CDG - Why are my SP's rated so low?

[JimTurkey]

On the CDG, my SP's are rated very low ... in the negatives. Guys with 0 MM Codes are above them. I've put in the categories from my league just as I did in RotoLab. However, RL scores SP's much better and more realistically IMO. The only difference in the 2 is that I am able to state the # of SP, RP & P's in RL whereas CDG only asks for the total number of pitchers. Is there an adjustment in CDG that I am missing?

FWIW ... This is a 10x10 league with the following categories for pitching: W, ER, ERA, SV, HD, QS, K, WHIP, BB, and CG (not entered in either RL or CDG),

[RAY@HQ]

Try a search on "negative categories". It's explained in multiple threads. Cats like aggregate ER and BB punish pitchers with high IP too much. Use bb/9 as a proxy for BB. Not sure why you have both ERA and ER, but just double-count ERA instead.

[JimTurkey]

I don't know why we double count cats. I've argued it many many times. Our commish is hellbent on his ideas and any changes are hard to come by.

The one that really drives me nuts is CG.

[JimTurkey]

By the way, switched BB to BB/9 and things look a lot better.

Thanks.

[Michael@HQ]

Maybe you had it right the first time and the CDG is telling you that you should roster nearly all relievers except for starters with high complete game totals.

[JimTurkey]

It's just odd bc using BB in RotoLab gives me a valuation of pitchers similar to what CDG does with BB/9. However, the same cannot be said for CDG with BB.

Is this to be expected? Why don't the same category selections produce similar results/valuations?

[RAY@HQ]

I can't speak to what Rotolab is doing, sorry. But what you're seeing in CDG is expected.