[IBL] comments on mid-season ballot

[Sean Sweda]

On Jul 25, 2014, at 7:11 PM, Noel Steere wrote:

> As I mentioned to Sean separately, I think at a minimum we need to include some form of variability to starter fatigue from the get-go, as that's currently the only instance were the offense knows exactly when a reliever will fatigue (I say "only", but it's also every game :-)).

While some may consider variable fatigue a "feature" of the old PtP rules, as it's also a "bug" that allows starting pitchers to throw an unlimited number of innings as long as they don't allow the magic number of baserunners.  The BF system will undoubtedly be refined over the course of time, let's not make perfection a requirement for having something better.

> I also think the BF rest rules, while much more realistic, will along with the possible new rule about roster restrictions on dropping/adding players cause some serious roster crunches due to an inability to get enough innings.  If we're going to more closely emulate MLB usage (not even sure that's such a great idea for a sim, since MLB bullpen strategies are so lopsided towards fewer and fewer BF per appearance), we should more closely emulate their resources and expand the rosters to 40 players.

The release restrictions won't affect anyone unless they are trying to cycle through a bunch of low-PT players in the free agent pool, and even then it simply means they will have to get slightly less usage out of a guy before moving on to the next card.

I managed my team using the new BF rules for the first 5-6 weeks and I had absolutely no problem running my relievers over 100%, you just can't do it as ludicrously fast as with the old rules (e.g. RP pitch 5 innings across consecutive games).  I don't see any reason to think we would need additional roster spots, though I suspect it will require some people to adopt a different configuration of their 25-man active roster.

> Re Stadiums:  A lot of analysts use 3 year averages, which would help with variance.  Personally, I think we should do 3 year weighted averages for everything, including player cards, with current year weighted 4, last year a 2, and two years ago a 1.  Rookies and two year players get a AAA player sort of stat line for years before they came up.  But I know that's really a conversation for another time. :-)
> 
> Still, three year averages for parks is something to consider.

FYI - IBL park effects are already a weighted average of the previous 2 seasons (2/3 most recent season, 1/3 previous season).  I doubt adding another year will stabilize the park effects enough to suit those who want their MLB park to remain relatively static.

Sean