STARTING PITCHER STREAMING, A VIABLE STRATEGY?

[Todd Zola]

In the Player Analysis thread, I have started a little game where we assume out pitching is composed of relievers and starters you pick up off the wire and the discussion focuses on how to judge the available starters?

Let's ask the general question, is this a viable strategy?

My contention is YES, with the following caveat.

The idea is to go DIRT DIRT DIRT cheap on your pitching, funneling the extra money to hitting. You have solid middle relievers getting you enough innings to reach a minimum and amass some Ks, wins and a solid ratio base. You then stream in starters to get wins and strikeouts, but not completely wreck the ratio foundation.

For sake of argument, let's say it is a 12-team 5x5 league. Usually 90-100 points will win. Let's say you get 55 of 60 possible hitting points. You now need 35-45 pitching points, or 4th-6th place in each category. I know it can be done, because I have done it, multiple times, usually with more points in saves to require fewer in wins and strikeouts.

In a 12-team, 5x5 league, here is about what you need for 5th place

W 98
S 83
ERA 3.92
WHIP 1.28
K 1168

A "normal" staff might have 6.5 starters and 2.5 closers, splitting that last spot as necessary to get saves if needed. At about 170IP for the SP and 65IP for the closer, that is 1250-1300 IP.

Let's say you can get 500 IP from relievers, leaving 800 for starters.

The relievers give 500K, 3.10 ERA, 1.15 WHIP, not unreasonable if a decent closer or two is included.

So you need 800 IP from starters. The necessary K/9 is 7.5 which is stretching it, I admit, but I also usually accrue more than a K/9 of 9 from my relievers.

To get an ERA of 3.92 overall, I need an ERA of 4.43 from my 800 innings from SP, to get a WHIP of 1.28 overall, I need a 1.36 WHIP from my 800 innings of SP.

Difficult? Yes

Impossible? No

Granted, the hitting HAS TO COME THROUGH.

But there is actually some buffer with the pitching as I have accrued more than 500 IP from my relievers at a better pace in some years.

Is this better than "playing it straight"?

That's up for debate.

[viper]

I agree that "better" is subject to each person's personality. But it sure keeps you involved and can be lots of fun.

[alleyoops]

Although I favor a more balanced approach, I don't see why this could not work. The challenges are similar to the other "low pitching budget" approaches: a) you really have to know what you're doing on the pitching side of things (or get very lucky) and b) the extra money spent on offense has to produce a lot of points. With high-offense-dollars approaches becoming more common, I think b) is the more difficult of the two.

SV may also present some challenge, as if you're not spending for closers in the auction, you'll have to find them from FA's or middle relievers you bought who inherit the role. Those things are also becoming more and more difficult to accomplish.

[mess1066]

As an Englishman who has been fooling around with fantasy baseball for only 5 years you should ignore everything I say. However, I have found this to be a very viable strategy in particular in shallow, mixed, daily ESPN 10 player leagues where there is no innings pitched limit rather there is a limit on number of starts.

My strategy has evolved to drafting 2 or 3 high K starters with whom I am very comfortable plus 2 mid level (solid as can be) closers plus as many lower tier closers and high K/9 relievers as possible. The focus is of course on hitting. Through the season I stream starters and with 3 bench slots will often have 7 or 8 MR / closers active out of the 9 daily pitching slots available. Starters such as Wakefield (yesterday), Jurrjens, Maholm, etc can often be picked up as FAs and played if the match-up is right (e.g. at home or in pitchers park vs weak opposition). In my ESPN leagues last year I came close to the 200 start limit with most of my teams. Though there were a few blow-ups with certain spot starts the elite startes are not immune to this disease either. In such shallow leagues it is also easier to pick up the next closer / hand-cuff rostered closers because very few MRs are drafted.

In such shallow leagues I will sometimes stream hitting to some degree with one or two marginal bats being rotated in and out on off days to take advantage of hot / cold streaks and matchups.

It all takes a bit of work especially if running a few teams but last year I won 2 of 3 (paid) ESPN leagues and came second in the other using this strategy.

[Todd Zola]

Something that should not be lost in the conversation is what viper said...

But it sure keeps you involved and can be lots of fun.

I think sometimes we forget that many of us play for his very reason. And while I know one of my favorite sayings is "for me, winning is fun", there are definitely different levels at which to play this great hobby, sometimes many levels for the same person.

[Guest]

And then the opposite of that is people like me who like the Ron Popeil "Set it and Forget it" approach to fantasy league-ing and like very strict transaction rules like those of the founders. Pure personal taste.

Should factor that heavily into your draft strategy, however.

[roche]

However, I have found this to be a very viable strategy in particular in shallow, mixed, daily ESPN 10 player leagues

Agree.

Take Todd's sample league of 12 mixed. This league drafts 9x12=108 pitchers (not including reserves). Of the 108 pitchers, all 30 closers along with a handful of closers-in-waiting will be drafted, so there are roughly 70 starters to-be-taken. So, all 1st and 2nd starters are rostered and the best of the 3rd starters. The free agent pool then consists of 3rd starters and worse. This is fertile ground for streaming. The targets that Todd laid out are reachable with 3rd starters.

Deeper leagues like 15-team mixed (NFBC) drafts 9x15=135 pitchers (plus an unknown number in the reserves). The same 30 closers and closers-in-waiting are also rostered. This leaves about 100 starting pitchers to be drafted. So now, all 1st, 2nd and 3rd starters are gone. The free agent pool now consists of 4th starters and worse. Poorer quality is available to the would-be streamers. This is where I debate if enough quality is available to make streaming a viable strategy.

In deep only leagues, it is likely that all starters from 1 to 5 will be rostered. The only things left on the waiver wire are rookies and injury callups. Streaming is not possible here.

[Todd Zola]

In 15-team leagues, you could have some options on your reserve so a version is still possible, just less margin of error. Here is where a couple of decent middle relievers come in handy when your matchups are less than desirable.

[zoobird]

I agree with those who said this works particularly well in shallow mixed leagues w/daily transactions and with no IP cap. Also works especially well against relatively weak competition, where plenty of good pitchers are on the waiver wire. The last time I played seriously in those leagues, I won 7 out of 7 Yahoo public leagues with heavy streaming.