Re: how innings cap parallels mlb, and waivers
innings cap isn’t a mirror to mlb, obviously, but we’re running a 13 team league, so the pool of available pitchers in our league is much better than mlb.
In that environment, possible for an owner to game the system by streaming starters and earn an artificially inflated number of points.
Our league protects against that by limiting waivers.
Personally, I hate the waiver limit. I think it limits activity, and therefore interest, in the league. There are plenty of transactions I’d pull the trigger on but for the waiver cost. If there were no waiver limit, I’d enjoy myself more. Maybe that’s just me.
More broadly, current waiver rules create another system to manage, and I think Curt and CBJ would both tell us the league would benefit from less bureaucracy/management requirements.
Here’s where innings cap and general P role really shine: General P role eliminates any question about openers, relievers, hybrid guys, etc. Makes the league better for owners and commissioners. Nobody has to worry about start counts or role changes.
Then implement innings cap *and* remove waiver count. Fantrax seems to do a great job of automating claims on new guys to the pool. No headache for commissioners. If we have no waiver count, that’s another process eliminated, friction removed for owners, and the cap protects against gaming the system by streaming SP.
You wanna pick up a guy? Great, pull the trigger. Long live the Smurf Cup.
More automation, less friction, system self-regulates.
Home
Chat
Login
Register