The Unwritten Rules
Many years ago I met the woman who would become my future wife while we were standing in line to get into a bar. While I had been to that bar on a few occasions before, I was only there because a friend of mine had been invited to a toga party on the following night by a coworker of his and asked them if I could come along since I was new to the area and he wanted to meet me first. As I was waiting to enter the establishment, I heard the woman in front of me talking about this party. I looked up to see the most beautiful woman standing in front of me, so I used the party as an opening.
“You’re going to a toga party?” I asked. “I’m going to a toga party too! I hear it is like a frat house. I can’t wait! It should be crazy.”
That is when I got the answer I was not expecting.
Justin is the co-host on The Sleeper and The Bust Podcast and writes for Rotographs covering the Roto Riteup as well as other periodic articles. In addition to his work at Rotographs, Justin is the lead fantasy writer/analyst and co-owner for FriendswithFantasyBenefits.com, and the owner of The Great Fantasy Baseball Invitational. He is also a certified addiction treatment counselor. Follow Justin on Twitter @JustinMasonFWFB.
“IP minimum is a fair rule” Are you playing fantasy Craig Kimbrel or fantasy baseball? Of course it’s a fair rule, you’re lucky they don’t implement a more restrictive rule. I have no problem with punting categories, but I do have a problem with punting an entire position.
Why? That’s a weird way to put it. Would you admonish an owner for punting saves, which is also an entire position?
I think Bounty is just saying he wants to play in leagues where the structure rewards rostering both SPs and RPs (whether or not they are closers). In my opinion, it’s a matter of taste – not of unwritten rules.
the way he put it though, it really only applies to SPs, and it only applies to this one strategy. I get not being a fan of the strategy, but I agree with Justin that it should never break a league in its own right. People have been using it forever and it’s never really proven to work that well. Maybe Matt A, has just been the better owner? And he mentions it’s a keeper league, not crazy for one team to dominate 3 years in a row when they have good keepers.
Agreed. That was my take, at least. I like that rule because I like to think I’m playing fantasy baseball to (in some small way) imagine I’m a GM and put into practice all those time I said “I could do a better job than [the current moron running my favorite team]!” So I tend to prefer league rules that require some semblance of team building that is somewhat similar to real life.
I wouldn’t fault someone for preferring a different type. I guess you could play in a league where every team consists of only hitters, has no positions, and only gives points for HR (to give an extreme example).
I wouldn’t like that, personally, and it sounds like the other league owners in this league think like I do. And I don’t think there’s anything unfair about changing league rules based on a consensus of the owners. Especially when, realizing the rule change will disproportionately impact one owner who was not breaking the previous rules, they delay the implementation a year to mitigate (though, I’m sure not “eliminate”) the level of impact on that one owner. I would only find that unfair if the commissioner implemented the rule change surreptitiously without discussion or it was made effective immediately.
I’m not sure how having a pitching staff made entirely of relievers is any less “true” of real life baseball than having 2-3 starters throwing every day. I would actually think it’s more realistic, as several jamokes throughout history have floated the “why not just have an all-relief staff?” idea, while probably no one ever has suggested “why not have 3 starters pitching simultaneously off the same mound every day”
Amazing point