PA's as a category READ BEFORE VOTING

[Ben (Rays GM)]

Innings pitched is already category for pitchers. Should PAs be a category for hitters? Vote and discuss, and take a look at what has already been said on the subject here.

A follow-up poll will be created to determine what category PAs would replace, but feel free to include your opinion on that question in your responses here.

Please read responses and carefully consider your position prior to voting, as it is not currently possible to retract a vote after the recent upgrade.

[Ben (Rays GM)]

I voted yes, absolutely they should. Not only would this reward teams for fielding full lineups of starting-caliber, healthy players, but it would also make leadoff hitters a little more valuable, as they are currently perhaps undervalued (having XBH, OPS, and HRs all as categories favors heavy hitters, while leadoff types are only really represented in SBs and possibly AVG and BB depending on the type of player).

Personally, I'd like to see OPS replaced, as all of the components of OPS are already represented in HR, XBH, AVG, and BB.

[Max (Tigers GM)]

Ben took the words right out of my mouth; I vote yes....

[Brian (Blue Jays GM)]

I agree with getting rid of OPS, rate stats tend to afford an advantage teams with incomplete lineups and i think we should be encouraging teams to field a more competitive lineup.

[Ben (Rays GM)]

I have a feeling some people are holding out on voting until more is said on the topic. Any other thoughts?

[Deleted]

I voted no, but do not hold a very strong opinion on the matter.

My main reason is that PA is not a measure of skill. The leadoff hitter for a team could go 0 for 6, and we're saying that holds positive value in our league (I know it hurts any rate stats, but there should be no positives coming out of it). I understand the need to reward teams who fill out a complete roster, and that is why I'm not going to say a word whichever way this shakes out, but I thought the whole idea of avoiding classic stats like R, RBI, etc. was so that we were valuing players based on their underlying skill. It makes sense to use IP because you have to be successful to pitch an additional inning in a given ballgame, but the PAs you get just for showing up.

[Ben (Rays GM)]

Fair points. However, sometimes just showing up is valuable. The guy who went 0 for 6 presumably helped his team out on defense that day, while the guy who sat on the bench all day didn't. You can't have a team made up of 9 players who don't play. So if I have a catcher who goes 0 for 6, I think I should get rewarded for that. At the very least I deserve more for that than does my opponent, whose catcher went 0 for 0 because he's in AAA. As it is now, my opponent would have come out on top in that situation, since I'd take a hit in AVG and he wouldn't. At least if I get points for his PAs, it evens that out.

[Deleted]

Aug 9, 2013 15:07:01 GMT -5 Ben (Rays GM) said:

Fair points. However, sometimes just showing up is valuable. The guy who went 0 for 6 presumably helped his team out on defense that day, while the guy who sat on the bench all day didn't. You can't have a team made up of 9 players who don't play. So if I have a catcher who goes 0 for 6, I think I should get rewarded for that. At the very least I deserve more for that than does my opponent, whose catcher went 0 for 0 because he's in AAA. As it is now, my opponent would have come out on top in that situation, since I'd take a hit in AVG and he wouldn't. At least if I get points for his PAs, it evens that out.

I have no problem with the reasons for the proposed rule change, I totally get it and agree with them. In a league this deep, where you need to acquire talent before it ever materializes in the big leagues, making an appearance should have value, I just wasn't sure PA was the right measure of that value. I'll admit there isn't much of an alternative (it would be cool if Pitches Seen At The Plate was a stat!), so if we feel PA is the best route then I'm on board.

[Ben (Rays GM)]

Pitches seen at the plate would be a fantastic stat to use. If Yahoo ever adds that to the options, we'll definitely have to have a discussion about adding that in.

[Brian (Blue Jays GM)]

Aug 9, 2013 20:27:36 GMT -5 @onedog119 said:

Aug 9, 2013 15:07:01 GMT -5 Ben (Rays GM) said:

Fair points. However, sometimes just showing up is valuable. The guy who went 0 for 6 presumably helped his team out on defense that day, while the guy who sat on the bench all day didn't. You can't have a team made up of 9 players who don't play. So if I have a catcher who goes 0 for 6, I think I should get rewarded for that. At the very least I deserve more for that than does my opponent, whose catcher went 0 for 0 because he's in AAA. As it is now, my opponent would have come out on top in that situation, since I'd take a hit in AVG and he wouldn't. At least if I get points for his PAs, it evens that out.

I have no problem with the reasons for the proposed rule change, I totally get it and agree with them. In a league this deep, where you need to acquire talent before it ever materializes in the big leagues, making an appearance should have value, I just wasn't sure PA was the right measure of that value. I'll admit there isn't much of an alternative (it would be cool if Pitches Seen At The Plate was a stat!), so if we feel PA is the best route then I'm on board.

I would love it if we could measure plate discipline like that!

[Ben (Rays GM)]

Currently 11-2. I'm about ready to call this one if nobody else has anything to add.