As I recall, the sixth pitching category was a debate that revolved around the splitting of saves and holds. In other 6 x 6 leagues I'm in, wins are the sixth category, which were universally shot down. Everyone wanted saves + holds combined to provide multiple avenues for relief pitching scoring in such a deep league. Innings Pitched was presented as an alternative and discussed and adopted. I understand the cumulative effect of having an IP limit and an IP counting stat. I think they both serve the same purpose. It protects against a team taking the ratios with three starts per week and punting the counting stats. Having a general Pitcher position instead of SP/RP also allows more flexibility in gaining all the pitching stats. If you choose to go with more RPs you'll punt the IP and QS categories. Lets look at which stats are tied together:

Streaming - Increased IP - More opportunity for QS - More opportunity for S/H ----> Aided by IP Limit (3 categories)

Barely Hitting IP Limit - More opportunity for ERA - More opportunity for K/9 - More opportunity for WHIP - Restricted by the IP Limit (3 categories)

The IP limit restricts some categories and helps others.

If another viable category was presented I would have been for it. As it stands now, I do not think streaming will be prevalent nor gain you an advantage in an inordinate amount of pitching categories. I don't think it's perfect, but there is some balance here. I was not the one that proposed IP as a category, but I do not think it will encourage streaming as shown above.

One potential issue could be the streaming of RPs, which could increase both IP and some ratios, but that would still be a tight wire act for an owner. Plus the transaction limits could restrict that. We can discuss this as the league moves forward. I'm not for wholesale changes, but as with any FB league, if we can find a way to improve the scoring setup, I'd be open to discussing it.

This post was edited on 4/8/15 at 11:46 am