"Start highest rested" - Dead in real life?

[Markus Heinsohn]

Hey guys,

I was just running a few tests, and noticed that in 2008 real life no single pitcher in MLB started more than 34 games. NONE. Why is that? Are managers now sticking to the strict rotation at all cost (besides C.C.)? Were pitchers much more injured than usual? Are they out of gas because of no steriods?

From 1990 to 2007 each year you had to start at least 35 to lead the league, often times 36 and once 37. In the AL the past 3 years had a leader with 34!?

So, any ideas? Do I need to add a new era setting for endurance, called 'babies'?!

[thomamon]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Hey guys,

I was just running a few tests, and noticed that in 2008 real life no single pitcher in MLB started more than 34 games. NONE. Why is that? Are managers now sticking to the strict rotation at all cost (besides C.C.)? Were pitchers much more injured than usual? Are they out of gas because of no steriods?

From 1990 to 2007 each year you had to start at least 35 to lead the league, often times 36 and once 37. In the AL the past 3 years had a leader with 34!?

So, any ideas? Do I need to add a new era setting for endurance, called 'babies'?!

Haha, they do baby pitchers now a days. Even when they have days off now, they usually don't skip a guy to get back to number 1. They treat the pitchers as if they are so fragile, which in turn has made them become fragile. Its really quite unreal.

[1998 Yankees]

Originally Posted by thomamon

Haha, they do baby pitchers now a days. Even when they have days off now, they usually don't skip a guy to get back to number 1. They treat the pitchers as if they are so fragile, which in turn has made them become fragile. Its really quite unreal.

Yeah, thom and I are still trying to get over the "Joba [Chamberlain] Rules."

[thomamon]

Originally Posted by 1998 Yankees

Yeah, thom and I are still trying to get over the "Joba [Chamberlain] Rules."

[deadringer]

I don't think it's that the pitchers aren't able to make over 34 starts a year anymore, I think it has to do with risk / reward. If putting that many innings on a guy is going to knock him out for x number of games a year due to a minor (or major) injury why risk it?

I also think that most teams are prioritizing quality starting pitchers and the general trend right now is to work them as gently as possible so they aren't out long term. You don't have to look to far anymore to find big contract starters that spend significant time on the dl where they certainly aren't earning those big contracts.

As a GM, I'd rather see a guy make 30 starts a year for the two or three years of a contract than to make 37 starts one year, 17 the next, and 5 the last year.

[bailey]

Part of the reason may be because the team is 'out of it' and so they take the opportunity to start another player to see what they have even if #1 is fully rested. As far as OOTP, I'd like to use the 'start highest rested' starter occasionally, but I doesn't seem to work the way I think it should.

[deadringer]

Originally Posted by bailey

Part of the reason may be because the team is 'out of it' and so they take the opportunity to start another player to see what they have even if #1 is fully rested. As far as OOTP, I'd like to use the 'start highest rested' starter occasionally, but I doesn't seem to work the way I think it should.

Good point, this is why I'd like to eventually see OOTP really implement a more drastic organization wide strategy within the "Win Now", "Balanced", and "Rebuild" modes.

[Giants44]

I think at this point organizations have so much money invested they are petrified to push their assets.

I believe the only time you will see starts on 3 days rest are like what you saw with CC and Johan in the last week in must win games. and of course in the playoffs.

If you do model something new for the modern era, you do need to account for the difference in the AI from the regular season to the playoffs.

[statman]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Hey guys,

I was just running a few tests, and noticed that in 2008 real life no single pitcher in MLB started more than 34 games. NONE. Why is that? Are managers now sticking to the strict rotation at all cost (besides C.C.)? Were pitchers much more injured than usual? Are they out of gas because of no steriods?

From 1990 to 2007 each year you had to start at least 35 to lead the league, often times 36 and once 37. In the AL the past 3 years had a leader with 34!?

So, any ideas? Do I need to add a new era setting for endurance, called 'babies'?!

I grew up in the 60's and back then the 4-man rotation was the thing. Pitchers pitched on 3-days rest ALL YEAR and injuries were more uncommon then. I really think the reason for all the pitch counts and fewer starts is the $$money$$. Organizations have so much invested either with contracts or pitching careers that the risks far outway the rewards, in their opinion.

Do you really think CC would have pitched that many games on the 3 days rest if the Brewers would have had him on a 6 year deal paying him $150 million, I think not. And as far as the player goes, if your boss said you could work one less day every week, wouldn't you?

So it's not the pitchers that are babies, it's the GM's and owners protecting their "fragile" investments. You want to change OOTP to be more like "real" baseball, have injuries such as this. "CC Sabathia will mss the next 11 months after his 37th start of the season, his left arm fell off."

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by statman

I grew up in the 60's and back then the 4-man rotation was the thing. Pitchers pitched on 3-days rest ALL YEAR and injuries were more uncommon then.

Did pitchers really throw on three days' rest all year? (A trip to Retrosheet should confirm or refute the claim.) Were injuries really less common then? (Hard to determine because the data doesn't really exist.)

A couple of things to note about the 1960s:

1) The schedule length was shorter, with teams playing 162 games in 25 weeks as compared to 26 weeks currently. There were also quite a few scheduled doubleheaders back then. This would tend to work against much use of a strict 4-man rotation.

2) The regular Disabled List operated completely different back then. It was limited to just two players being on it at any given time, and for most of the decade the required stay was either 21 or 30 days.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Hey guys,

I was just running a few tests, and noticed that in 2008 real life no single pitcher in MLB started more than 34 games. NONE. Why is that? Are managers now sticking to the strict rotation at all cost (besides C.C.)? Were pitchers much more injured than usual? Are they out of gas because of no steriods?

From 1990 to 2007 each year you had to start at least 35 to lead the league, often times 36 and once 37. In the AL the past 3 years had a leader with 34!?

So, any ideas? Do I need to add a new era setting for endurance, called 'babies'?!

Actually C.C. Sabathia started 35 games between Cleveland and Milwaukee. Considering the number of 3 day rest starts he had down the stretch he may only have had 32-33 starts anyway.

Seems to me that good SP are so rare that managers tend to push them back a day to match up with a rival or stronger team. So instead of your No.1 or 2 guy starting against just any team, you throw in your 3, 4, 5 guys or even a relief pitcher to get you 4-6 innings against the weaker teams.

[RchW]

[quote=Le Grande Orange;2597887]Did pitchers really throw on three days' rest all year? (A trip to Retrosheet should confirm or refute the claim.) Were injuries really less common then? (Hard to determine because the data doesn't really exist.)

No, but todays pitchers often go on 5 days rest not 4 so it evens out.

A quick survey (not scientific) of days since last start from 1971 vs the same for 2008 shows lines like:

1971 4 6 4 5 6 4 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 9 5 5 4 4 6 4 4 4 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 6 5

2008 5 6 5 6 6 5 5 5 4 5 6 5 6 6 5 5 5 6 8 5 5 6 5 7 5 5 5 5 5 4 6 5

For two premium pitchers of the time. The number of 6 day gaps in the 2008 line adds weight to my theory that good pitchers are held back to face better teams.

[Mattymo]

One thing that's frustrating me in OOTP though is the fact that, for two years in a row now, the #3 and #4 starters for each team started Games 1 and 2 of the World Series when starters #1 and #2 were both 100% rested b/c the AI set up the pitching rotation as "strict rotation". That's not realistic. If it were June, yes that would happen, but not in the World Series!!

[PhillieFever]

Rather than start Cole Hamels,Brett Myers or Jamie Moyer on 3 days rest,the Phils constantly trotted out Kyle Kendrick and Adam Eaton who by mid season had both become automatic losses,I just don't understand the logic behind this.There are a lot of baseball men though who think that the 4 man rotation will return in the near future,all it's going to take is one team to take the plunge....

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by Mattymo

One thing that's frustrating me in OOTP though is the fact that, for two years in a row now, the #3 and #4 starters for each team started Games 1 and 2 of the World Series when starters #1 and #2 were both 100% rested b/c the AI set up the pitching rotation as "strict rotation". That's not realistic. If it were June, yes that would happen, but not in the World Series!!

Well, then simply set it to 'start highest rested'... the AI always uses this unless you tell it to do otherwise.

Edit: Or are using 4-man rotations in the league setting? In that case the AI uses the strict rotation to keep the number of starts realistic. But I agree, it should start the highest rested in the playoffs... I'll look into it

[satchel]

Originally Posted by Giants44

I believe the only time you will see starts on 3 days rest are...in must win games. and of course in the playoffs.

Originally Posted by PhillieFever

Rather than start Cole Hamels,Brett Myers or Jamie Moyer on 3 days rest,the Phils constantly trotted out Kyle Kendrick and Adam Eaton who by mid season had both become automatic losses,I just don't understand the logic behind this.

A couple of playoff teams this year are planning on giving no one three starts per series (can't remember which; Boston and Philly maybe).

[Mattymo]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Well, then simply set it to 'start highest rested'... the AI always uses this unless you tell it to do otherwise.

Edit: Or are using 4-man rotations in the league setting? In that case the AI uses the strict rotation to keep the number of starts realistic. But I agree, it should start the highest rested in the playoffs... I'll look into it

Well its AI controlled teams, right now I'm just simming. But the league where it's happening is a historical league (currently 1909) and I'm using the default settings which is set to 4-man rotation.

[Mattymo]

sorry double post.

[Carlton_Willey]

I want a "Spahn, Sain and two days of rain" rotation option.

I am planning a fictional league using 1960's settings to see if I can get 40 start, 300 inning guys with some regularity.

Even in the days of four man rotations, it was hard to get all 4 men with 35+ starts. Check out the 1971 Orioles with 4 20 game winners for as close to that as I've found post-WWII.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Mattymo

One thing that's frustrating me in OOTP though is the fact that, for two years in a row now, the #3 and #4 starters for each team started Games 1 and 2 of the World Series when starters #1 and #2 were both 100% rested b/c the AI set up the pitching rotation as "strict rotation".

Well, it's worth noting that OOTP does not use the actual MLB post-season schedules when running historical leagues. This means that you'll probably have fewer post-season off days in OOTP than is the case in reality, at least for the more recent MLB seasons.