H2H - facts or myths?

[alleyoops]

I'm in a h2h league this year for the first time in many years. It's a snake draft, 16 teams, mixed, using 5x5 roto categories, 23 active, 8 bench, with weekly matchups vs 6 other teams for the first 18 weeks, then 6 teams going to 2-week playoffs.

I drew draft position 4. It's a slow draft, starting on 3/12.

Trade question: I may be able to deal my 1, 2, and 4 for #15's 1, 2, and 4. I'm not that keen on Tulowitski, don't think Pujols, Hanley, or Cabrera will fall to me, so not sure who I'd take at #4. I'm considering doing this, or holding out and hoping somebody drafting 8 or 9 goes for this kind of deal. Thoughts?

Facts or Myths - I've read the things below from various sources. Not sure which to believe, which not to believe. Maybe it relates to the specific league format, so I'm asking in the context of the league described above.

1. Pitching is much more important in H2H (than in roto), so top pitchers go up in value relative to other positions.

2. Always wait on closers, since a) they're up-and-down week to week and b) they're mainly one category guys.

3. Speed should be devalued - same reasons as closers.

4. Bench spots should be primarily occupied by pitchers, so you can stream and optimize 2-start pitchers.

5. Injury-prone players should be devalued, since they can cost you if they're injured mid-week, or you'll have cases where you'll have to gamble on them being back from an injury or not.

6. Players should be valued the same in H2H as in roto, pretty much.

[Todd Zola]

1. Pitching is much more important in H2H (than in roto), so top pitchers go up in value relative to other positions.

I'll say MYTH. This may have to do with the notion that in H2H points leagues, pitchers score more points due to the scoring system, but even that is misleading. The key to pitching is how you want to approach it

a. Try to compete in all 5 categories and see what happens
b. Go heavy on starters to maximize W and K, let saves, ERA and WHIP fall where the may
c. Focus on relievers to maximize chances for ERA, WHIP and saves.

You need to win 6 categories, so some like to choose b or c feeling if they can get 2 from pitching and focus on hitting, they can win 6-4 or 7-3 most weeks. I'm a play it straight, "a" type guy.

2. Always wait on closers, since a) they're up-and-down week to week and b) they're mainly one category guys.

FACT, but not for those reasons.

3. Speed should be devalued - same reasons as closers.

MYTH, sort of. Those reasons are wrong, regardless. I don't get the notion how they think a player should be devalued if they are one category contributors. If 1 out of 23 players, or less than 5% of your roster can get you 17% of the points you need to win, it seems to me you WANT to make that investment.

That said, speed can be devalued because of its prevalence. There will usually be someone you can pick up as a SB specialist to help you in the category.

4. Bench spots should be primarily occupied by pitchers, so you can stream and optimize 2-start pitchers.

NEITHER FACT OR MYTH -- depends on your strategy per above

5. Injury-prone players should be devalued, since they can cost you if they're injured mid-week, or you'll have cases where you'll have to gamble on them being back from an injury or not.

MYTH - you can't predict the week(s) they will get hurt. If this injury is already built into their projected "value", the weeks they are healthy, they are HELPING your team at a greater value than you paid for them.

6. Players should be valued the same in H2H as in roto, pretty much.

Players should be valued according to the scoring system and the intrinsic value to your team based on your strategy

[Mickey4081]

Well, in h2h weekly matchups, I do believe it's wise to roster additional starting pitchers to take advantage of double start pitchers. I do not see the advatage of rostering additional positional players when, most likely, you'll trot out the same positional players each week. I'm not saying ALL bench players should be pitchers but you'll very likely get more use out of the pitchers on your bench over the backups at your positional players.

[Todd Zola]

Well, in h2h weekly matchups, I do believe it's wise to roster additional starting pitchers to take advantage of double start pitchers. I do not see the advatage of rostering additional positional players when, most likely, you'll trot out the same positional players each week. I'm not saying ALL bench players should be pitchers but you'll very likely get more use out of the pitchers on your bench over the backups at your positional players.

Unless you are using an all-relief strategy or just enough IP to reach the minimum.

[alleyoops]

2. Always wait on closers, since a) they're up-and-down week to week and b) they're mainly one category guys.

FACT, but not for those reasons.

3. Speed should be devalued - same reasons as closers.

MYTH, sort of. Those reasons are wrong, regardless. I don't get the notion how they think a player should be devalued if they are one category contributors. If 1 out of 23 players, or less than 5% of your roster can get you 17% of the points you need to win, it seems to me you WANT to make that investment.

That said, speed can be devalued because of its prevalence. There will usually be someone you can pick up as a SB specialist to help you in the category.

5. Injury-prone players should be devalued, since they can cost you if they're injured mid-week, or you'll have cases where you'll have to gamble on them being back from an injury or not.

MYTH - you can't predict the week(s) they will get hurt. If this injury is already built into their projected "value", the weeks they are healthy, they are HELPING your team at a greater value than you paid for them.

On 2 and 3, I think the logic is that since closers and speed are "choppy" - i.e. a guy may get 5 saves one week, 1 save the next, 6 SB one week, none the next - that the extra value that you get from them in their big weeks is not really useful. Of course, this can be true for any category, but it does seem to me that saves and steals are more "choppy" than the others, with the possible exception of W's.

On 5, I think they're citing players like Chipper Jones has been in recent years, where there are a lot of weeks where you're really not sure what you're going to get from him, injury-wise. That is as opposed to guys with an injury that will presumably heal and they'll be more certain week to week after they're back.

[Todd Zola]

There is a whole argument with consistency in performance, but I don't see it, never have. The smaller the window, the more inconsistent performance becomes.

If you devalue speed or saves, you are not going to acquire enough of either to have a "50/50" shot of taking the category. If the argument is to not compete in them, that is different. But I need to see some data demonstrating that if you put less resources to a category, your winning percentage of that category is greater than the proportion of resources you allot, and what you "save" helps improve winning others.

[maxdad007]

I would say that sometimes SP can have a perceived higher value when you see a mid-level starter get you two wins with a couple of gems. In my league the Sp's always seem to go earlier then they need to so teams can load up on the 2 starts starters for the week.