Minimum and Maximum Innings Pitched

[nymr83]

We need to start nailing some more things down and this is a good place to start. A yahoo public league with 7 pitchers allows a maximum of 1250 innings pitched (178.5 per spot.) Since we have 8 pitchers that would be 1428.5 innings maximum, i'd say we should round that up to 1450.

We also need a minimum...if we go with 3 starters, 2 relievers, 3 other pitchers and assume that the 3 starters will throw 180 each, the 3 relievers 90 each and 3 other pitchers 150, 120, and 90 that would give us 1080. we can round that down to 1050 to give people a little more leeway (requiring 131.25 innings per spot minimum)

Is anyone radically opposed to a minimum of 1050 and a maximum of 1450? I think it will prevent any BS attempts at winning ERA and WHIP with too few inings while also prevent winning W's and K's by sheer force of innings.

[Guest abogdan]

Assuming 180 for starters and 90 for relievers as a minimum is a bit much. 150/50 are more realistic. I'd lower the minimum to 900 if we're going to require teams to carry a specific number of relievers.

[nymr83]

900 innings between 8 guys is 112.5 each, which is barely anything. when your top starter goes 200 innings that leaves only 100 for each of the remaining slots, when your next starter goes 200 that leaves only 500 innings between 6 pitchers!

[Diamond Dad]

The easier way to prevent a team from winning the wins category by going with 8 starters is to use "net" wins (wins minus losses). This takes away the incentive to use a low-end starter rather than a high-end middle man.

I would prefer only a minimum innings requirement. No max.

5 starters pitching average 200 innings (remember that you sub out for anybody who is injured, so each starter "spot" should get 200 innings easy) is 1000 innings. 3 relievers pitching 50-75 innings each would be another 200. So, 1200 minimum innings, I'd say.

Otherwise you have two or three stud starters, and then all the rest are middle men and closers.

[nymr83]

Diamond Dad wrote: The easier way to prevent a team from winning the wins category by going with 8 starters is to use "net" wins (wins minus losses). This takes away the incentive to use a low-end starter rather than a high-end middle man.

we've gotta go with the standard 5x5, otherwise we'll be arguing categories well into May. As far as that particular category goes i don't like it, it lessens the value of GOOD pitchers on BAD teams even more than just counting wins does.

[Guest abogdan]

Using 200 innings as a basis for a minimum doesn't make sense. Only 50 starters had 200+ innings last season. In a league w/20 teams, each having as many as 6 starters, w/other on the bench, using 200 as a minimum amount for each starter position is way too much.

I vote for a 1000 IP or so minimum and no max. With a league this large, you have to give players different options as to how they can best construct their roster.

[nymr83]

oh yeah and on a related topic i think we can assume a 162 games maximum per position for each hitting spot right?