the best mix of stats?

hr-1b, sb-2.5*cs, 2b, iso, ops, sb-3b

w, cg, k, wp+pb, w+sv-hold, era+whip

[onejayhawk]

hr-1b, sb-2.5*cs, 2b, iso, ops, sb-3b

w, cg, k, wp+pb, w+sv-hold, era+whip

Expand. HR - 1B appears to be almost always negative, why subtract 3B from SB, WP + PB is a negative stat, and several are not available from host sites. Why are these good stats to use?

[The Feral Slasher]

Expand. HR - 1B appears to be almost always negative, why subtract 3B from SB, WP + PB is a negative stat, and several are not available from host sites. Why are these good stats to use?

ok, so to reach common ground and levelset on the pitching side - can I assume you are good with era+whip and w+sv-hold ?

adding whip+era reduces the ratio categories to one, having both whip and era overemphasizes per inning stats, when baseball is a 9 inning game. W+Sv-hold, accounts for the traditional wins and saves, and subtracting holds effectively prevents teams from hoarding potential closers who accumulate holds. It results in a more valuable free agent pool

[The Feral Slasher]

Expand. HR - 1B appears to be almost always negative, why subtract 3B from SB, WP + PB is a negative stat, and several are not available from host sites. Why are these good stats to use?

HR-1B was an error, good catch. Should have been HR+1B.

[The Feral Slasher]

Expand. HR - 1B appears to be almost always negative, why subtract 3B from SB, WP + PB is a negative stat, and several are not available from host sites. Why are these good stats to use?

Yes, it is like whip or era where you want the lowest value. It is also an interesting quirk that PB is a catching stat, so it opens a spot on the pitching side for a catcher - which i think is overdue in fantasy baseball. The catcher has a huge impact on the pitching staff, and this helps reflect that.

[onejayhawk]

ok, so to reach common ground and levelset on the pitching side - can I assume you are good with era+whip and w+sv-hold ?

adding whip+era reduces the ratio categories to one, having both whip and era overemphasizes per inning stats, when baseball is a 9 inning game. W+Sv-hold, accounts for the traditional wins and saves, and subtracting holds effectively prevents teams from hoarding potential closers who accumulate holds. It results in a more valuable free agent pool

That's assuming a bit much.

I understand your reasoning, but why do you want to eliminate ratio stats? Why distinguish between per inning and per game? I prefer to eliminate W by using QS. I also do not expect subtracting holds to affect the FA pool very much.

On the hitting side, I rather like Hits as a counting category and it seems better than the complication of 1B + HR. Why penalize a player for 2B and 3B? See also the question about SB - 3B. An alternative is to go with TB.

Interesting point about PB but I still don't like negative stats.

[The Feral Slasher]

That's assuming a bit much.

I understand your reasoning, but why do you want to eliminate ratio stats? Why distinguish between per inning and per game? I prefer to eliminate W by using QS. I also do not expect subtracting holds to affect the FA pool very much.

On the hitting side, I rather like Hits as a counting category and it seems better than the complication of 1B + HR. Why penalize a player for 2B and 3B? See also the question about SB - 3B. An alternative is to go with TB.

Interesting point about PB but I still don't like negative stats.

Well doubles is it's own category, and it's reflected in ISO and OPS as well....so perhaps the final category should be SB-2B to even out the 2B/3B imbalance in my original proposal.

[The Feral Slasher]

That's assuming a bit much.

I understand your reasoning, but why do you want to eliminate ratio stats? Why distinguish between per inning and per game? I prefer to eliminate W by using QS. I also do not expect subtracting holds to affect the FA pool very much.

On the hitting side, I rather like Hits as a counting category and it seems better than the complication of 1B + HR. Why penalize a player for 2B and 3B? See also the question about SB - 3B. An alternative is to go with TB.

Interesting point about PB but I still don't like negative stats.

I think the factor of nine is more important than many people think regarding it's impact on fantasy teams. Dividing by 162 would be even more extreme IMO

[The Feral Slasher]

I think the factor of nine is more important than many people think regarding it's impact on fantasy teams. Dividing by 162 would be even more extreme IMO

ok, so thinking about it a bit more I see what you mean about per inning/per game. I still think my modified proposal is nearly perfect, and I've made a strong case....however, maybe it would be easier to just slightly adjust what your league currently uses.

On the hitting side I think you need to add HR, and on pitching you need a W category. A league without these categories is an abomination. If you think that makes the hitting side to power heavy, change OBA to hits or avg. In pitching I hate the use of holds, especially if they are equal to net saves. It introduces to much randomness and the need to care about a lot of mediocre MR. So I would make saves its own category, combine holds (if you must) with QS, and add wins. Final answer.

[onejayhawk]

ok, so thinking about it a bit more I see what you mean about per inning/per game. I still think my modified proposal is nearly perfect, and I've made a strong case....however, maybe it would be easier to just slightly adjust what your league currently uses.

On the hitting side I think you need to add HR, and on pitching you need a W category. A league without these categories is an abomination. If you think that makes the hitting side to power heavy, change OBA to hits or avg. In pitching I hate the use of holds, especially if they are equal to net saves. It introduces to much randomness and the need to care about a lot of mediocre MR. So I would make saves its own category, combine holds (if you must) with QS, and add wins. Final answer.

Those are two categories I would look to eliminate, especially W.

QS is not a good stat IMO but it's better than W. ISO, TB, and SLG are all better than HR.

[Ken]

Those are two categories I would look to eliminate, especially W.

QS is not a good stat IMO but it's better than W. ISO, TB, and SLG are all better than HR.

Better for what? Again I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish.

I get removing CG since no one gets them now, that was a good example, but it seems like you are tricking it up. The standard stats are best because it's a common ground everyone uses and can discuss.