Thread: Stage Four

It doesn’t exist. But we keep hoping.

Welcome! You are invited to wander around and read all of the comments that have been posted here at Patton & Co., but as soon as you register you can see the bid limits that Alex, Peter and Mike propose for each player, and you can post your own comments. Registering is free, so please join us!
In my home league this commercial is being used to find a replacement owner before our 3-round Rule 5 Draft on the eve of the first World Series Game.


We help our team owners achieve their fantasy baseball dreams by providing an uncomparable environment that fosters personal growth.

Fun for our fantasy players is not a goal to be achieved; rather, it is a byproduct of doing something interesting in a fair and competitive environment among other like-minded team owners.

We’re really not a good fit for everyone, but the ones we work well with we put in one of two categories.

The first group is doing well in fantasy baseball; their teams consistently prosper season after season. Accordingly we call them thrivers, as opposed to survivors. And yet these thrivers remain undecided about the optimum pathway through the present-day maze and multitude of fantasy baseball platforms. They may well be able to find something that allows them to grow their talents even further or increases their opportunities for perfecting their craft, but they don’t know which Leagues truly offer the right set of circumstances for the next big step.

The second group, and they could also be called thrivers, but they typically tell us that what riles them most are immediate, inherent, obvious issues like:

Frustrated that the only teams that turnover in good keeper leagues are those that require two or more seasons to be renovated into contenders; or

Concerned that most keeper leagues give too much weight to great freeze rosters, making them vastly more important than all other facets of the game; or

Dissatisfied with the lack of transparency and the inequity of how waiver claims and free agent acquisitions in-season are awarded; or

Tired of seeing these 2nd half events season after season: Ghost teams disappearing, coasting by first place teams with large margins at the Break, tanking by the worst teams in order to gain an important advantage for the next season.

These probably aren’t issues you’re dealing with?

On the other hand, should any of those resonate with you, please contact our League Commissario.
Caleb King-Stone ckStone
Oct 15 '13
With this definition of fun what would be the mechanics of your perfect Roto League? Having fun in fantasy baseball is not a goal to be achieved. Rather, it is a byproduct of doing something interesting in an environment that insures fair play, while stimulating formidable challengers.
Caleb King-Stone ckStone
Oct 13 '13
NL 12 team league...been around since '87. We use 13/10 (after using 14/10 up until Houston departed the NL). We dumped an OF.

We also have an IP minimum, which naturally provides a good balanced staff. Most of our teams are either 5/5 or 6/4 with regards to starters, though there are times when a particular team might be 7/3 or even 3/7 based on need, injuries, etc.
paul schneider badgermania
Oct 10 '13
The Plain Wheeler Dealer League, which began in 1991, switched from 14/9 to 13/10 several years ago.

We cut outfielders to 4, as most MLB teams have reduced the number of outfielders. We are a 12-team 5x5 AL only with a max of 10 keepers. Rules are similar (though evolving) to those of the original Rotisserie.

The impact is that there are always a few hitters available on Sunday FAAB day to replace injured players or those sent to the minors. With the addition of Houston, we had a bigger pool this year, and we will have to address that again at our February meeting.

I don't think the 13/10 increased the numbers of starters on rosters, as the league is very era/whip oriented. It did increase middle relievers, and it seems that most teams now have at least one setup guy whom they hope will become a closer, and a cheap closer for the following year.
David Molyneaux NeauxBrainr
Oct 9 '13
Maybe it should be 13/10 (or 14/11 for leagues with fewer than 12 teams in NL or AL only).

My league as well has lots of FA pitchers and very few FA hitters, so a 13/10 split might address that as well.
mike fenger mike
Oct 8 '13
We went to 10 pitchers this year to make up for the lack of balance between 14/9, especially in light of the AL adding the Astros. We also used Peter's suggestion that we keep the $260 14/9 auction and just add an extra supplemental pick (who must be an active AL pitcher and put them on the active roster immediately). It worked out well.

We still didn't have nearly the league penetration for pitchers as we do hitters. With 168 hitters taken in the auction and approximately 195 AL hitters, there are only backup catchers, defensive replacements, and some Rule 5 - must stay on major league roster - free agent hitters. Meanwhile 120 pitchers out of 180 means that we leave 1/3 of pitchers on the table.

We tend to be an ERA/Ratio focused league, so bad starters are avoided in favor of good relief pitchers, but there's still a lot of relievers left for dead.
Eugene Freedman EugeneFreed
Oct 8 '13
A friend of mine has a 13 team NL only that I'm the auctioneer of every year and they have 25 active spots- the standard 23 plus a P and SW spot.
van wilhoite LVW
Oct 8 '13
More or less what I was looking at Mike and thanks for confirming what I thought would occur when using IP as a category. A change from a 14/9 split to 14/10 with fixed slots for both SP and RP would be interesting, wouldn't it? Some combination of saves/holds has that same influence in that it provides some measure of value which is currently not there. Thanks for your thoughts Seadog and it was something that I had pondered but was hoping to maintain the current 14/9 split. Maybe I shouldn't be? I have a hunch that I'm going to be assembling another in a series of "test" leagues for the 2014 season.
Tim McLeod tlmcleod
Oct 8 '13
My home league does use IP as a category (we don't use Ks) and it really doesn't do much to make middle relievers valuable (it just means bad starters are more valuable). I think there is some merit to the suggestion (which I think Tim is making) that, with major-league teams using 13 hitters and 12 pitchers, maybe we should change our (typical) 14/9 hitter/pitcher ratio. Even without IP as a category (maybe especially without it), a good middle reliever would start to be better to fill that last slot than a bad starter.
mike fenger mike
Oct 8 '13
tlmcleod ... why doesn't raising the IP floor get those "missing innings"? Perhaps even make IP a category?
Howard Lynch LynchMob
Oct 8 '13