Just kidding.

Well, not exactly.

It's never too early to start thinking about it, is it?

Click Here:

http://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/

Then

Join a League, then

Join a Custom League

League ID # is 6265 (League: Gangster BB)

Password: Corleone

Live Draft: Monday, March 20th, 9:30 PM:

As my fellow players know, my first exposure to fantasy sports was the ESPN Salary Cap baseball game in 2003, and I thought that nothing could be finer, especially after winning.

That was followed by another victorious year, along with two happily successful fantasy basketball seasons.

However, my present misadventures in basketball notwithstanding, I have come to realize, as DB I believe also has, that the daily grind of a salary cap game, coupled with its repetitiveness and the necessity to play every single day or suffer the huge penalty exacted from one who doesn't, removes a good deal of the games enjoyment.

Of course, if no alternative existed I might very well feel differently, however I find the Yahoo games in which each particpant drafts his or her own team to be vastly superior.

The excitement of the draft, the idea of having a team composed of completely different players than that of your opponents, the ability to make trades and acquire new players as the season progresses via free agency or waivers, and the management of the "maximum games played" aspect, add several elements of interest which simply do not exist in a salary cap game, while serving to make the Yahoo brand considerably more enjoyable and realistic on a day-to-day basis.

Not to mention the fact that the penalties are slight - a missed waiver pickup, perhaps - when you fail to devote some time and attention to it each and every day.

Will I continue to play Salary Cap Basketball this year and basbeall next year? Most certainly. But with the introduction of the Yahoo games, I must state that they are now first in my heart.

Now, as far as Yahoo Baseball for next season goes.....

As you know, I believe that a "Points Only" league is the purest form of scoring. Head-to-head is subject too much to the vagaries of scheduling and the luck of the draw, and, quite frankly, I think that Rotisserie style, in which a stolen base is treated with the same importance as a run batted in (another feature of HTH) is rather silly.

I would use a 162 game maximum at each position, and the ESPN scoring system for offense, adding HBPs if available, however I'd devalue pitching somewhat by including HBPs,and charging the pitcher a minus total for total bases allowed, rather than simply one point for each hit given up.

A mandatory roster of at least one player for each position in the field plus a required utility position, which would serve as the DH, altho I have no idea how Yahoo treats the DH position. For example, are there players, like a Frank Thomas, who can only be used as a DH, thus necessitating the creation of a DH position so that these players can be drafted and used?

A bench of 6 or 7 other hitters of your choice; If you wind up with Albert Pujols, you probably don't want to draft another first baseman, but if you have, say, Adam LaRoche, you're going to need someone else who plays first when LaRoche sits against lefties.

Five starting pitchers, a couple of closers, and maybe a manager to earn you three or four points for every win.

Sounds like fun, doesn't it? I can hardly wait.

Now, that's the spirit!!! Well, I don't play Yahoo, but baseball, in general.

I swear, Plaw, you scared me so much with this post. I was almost certain you were going to say that we shouldn't do the BBC salary cap game next year. I can see your reasoning for enjoying this style more so, but BBC is my love, and I'd just be empty if everyone decided not to play it.

(Sorry to go so off-topic, by the way.)

Just a couple of bookkeeping thoughts... I'll post more substantive thoughts later...

- A player like Frank Thomas will only have a "Utility" designation. All other position players will have their position plus Utility available. A standard Yahoo team includes all eight non-pitching positions plus two or three utility positions. You'll have three starting pitchers, two relief pitchers, and a couple of pitchers of your choice.

- There are no manager choices in Yahoo.

If you have a max game requirement of 162, how do you fill it with only 3 players besides your starters?

You need at least one extra catcher, a middle infielder, a fourth outfielder, an extra first baseman....

That's four right there.

I'd want a major league sized roster of hitters. As long as you stick to the 162 game max, the extra guys add more strategy elements 'cuz you're not simply playing the same eight guys every day. Plus, larger rosters encourage trading, as you've pointed out.

I just listed starting rosters. There is about five bench spots for non-pitchers and three or four bench spots for pitchers.

You're right plaw. You have entirely too much time on your hands. If you're really bored I have a bunch of chores around my house you can do.

The whole last page in the Yahoo Basketball thread is all me, except for a couple of quick posts by JG, and the political debates have been awfully quiet lately.

I figured if no one wants to talk about abortion, terrorism, rape, Iraq, the death penalty, or fantasy basketball, maybe we could get a fantasy baseball discussion going.

It was my first love, too.

But like most first loves, it flamed out when something better came along.

Try Yahoo, GG.

Oh, well since you put it that way.

Vinny Castilla is HOT!!! Is that enough baseball talk for you?

Or maybe we can just copy plaw's numerous type o's in his first post. :p

BBC is grueling, but a game I won't give up on. I first played it in 1997, so it's now a longterm relationship. But the Yahoo one sounds cool, too.

It was faster just to copy your typo.

It was faster just to copy your typo. [/b][/quote]That's how we say type o's in my neck of the woods. :p

Well, my love won't fizzle. :p

The first two fantasy games I ever tried were draft ones - I'm not sure if they were Yahoo, but I had a lot of trouble keeping up with them and figuring out how they worked. I don't think I fully comprehend all the trade rules and such. I guess I just enjoy the simplicity of a salary cap game.

Okay, Plaw, you just want to talk baseball, then? I'll use Bethie's technique. Willy is just so cute! Oh my gosh! And A-Rod! I wonder if the MVP has anything to do with looks, because he'd certainly get my first place vote!

Is that the same accent as noone ?

Is that the same accent as noone ? [/b][/quote]You'd have to ask Buffy that. That's her specialty now.

Only five typographical errors.

I've played Yahoo fantasy baseball for several years now. Yahoo is far superior to ESPN.com in every single imaginable way. Depending on how many teams would be in the league, I would think we would need more than 3 starting pitchers. We have 10 guys in our league every year, and we have 5 starters and 2 closers. Pitching depth is the most valuable thing to have in fantasy baseball. With only three starters, it really dilutes the value. We set our lineup weekly, which would make a difference too, I guess. If you guys were planning on setting the lineup daily, that would change things considerably.

If we play head to head in football, we might as well play head to head in baseball. Football is by far the most random fantasy sport of them all. A stacked team can get their ass kicked single-handedly by someone who picks up Sam Gado and gets 3 tds out of him. In baseball, with a week-long scoring period, the better team wins most of the time. One big game out of some stiff can't single-handedly carry a team to victory. If some stiff puts up big numbers all week long and helps defeat an alleged superior team, then that team probably deserved to lose that week anyways. Just like football, you still pay out regular season champ by most total points. I agree, total points is by far the best way to determine who has the best team, but if people have more fun playing head to head, then why prevent them from doing so. Having fun is the whole purpose of playing fantasy sports anyways. Espeically when there is no reward for winning.

I agree with you about HTH in baseball, JB.

The luck factor of scheduling in football - who you play that has a hot week, when the other guy's QB has a bye, the once a week game - is much greater than it would be in baseball.

But if you "still pay out regular season champ by most total points", and you "agree, total points is by far the best way to determine who has the best team", then what's the point of a HTH matchup every week. Just for the heck of it?

Besides, in a HTH or rotisserie game, aren't the draft strategies different? For example, let's say that during the draft I decide that I have enough power and htting to win the "Runs Scored" and/or "RBIs" category, so I pass on a home run hitter to go for a stolen bases guy.

I know that the HR hitter can be expected to get me more overall fantasy points, but to try and win another category, I go for more stolen bases, but fewer fantasy points.

And do me a favor, JB....come out of the doghouse already. :p

Damn, I don't even look at my signature ever so I completely forgot I was even in the doghouse. :p

The wording in my last post was rather ambigous. We pay out not only the regular season champ, but also the top 3 spots in the playoffs. We have a grand in the pot, so playoff winner gets $350, most total points get $350, 2nd gets $200, and third gets their money back. Most of the guys in our league like the head to head format just because we're all old college friends and it's fun to kick your buddy's ass, even though it might be your first win of the year coming in week 9. It wasn't until two years ago that two of us finally convinced everyone else that the highest regular season point total should get some money.

Regarding rotisserie vs. points, it would make a huge difference in draft strategy. I'm not proposing we do our HTH scoring rotisserie-style though. It's a lot like the Salary Cap Challenge or football scoring in a way. You get your typical points for home runs, triples, RBIs, etc. You are matched up against someone and you try to outscore them for the week. Next week, you have a new opponent and you try to outscore them. It's certainly not perfect. You set your lineup weekly, but with all of us out of school now, a daily league just isn't feasible anymore. And I don't have to tell you, our format allows for lucky wins and losses, but that's the way the guys want to do it, and if it keeps their $100 coming back every year, then it's fine with me. There are a lot more weeks of competition for the lucky wins and losses to even out, and the total points champ gets paid the same as the playoff winner anyways.

Good idea...!

And, those that serious about it (to bet $100 on it), won't just drop out halfway thru...

I've said in the past that I'd play for money.

But it's really not necessary here, I think. The glory is fine with me.

I've been giving this some more thought....

I'm inclined to set up the roster identically to a major league roster.

15 position players, 5 starting pitchers, and 5 relief pitchers.

A maximum of 162 games at each position, including starting pitcher.

No maximum number of games for relief pitchers.

You'd play 8 position players and a DH everyday, but you could use all 5 of your starting pitchers and all of your relief pitchers on a given day, since there is a chance that all 10 of them might be pitching on a single day.

So for pitching, you would just set it and forget it, listing all of your pitchers as active that day.

You would have to keep track of your starters though, because combined they'd probably go over the 162 game limit, so barring injuries, there would probably be 10-15 situation each year when you might want to pick your spot to not use a starting pitcher.

You could pick any 15 position players that you wanted to, but of course you'd want to make sure that you had at least one guy for every position on the field. Anyone would be eligible to be used as DH, just as in real life.

I'd go with the ESPN salary cap game scoring system, since it's the one that most of us are the most familiar with, so we'll have the best frame of reference for the values of the players (The Yahoo rating system is misleading, since it is based on Roto scoring, so all other things being equal, for example, if one guy has 40 homers and no stolen bases, and another guy has 40 SBs and no HRs, they'd be rated eaqually).

Since we'd only credit starting pitchers for their work, and not the subsequent work of their relievers, I think it would tend to devalue starting pitching a bit, which is something that I think we've always thought to be desirable in the ESPN game, where pitching accounts ofr a one-third of your points.

I'd also maybe eliminate the 5 point bonus for a win, or at least reduce it, which devalue pitching a bit more.

That would make a top offensive player, like Pujols, who averages maybe 4.5 points a day, a little more valuable than a pitcher like Santana, who may average about 18 points per game, but only plays once every five days, which, I think, is how it should be.

If a pitcher has a great game, you'll get enough points without the five extra, and this will eliminate the extra five points for games in which a pitcher gets bombed but gets a win anyway.

I would also add a +1 for batters being hiy by a pitch, and make that a -1 for pitchers who hit them.

Yes, it's early, but I would like to think this whole thing through as carefully as possible, so the more time we have the better.

No one is ready to start talking about this yet?

It's never too early, you know.....

Three more weeks until spring training starts....

I'll try playing this one, but I expect to have this exact kind of trouble.

I'll try playing this one, but I expect to have this exact kind of trouble. [/quote]Fear not, guys.

One advantage that the Yahoo game has over Salary Cap is that while it can be played as a daily game, you also can set your lineup for the entire season in advance - a feature you should like, TM.

As far as the trade rules, free agent pick-ups, etc. go, there will be plenty of discussion and explanation on how all of that works, as well as discussion on how we should set the league up, mostly regarding things like how many players should be on each team and how the scoring should work.

Stay tuned.

I personally like the scoring where the person with 100 rbis gets 10 points, 98 rbis gets 9, 95 gets 8 etc..

100 RBI? We scoring at the end of each day, or the end of the season? :p

I was using it as an example :p

Although does it really matter WHEN we score?

That's an example of scoring in a head-to-head game.

I'm thinking along the lines of the way we're doing the basketball.