Increased RP Value

[Former Texas Rangers GM]

I've had a member make a suggestion that we should increase the value of RP. I don't want them to be too valuable, as I think they're highly overvalued in most leagues, but I'm not opposed to increasing them, if it's what the majority of the league wants. If we get 15+ votes and it's over 75% in favor of it, then I will make the proposed change.

[Former Milwaukee Brewers GM]

Since I'll admit to being the one to bring it up on the chat privately, I'd like to state my reasons. And I only brought it up privately so that others who didn't do their homework wouldn't see exactly how valueless relievers in this scoring system. Like less equivalent value than a kicker or defense/ST in fantasy football.

1. Just based on what I've found running numbers, Craig Kimbrel is worth less than a bad 5th-starter on a bad pitching staff. I think that is seriously discounting their value compared to real life.
2. There is no point in even drafting/rostering more than the minimum RP starting slots. You lose more by rostering an extra reliever for your bench than you do by rostering a utility position player.
3. Because of the first two points, I'd suggest that if the scoring isn't changed we should just eliminate the position altogether. It sounds drastic, but when the elite hitters are worth 3-4 ppg, elite SP's are worth 10-15 points per start (total points roughly the same), but elite RP's for this system are worth ~1.2 ppg. Obviously the bulk will be < 1 ppg or hovering around 0. Why bother at that point? You'd only be missing about 6-7 points per week by rostering 0 RP's. It's the same as one start from an average SP.

I still think even this is too low, as it only adds a tiny bit of value and is an overreaction to how dominant they are in our other league. I think that the best leagues give you multiple strategies to win, which is my favorite thing about points leagues. You're not locked into collecting specific stats. However I think that the current system locks you into 1-2 strategies at best. You either have dominant SP's, or you have dominant hitting. Allowing a set of dominant RP's doubles the ways you can win, as it will augment that middling offense or pitching with points from a different source. I'm not saying make Kimbrel the same as Kershaw like he almost is in our other league, but moving it to 2 points per save and 1.2 points per hold makes the elite ones more than just a strategic afterthought. Even at 1 and .8, if you draft a RP before filling out 7-9 SP's and a full offense, you should have your head examined.

[Former Milwaukee Brewers GM]

I don't intend to argue or anything, but just wanted to state my case and hopefully present enough info to illustrate that it's more of an overreaction to their dominance in our other league rather than a true reflection of their value. The Royals are a pretty good example of a strong bullpen's value in real life. In a season where the Brewers won 75 games, their bullpen blew 38 leads after the 7th inning. The winners of the division won 87 games that year. Another example of how a bullpen in real life has a lot of influence on standings. I don't want them to be a sole strategy to win like it was in the other league, but at least make it so that guys beyond the tip top tier of RP's can be worth rostering/drafting

[Former Texas Rangers GM]

I understand you're reasoning and I'm not opposed to increasing them, but I don't see them being worthless. Kimbrel is around 140 points for the year now, the change would put him in the 185-190 range. I completely agree that having a strong bullpen is valuable in real life and if you build a strong 6 man bullpen in this league, I believe it will be valuable as well, especially under the proposed change. It will take a complete bullpen though, not just 1 reliever alone. I think a good reliever is worth about as much as a solid everyday player and that's where this change would put them.

[Former Cleveland Indians GM]

I'm with Brewers on this one. Currently Street and Doolittle are worth about the same as Brayan Pena, and Marwin Gonzalez, Juan francisco, and Lyle Overby who got only 250 AB's with a .233 avg and 4 hr's. I think any real team would much rather have Doolittle than Overby, and would expect Doolittle to do more for their chances of winning.

The proposed change puts the elite RP's in the same category as Robbie Grossman (360 AB's .233 avg) or Reuban Tejada (400 AB's .254 avg)

I don't disagree that many leagues have skewed scoring that results in the ability to win 4 out of 6 (or so) pitching scoring categories with only RP's. I've done well doing that where the rules allowed it. However, I think here RP's are undervalued, and even at 1 and .8 are going to be the last off the board, or at least should be.

I agree with Brewers that it's good to have a bit more balance, and let there be multiple ways to win, otherwise draft position becomes too important. All that said, I'm good either way...whatever the rules, an owner just has to come up with a strategy.

[Former Texas Rangers GM]

Ok, it seems pretty overwhelming to increase it, I'm going to go ahead and bump it up to 1.3/1.0 and add it in. This will bump the top closers up to around 200 points, which I think is good value for guys that pitch 60 innings a year.