Fair or Not Fair Lineup manipulation.

[DontHaveToCheat]

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

"Why not just eliminate positions and play 13 hitters?"

No answer to a very simple question.

That's what I thought.

[Grey]

Because that's not the game... If someone wants to not own a 1B and take a bunch of missing stats from that position, it's their decision... You're only upset because it's a catcher they're not starting... If it were a 1B they weren't starting, you wouldn't care

[DontHaveToCheat]

So if it's not the game to just start 13 hitters from any position, why would it be the game to not start a catcher and have an extra bench spot?

You are ignoring the math I provided as to how easy it would be to use that extra bench spot at other positions to get better stats than you would with a low level catcher.

That can't be done from the 1B position.

You are still trying to compare apples to 747 jumbo jets.

[Grey]

If you take a catcher like Welington Castillo -- the person without them is losing 45/15/60/.250 -- so if they don't make that up by shuffling players in on short schedule days, they're losing out by not having a catcher. I see no evidence they are actually benefiting...

You should just play in a weekly league next year, so teams can't change their lineup during the week...

[DontHaveToCheat]

And Wellington Castillo is currently the 5th ranked catcher in MLB according to ESPN rankings.

Not quite the low level starting fantasy catcher I used in the example and the math used to correctly point out the advantage. Still apples to 747 jumbo jets.

And they are doing exactly that with the extra bench spot, shuffling players in on short schedule days which I showed the math of how little 15 HR's 50 runs and 55 RBI's provide on a weekly basis. Numbers that can easily be made up with the extra bench spot used to fill in on those short schedule days.


Why don't you look at say, Austin Hedges or Wellington Castillo's numbers and compare. The 11th and 13th rated catchers on ESPN current ratings.

Or maybe I should just play in one of the 99% of leagues (even daily leagues) that require you to field every position.

[DontHaveToCheat]

So if it's not the game to just start 13 hitters from any position, why would it be the game to not start a catcher and have an extra bench spot?

Here we go again having to ask a question 25 times before getting a vague response.

[Grey]

Or maybe I should just play in one of the 99% of leagues (even daily leagues) that require you to field every position.

This is not accurate.

So if it's not the game to just start 13 hitters from any position, why would it be the game to not start a catcher and have an extra bench spot?

Because it's your choice to start or not start a catcher.

And they are doing exactly that with the extra bench spot, shuffling players in on short schedule days which I showed the math of how little 15 HR's 50 runs and 55 RBI's provide on a weekly basis. Numbers that can easily be made up with the extra bench spot used to fill in on those short schedule days.

You didn't show any math, you concluded that an extra bench spot is better than having a catcher. Nowhere has this been proven. An extra bench spot can easily lead to an 0-for-4 and a catcher could have a 2-for-4 with a homer. There's no proof that not playing a catcher is advantageous.

[MattTruss223]

Or maybe I should just play in one of the 99% of leagues (even daily leagues) that require you to field every position.

The one and only league I play in where this is a requirement is a CBS-based AL-Only league with no bench. You have to roster every position in that league, it's written that way in the rules. This includes, FanTrax H2H and roto leagues, Yahoo Pro Leagues and of course, the RCLs. DFS is a totally different game, there is no bench.

So if it's not the game to just start 13 hitters from any position, why would it be the game to not start a catcher and have an extra bench spot?

The game is to accumulate the best/most roto stats for your team. If you can rack up more runs than me by not rostering a position, all the power to ya. But I bet that won't happen.

I stream my catcher spot in my RCLs, so here's some actual data:

Last year in ECFBL I streamed 23 different catchers for a total of 187 GP. That equated to 165 hits in 684 ABs (.241), 76 Runs, 26 HRs, 90 RBIs and 3 SBs (Thanks Tony Wolters!). Why wouldn't you want those stats on your team?

If you're just rostering an extra bench spot, what happens on full schedule days? That extra bench spot is sitting there doing you absolutely no good. It makes no sense to leave a spot blank 100% of the time.

If this was such a genius strategy and huge advantage, why wouldn't everyone be cheating in this manner? I play in 2 money RCLs with VERY smart players and not a single person has ever chosen to not roster a catcher. No one has adopted this strategy in my Yahoo Pro Leagues (money leagues) either. It's completely legal to do so there. So why isn't anyone doing it and collecting all the monies? Because there is no advantage, in fact it's a disadvantage. Now, most of us tend to roster catchers quite "loosely". I add and drop catchers on short/full schedule days constantly. If there's only 4 games being played, chances are there's an OF that has a better match-up than a catcher.

The RCLs state a roster limit, not a roster REQUIREMENT. You CAN roster one catcher, you don't HAVE to roster one catcher.

I would worry less about what someone else is doing with their bench spots and worry about making sure your team has a full roster as often as possible while collecting 90 more RBIs than his team will and making your point in the final standings of the league.

[DontHaveToCheat]

Actually I did provide the math on how little a low end catcher provides per week.

It was in the original post.

I will also provide the math that the average catcher BA last year was .242 as compared to the major league average of .250, which includes pitchers.

I will also provide you the math that 160 players last year hit at least 14 home runs.

186 players scored at least 50 runs.

152 players drove in at least 55 runs.

162 players stole at least five bases.

You would have to be really, really dumb to not make up the "lost numbers" at catcher and end up with a higher BA and more SB, if not get better HR, RBI and SB numbers.

[DontHaveToCheat]

The game is to accumulate the best/most roto stats for your team.

While fielding a team that resembles a real baseball team including all positions.