[IBL] IBL: More thoughts on a 2020 campaign

[Brent Cunningham]

I'd vote for a 162 game season also.  If MLB plays 60, multiply starts/PA's/
BF's by 2.7 (162/60) for the baseline numbers then figure the 75%/133%/150%
from there.  Alternately, 150 games with none against the opposing
conference and multiply by 2.5 to get the baseline numbers - hearken back
to the good old days of MLB when teams in separate conferences didn't play
until the World Series.

If we're worried about low MLB usage players, then lower the PA/BF
thresholds a bit.  If MLB is playing with larger rosters though, I don't
think free agent availability is going to be as much of an issue - more
players are likely to reach our thresholds.  Maybe lower them to 15 IP / 20
BF it that's the worry - but it's already pretty low.

Our rules will also change for next season with the permanent MLB changes,
right?  Meaning 3 batter minimum or to end of inning and 26 man rosters.  I
haven't heard if position players pitching is a permanent rule change, but
I think it is - position players can only pitch if a game is in extra
innings, or winning/losing by more than 6 runs.

One other rule, that I've never really bothered to look up - the 26th
(going forward 27th) man rule for double-headers.  If it's not a rule now,
we should vote on this as part of a mid-season ballot.


Thanks,

Brent Cunningham
Owner/Manager
Gettysburg Generals Baseball Club


On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 12:22 PM Russell Peltz <peltz38 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Personally, I don't think we should do anything too weird, and I'd like to
> play a full season.
>
> Since we'll need to add more low-playing time players and even full time
> players will only have around 240 PA or 60 innings, I think we will need
> to regress everyone's stats toward league average similar to how we regress
> LH/RH splits to mitigate small sample weirdness.
> The fewer PA/IP, the more their stats would be regressed.
>
> -Rusty
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 9:26 AM drm13 <dmenardmww at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Use pro-rated limits, expand ML rosters to 28 and Org rosters to 40/45
>> and play 162.
>>
>> Some new teams catch lightning in a bottle and make a real run at the IBL
>> championship?  Great.  Someone hits .430 or 30 hr over a 60g season?  Cool,
>> add an asterisk to the record books.  Some of the alternatives we were
>> considering with no season were wackier and less interesting.
>>
>> IMO, of course...
>>
>> Dave
>> SNH
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 11:12 AM Doug Palmer <aeronutty43 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If we assume that the MLB plays a 60 game season (and right now, I’m not
>>> convinced that’s happening), I’m curious how (or even IF) extrapolating a
>>> 162 game season would work for the cards?  Wouldn’t there be some
>>> significant abnormalities?  Especially with players who get a relatively
>>> low number of AB’s?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I know it’s a bit premature.  Had I known that COVID would wipe out the
>>> season, I certainly wouldn’t have restarted a rebuilding project, but
>>> hindsight is 2020.  I think that’s what’s neutering my enthusiasm moving
>>> forward.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The one thing that I think I can say without a doubt….COVID sucks.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Doug/BAL
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
>>> Windows 10
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ibl.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20200624/5f12bb73/attachment.htm>