My 110M team has played 12, 11 and 14 inning games so far for the first three games of the season. Pitching is fried...

10-14 so far and all teams have a win in first 4 games. Sadly, this is actually good for me #loweredexpectations

I'd like to say we couldn't have gotten off to a worse start, but I'm afraid my teams will take that as a challenge and prove me wrong.

Pick a year they said... So I picked 2005. Like the dumbest person alive.

I can't explain how annoyed I am going against deadball teams that aLLOWED NEGATVE 2 HOMERUNS IN 1500 IP.

Posted by rbow923 on 8/19/2018 12:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ozomatli on 8/18/2018 10:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Donburgh on 8/18/2018 10:21:00 PM (view original):
Ozo, I'm curious whether you rejected any of the Coors league pitching staffs. Apologies if you've answered this somewhere else already.

No worries. It's a good question. I did not. Some people are definitely going to need to do some creative managing, but I approached it with the mindset that I would only reject if there was no way it could work.

Only one team stood out enough to potentially be flagged based on innings (jbohrman with 1,479) but his pitcher quality was among if not the best across all owners (team WHIP 0.97), so I held off. I am also a bit worried about loyalcanuck (1,502 innings with a higher-end team WHIP of 1.21) but, again, not enough to pull the trigger on a redo (ironically, as he mentioned, we are now in the same division, so it's my own fault if he ends up fatiguing my hitters).

I haven't noticed that WHIP has much effect on innings needed. According to the formula higher WHIP pitchers are allotted more pitches per inning to compensate. So it should balance out in theory. They may lose just a little in big offense leagues because of geometric progression.

This is exactly why I didn't reject loyalcanuck's team and a few others. We'll see if it proves true, though, since this is a fairly big offense league.

Posted by mdc2276 on 8/20/2018 10:49:00 AM (view original):
Pick a year they said... So I picked 2005. Like the dumbest person alive.

I can't explain how annoyed I am going against deadball teams that aLLOWED NEGATVE 2 HOMERUNS IN 1500 IP.

If it makes you feel any better, Pete Rose (7 HR in 700+ PA) homered in the opener off Ed Walsh (2 HR allowed in 495 IP)

One of the more interesting problems with the 90M league was that, as you increased the amount of innings you would include on your roster, you would need to reduce the quality (assuming you kept your lineup the same). Worse quality leads to more pitches needed per inning. In theory, there's an point where increase innings actually increases the amount of innings you need even further, at a rate greater than 1.0, making it impossible to add innings at a low enough price to make it worth it. This is probably very high above the range we need for this league, but just funny to think about.

Kershaw team falls to 0-6. I guess I could have done better with any of my other choices. Sigh.

Posted by redcped on 8/20/2018 7:00:00 PM (view original):
Kershaw team falls to 0-6. I guess I could have done better with any of my other choices. Sigh.

Obviously early but, if it makes you feel better, no Kershaw teams are currently above .500

Posted by ozomatli on 8/20/2018 7:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by redcped on 8/20/2018 7:00:00 PM (view original):
Kershaw team falls to 0-6. I guess I could have done better with any of my other choices. Sigh.

Obviously early but, if it makes you feel better, no Kershaw teams are currently above .500

Across all of the 100M leagues, what player(s) was chosen the most for cloning?

Haven’t done the analysis yet but I believe it was Maddux

Actually, on that front, going to need to push back roster analysis a bit due to a heavy workload before heading out on vacation. Will try to get some things out this week but likely will not get all leagues done.

Two 0-9 teams, two first-place teams. One of the first-place teams is my Coors team. A lot of this is small sample sizes (we've only played three teams each), but still, I wasn't expecting more than one disastrous team (the 255 team), and I definitely wasn't expecting respectable results from Coors.

Biggest surprise for me so far has been the overall lack of errors and minus plays for the $90 mil Coors league versus what I expected, even given the small sample size. Average around 2 errors/minus plays a game. Looked at league averages across the different themes and lowest of which were $100 and $110 which are around 1. Expected those the lowest given the number of clones of pitchers (Maddux/Smoltz/another pitcher/any Braves hitter) and the pitching dominant teams with the deadball era string of years.

Played in back to back games in which the opponent struck me out zero and one time with only one error and zero minus plays between the two games. Lot of balls in plays and successful chances. Will be interesting to see the league progress.

Are the other 90M leagues seeing high runs per game, though? League average in my league is 8.5 runs per game, with the top team doing 12.4 runs per game