Changing the K category to K/9 next year?

[NoPepperGames]

So, I've been thinking about our format and how to possibly improve the categories we use. So I am proposing we switch from the K pitching category to K/9 starting NEXT YEAR (2015). It's a somewhat subtle change, but I feel that K/9 is a better measure of the quality of the overall pitching performance of a staff over the course of a week. It really won't change the value of too many players as the same guys that get high K totals are going to have high K/9 rates. Now, the one pocket of players whose value would stand to change somewhat would be relievers. These guys have the highest K/9 in the game, and so guys like Kimbrel and Chapman would gain some value in such a setup. But since they still only usually pitch 2-3 innings a week maximum, their effect on a team's overall K/9 would be minor, but real. If we were to adopt this change, I'd also advocate for increasing our IP minimum somewhat in order to prevent a manager from simply drafting the top 5 closers/holds guys along with 2 relievers with SP eligibility and rolling with nearly automatic ERA, WHIP, K/9 and SV (and maybe HLD) wins in most weeks, and I don't think that such an approach is in the spirit of our league. Our IP minimum is set for 20.0 this year, and I'd look to move it up to 30.0-35.0 if we were to switch over to K/9.

But as usual, if a change like this were to cause you to seriously consider leaving the league, please email me and let me know, as we all have the power to veto a rule change in such a case.

Please vote, and discuss below.

[arch]

I'm kinda undeicided about K/9 simply because you could have a guy pitch 8 innings of 0 run game and if he strikes out just 2-3 he would still hurt you, despite throwing a gem. It would also make streaming less prominent. Now, I prefer not to stream if avoidable (yeah, got bad results doing it), but I do appreciate the strategic aspect of it.

I would rather introduce a high(er) minIP or maxIP or max weekly moves to balance out the pitching strategies before changing to K/9. That being said, I'm also up for any kind of challenge, so I wouldn't mind the change in itself.

Hopefully you won't need my vote to tip the scales, but let me just point out that, I can be bought.

[NoPepperGames]

Actually if a guy pitches 8 innings and only Ks 2-3, it is going to hurt you because a team only gets a limited number of starts each week (due to our limited pitching slots). A 2-3 K game is going to hurt you in either system, IMO.

One of the main reasons for this change, for me, is because of the 2-start week phenomenon, and how if you come up against a opponent that has a bunch of 2-start pitchers, you are already behind the 8-ball in Ks in particular. This forces a manager to stream where he might not usually do so, and that can in turn hurt ERA and WHIP. I think this change would level that out a bit.

I don't think such a change will discourage tactical streaming. It simply makes you consider your streaming choices beyond simply who a pitcher is facing.

[Deleted]

Do you think it maybe makes relievers (closers or setup) a little too valuable if you use K/9 instead of K's?

I sort of see the effect each guy has on the pitching categories like this, which to me seems pretty evenly distributed.

*Forgive my rudimentary charts and ratings. Also, relievers generally have better ERA/WHIPS than starters, but over less innings hence why I've put the positive the same for both, but the negative higher for starters. The same could be said for K/9*

	Starter	Closer	Middle Reliever
Wins	++	+	+
Strikeouts	++	+	+
Saves	N/A	++	N/A
Holds	N/A	N/A	++
ERA	+/--	+/-	+/-
WHIP	+/--	+/-	+/-
Total	6 + 4 -	6 + 2 -	6 + 2 -

Whereas, with the change I see it more like this

	Starter	Closer	Middle Reliever
Wins	++	+	+
K/9	+/--	+/-	+/-
Saves	N/A	++	N/A
Holds	N/A	N/A	++
ERA	+/--	+/-	+/-
WHIP	+/--	+/-	+/-
Total	5 + 6 -	6 + 3 -	6 + 3 -

I could see top shelf starters becoming very important, whereas most other starters are really only going to give you a leg up in Wins and could potentially cause damage to 3 categories instead of just 2. As it is, most starters at least give you a chance at being a good help in 2 categories (W, K).

I just brought this up for discussion, I'm not necessarily against K/9 as I think it is a better measure of a pitchers talent than just Ks are. Thoughts?

[NoPepperGames]

I agree that relievers receive a bump in value. Absolutely. But as I mentioned, the 2-3 innings max that a reliever contributes to a 30+ IP minimum is less than 10%, and that's assuming a team only just hits the 30 innings minimum. No doubt...this change would increase the value of relievers relative to starters compared to what we have now. But I see the increase as marginal, and worth the change in order to employ the superior metric of performance, that being K/9. Maybe the top closers get drafted a round earlier than previously. Maybe elite holds guys get taken a bit earlier. Otherwise, I don't see any great effect.

[Deleted]

Yeah, I really do like K/9 better just as a general rule, so my vote goes to make the change. I will just be aware, as everyone should, of how it will change the SP/CL/SU dynamic. The fact that it is H2H instead of roto softens that blow though.

[NoPepperGames]

This measure is defeated. Thanks for voting.