![]() ![]() ![]() I understand Escobar not getting a * with the limited relief innings, but a lot of these would qualify for LABL Retro based just on their relief numbers, yet no *. ESCOBAR CX 22 games 10 starts 79.2 IP (74 as a SP, 5.2 as a RP) SANTANA C 35 games 19 starts 145.2 IP (116.2 as a SP, 29 as a RP) BUSBY CYĒ6 games 2 starts 46 IP (10.2 as a SP, 35.1 as a RP) BOTTENFELD CY 44 games 17 starts 133.2 IP (100.1 as a SP, 33.1 as a RP) BATISTA Cĕ6 games 13 starts 135 IP (71.1 as a SP, 63.2 as a RP) WEATHERS CYĔ4 games 9 starts 110 IP (49.2 as a SP, 60.1 as a RP) OJALA CĔ1 games 13 starts 125 IP (73 as a SP, 52 as a RP)ĭ. FLORIE CYĔ2 games 16 starts 133 IP (92 as a SP, 41 as a RP) JOHNS Cē1 games 9 starts 86.2 IP (41 as a SP, 45.1 as a RP)ī. MARTINEZĜYZĕ3 games 5 starts 91 IP (26.1 as a SP, 64.2 as a RP)ĭ. CHOUINARDĜZĒ7 games 2 starts 41 IP (6 as a SP, 35 as a RP)Ī. They would be ineligible under our Retro rules.ī. These pitchers have enough innings pitched on the season to qualify as a reliever but do not have enough starts and do not have the * on their cards. The rules notations are for the league I was preparing to draft. Not sure how the format will look here and I apologize if is difficult to read. I have wondered about it before but thought I would throw it out to the forum for your thoughts. In prepping for a league draft, I noticed some inconsistencies in APBA’s grading of pitchers. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |