Do batters figure out rookie pitchers?

smiller · 12-09-2017, 01:52 PM

I have a rookie pitcher who was 5-1 with an ERA under 2.00 for his first six starts. Since then he's gone 3-7 with an ERA over 5.50. Is the game structured so that batters eventually figure out how to hit a hot rookie pitcher or is there another reason for his turnabout?

NoOne · 12-09-2017, 03:54 PM

age/experience is a factor, but not a 1:1 cause/effect.

i've seen enough struggle, hold their own, and excel. this is something you'd need to track and see if it exists, your eye is not good enough.

my guess: a rookie is more volatile but not necessarily more prone to success or failure based on whether they pitch or bat. success/failure still comes down to ratings. the better they are the less likely you notice this effect => better %'s of avoiding failure regardless of 1st year or 10th that remains the same major constituent of the force (use it luke!).

i've always read/heard a rookie pitcher has a bit of an advantage at first... if this is quantifiable and there's some sort of greater agreement upon it's assertions, then there's a good chance it's in the game. highly debateable andit's probably not in the game.. i've never read into it to see if it's good logic or just some nonsense. what people "say" is 50/50 nonsense. one human's observations about these things is not evidence... unless they used some tools/math/logic to aid their assessment.

Drstrangelove · 12-10-2017, 04:34 PM

Regression to the mean.

Given dozens of rookies, one might be expected with random luck to pitch well above average at first, while another might be expected to pitch horribly. Luck in baseball is pervasive. A line drive is hit directly at some one, a squib becomes a hit, a fly ball is caught by the wind, or is carried out, a runner takes off late, or a fielder throws to the wrong base, a hitter just misses on a mistake pitch down the middle, or a hitter swings late and bounces a great pitch through a hole in the infield.

Voila!

Then both of them experience pitching with average luck, (or perchance the luck reverses) and we say:

1) the league caught up with him, or
2) he's figuring it all out

IRL, of course, there are scouts and people learn tendencies and abilities, but in a simulation, the code doesn't need that at all, since human expectations will generate sufficient doubt and optimism, to the generate same feelings.

NoOne · 12-12-2017, 01:31 PM

it may or may not be luck.. defintieyl couldn't tell from just watching.

not quite about regression... we are looking at long-term total pie results to determine if this effect is real or not. regression to the mean on this topis would be looking recent history or some small window of time and saying we are in a "up" period and it will likely regress back to historical norms if given enough time.

this effect could easily be simulated, if real, so that's not an obstacle. The only 'catch' to it is whether or not the game designers agreed that it was 'real' and wanted to implement it in their video game. if you can google it and find specific agreed upon assumptions proven by real life data, there's a pretty good chance it's in the game.

--------------

if i were forced to bet, it would be that both rookie batters and pitchers have some sort of net negative effect implemented relative to who they are facing at the moment. i doubt either has a net positive due to lack of experience, all other things remaining the same.

i'm ~100% certain age or service time (combo?) is a real effect in minor leauges, so it's not a stretch that it also influence initial mlb years. i.e. few 18 years olds can perform well even if current ratings warrant a higher placement in A, aa or aaa. some can do it, but if they wallow @ 50-80ops+ or 50-80era+ for an entire year you know they shouldn't have been in that league no matter what their ratings say (accuracy assumed for this example).. the ones that can do it will be competent and ~average or better stats relative to that league. keep promoting those even if young. but they are an exception and that doesn't disprove the effect of age in MiL.

don't speculate here on it, go google and see if any research backs up the postulation you are asking about. it won't be definitive as to whether it is in the game or not, but it will give a very good idea... a "no" will be more obvious and more easily shown to be true. a 'no' will be definitive. a 'yes' = maybe.

12-09-2017, 01:52 PM	#1
smiller Major Leagues Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Pittsboro NC Posts: 430	Do batters figure out rookie pitchers? I have a rookie pitcher who was 5-1 with an ERA under 2.00 for his first six starts. Since then he's gone 3-7 with an ERA over 5.50. Is the game structured so that batters eventually figure out how to hit a hot rookie pitcher or is there another reason for his turnabout?

12-09-2017, 03:54 PM	#2
NoOne Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,259 Infractions: 1/0 (0)	age/experience is a factor, but not a 1:1 cause/effect. i've seen enough struggle, hold their own, and excel. this is something you'd need to track and see if it exists, your eye is not good enough. my guess: a rookie is more volatile but not necessarily more prone to success or failure based on whether they pitch or bat. success/failure still comes down to ratings. the better they are the less likely you notice this effect => better %'s of avoiding failure regardless of 1st year or 10th that remains the same major constituent of the force (use it luke!). i've always read/heard a rookie pitcher has a bit of an advantage at first... if this is quantifiable and there's some sort of greater agreement upon it's assertions, then there's a good chance it's in the game. highly debateable andit's probably not in the game.. i've never read into it to see if it's good logic or just some nonsense. what people "say" is 50/50 nonsense. one human's observations about these things is not evidence... unless they used some tools/math/logic to aid their assessment. Last edited by NoOne; 12-09-2017 at 03:57 PM.

12-10-2017, 04:34 PM	#3
Drstrangelove Major Leagues Join Date: Jun 2014 Posts: 346	Regression to the mean. Given dozens of rookies, one might be expected with random luck to pitch well above average at first, while another might be expected to pitch horribly. Luck in baseball is pervasive. A line drive is hit directly at some one, a squib becomes a hit, a fly ball is caught by the wind, or is carried out, a runner takes off late, or a fielder throws to the wrong base, a hitter just misses on a mistake pitch down the middle, or a hitter swings late and bounces a great pitch through a hole in the infield. Voila! Then both of them experience pitching with average luck, (or perchance the luck reverses) and we say: 1) the league caught up with him, or 2) he's figuring it all out IRL, of course, there are scouts and people learn tendencies and abilities, but in a simulation, the code doesn't need that at all, since human expectations will generate sufficient doubt and optimism, to the generate same feelings. Last edited by Drstrangelove; 12-10-2017 at 04:41 PM.

12-12-2017, 01:31 PM	#4
NoOne Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,259 Infractions: 1/0 (0)	it may or may not be luck.. defintieyl couldn't tell from just watching. not quite about regression... we are looking at long-term total pie results to determine if this effect is real or not. regression to the mean on this topis would be looking recent history or some small window of time and saying we are in a "up" period and it will likely regress back to historical norms if given enough time. this effect could easily be simulated, if real, so that's not an obstacle. The only 'catch' to it is whether or not the game designers agreed that it was 'real' and wanted to implement it in their video game. if you can google it and find specific agreed upon assumptions proven by real life data, there's a pretty good chance it's in the game. -------------- if i were forced to bet, it would be that both rookie batters and pitchers have some sort of net negative effect implemented relative to who they are facing at the moment. i doubt either has a net positive due to lack of experience, all other things remaining the same. i'm ~100% certain age or service time (combo?) is a real effect in minor leauges, so it's not a stretch that it also influence initial mlb years. i.e. few 18 years olds can perform well even if current ratings warrant a higher placement in A, aa or aaa. some can do it, but if they wallow @ 50-80ops+ or 50-80era+ for an entire year you know they shouldn't have been in that league no matter what their ratings say (accuracy assumed for this example).. the ones that can do it will be competent and ~average or better stats relative to that league. keep promoting those even if young. but they are an exception and that doesn't disprove the effect of age in MiL. don't speculate here on it, go google and see if any research backs up the postulation you are asking about. it won't be definitive as to whether it is in the game or not, but it will give a very good idea... a "no" will be more obvious and more easily shown to be true. a 'no' will be definitive. a 'yes' = maybe. Last edited by NoOne; 12-12-2017 at 01:37 PM.