Posted by ozomatli on 6/19/2020 4:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by skinndogg on 6/19/2020 3:22:00 PM (view original):
Seems like I remember discussing this before. It would have to be part of the theme rules. Min IP and Min PA per theme.
MIN IP:1250
MIN PA: 5100
The sentiment here is good but this isn't the right implementation. Guys who know a ton about how fatigue works like just4me and justinlee_24 can probably make fewer than that work, and deserve to have that as an option. I myself almost never draft that many PAs in low cap leagues, and I get that the actual number isn't important but my point is that the number is different for different owners.
I could theoretically create an indexed value of IP related to ERC#, K/9#, and BB/9# or a system that compares those to defense and park choice when I'm verifying rosters, but that has always seemed like overkill to me.
Maybe the best solution is just to send out a reminder when people begin building teams asking them questions that could make them rethink things if they're borderline.
Given the right theme rules, at $80m I'm comfortable as low as 1,050, and can push it to about 930 if everything goes right. That said, it's a fine line to walk and I've played this WISC much more conservative than in years past. But as others have addressed, the issue goes beyond just quantity, quality and actual use of innings is just as important. An owner that drafts 1400 but sets and forgets without adjusting settings could end up in a death spiral before game 15 and ruin a season.
The $114m variable cap team is also an example. I've won a number of variable cap leagues with a team significantly below the median and as I mentioned in another thread, one of my WIS highlights is having my $25m team beat a $255m team in one such league. That said, a team at a huge disadvantage is walking a fine line.
In building these teams for these themes, many of us make choices that push these lines and balance our level of comfort as managers. We can go risky in the hopes that if it pays off we don't just move on, but we win. However, if it flops, we flop hard. Or we can play safe and try to build a bunch of teams that will win 85-90 and try to hedge our losses.
In the past of played the high risk high reward path and was met with very little success. This time I tried to play it much safer and take only minor risks. I think disclaimer warnings like schwarze used to do are helpful, but ultimately, it's part of the risk of the tourney so long as everyone still puts forth best effort. Fatigue spirals can be saved, poor constructed teams can be shuffled to maximize when efficacy... that's where the burden lies. The best effort.