[IBL] SDQ comments on some of the ballot items

[Larry Selleck]

Hello,

Some observations and comments on some of the ballot items.

2014-4a)  Hooray!  It's been well evaluated (play tested) and well thought out, IMO.  Bit more of a burden on writing MIS instructions, but it really boils down to whether your MIS states if you want the pitcher available the next day or not.

2014-4b)  If we're going to do it ... do it all the way, so a nope on this one.

2014-4c)  I think the impact of this will be that becomes (somewhat) easier for mediocre or poor pitchers (especially RP) to get usage as they get credit for those appearances where they come in a only get one out before they fatigue.  Manager's do have to keep a bit better track on overall usage to avoid going over 133%.  Not sure which way to go with this one.

2014-5)  I don't really subscribe to the theory that just because an OF played LF or CF, that he is then as good, or nearly so at an OF position he has never played.  As a query, if a player is allowed 10 total IBL starts in LF, then I think I am right to assume his total allowable IBL starts would be more of an LF/RF number of starts, rather than them being split ... or is the rating one a player can move to in I6+, but is not allowed to start.  For example, PIT Marte is a full time LF (also rated in CF) ... am I right to assume that with the lf/rf rating that he is still only allowed his starts in LF (a RF start is an illegal start), but in I6+ or in an emergency he can move to RF ... or does it mean he actually has an entire season of starts in RF.  I think this is still unclear (may have been clarified   As an FYI, how the lf/rf ratings are calculated is clear and includes the rationale and reasoning on the calculations
 (http://www.ibl.org/~sweda/2014/03/combined-lfrf-rating/) is great, I'm just not clear on the mechanics of the implementation as it relates to starts, etc....

2014-6)  I think it needs to be clear that there are "caps" to the reduced ratings.  As an example, a 0/K/+3 rated CF would be a -2/KKKK/+5 rated RF if played out of position ... so he would be a lot worse than throwing a pitcher out in RF to play defence.  I think some text that simply states that the ratings for out of position have the stated adjustment, but in no case will be worse than the (Others) rating.  

2014-8)  I see this as a significant additional burden for those who need to play more by MIS.  Currently, I make the effort to always log offence, lineup changes and SDQ defence changes prior to rolling.  For opponents defence, I roll then check to see if there was an adjustment due to defence (e.g. gaurding line, infield in, corners in, etc....) ... as an example, if I have a runner at 3rd and hit a RG to 3rd, I simply look in the MIS as to fielder positioning and it's either runner holds or choice ... and I do record in the GRS for those situations where it makes a material difference (e.g. gaurding line and an IFR in the hole for example).  In my experience, it is not common where the defensive positioning matters, but to have to log it for each and every play (e.g. a number of MIS have players gaurd the line vs certain types of hitters) will become tedious.  I would strongly recommend that the logging simply records where the defensive
 positioning is materially significant for the road manager (lets the road manager know that defence was applied), but still log home defensive positioning prior to rolling.


My couple of pence worth,
Larry
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ibl.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20140730/68ab0f2d/attachment.html>