Suggestion: Add rust for players who haven't gotten playing time in a while.

[robc]

The new rehab assignments got me to think about rust again. To me it seems like a player who hasn't gotten enough playing time in the majors should at least experience some minor form of rust. If you have a pitcher in the pen who hasn't been used in a game for a month he shouldn't be at top performance when you bring him in. Same for a position player. It just seems to make sense to me.

Caveat: I have no idea if it really occurs in real life. It seems like it should. I know when I used to watch games they would talk about bringing in a reliever just to get him some work. I'm sure some of the baseball guys around here have an informed opinion about whether this is true.

If there is support for this, perhaps Markus would consider adding this in OOTP 12 in a patch or something.

[Syd Thrift]

I'm pretty sure this is in the game already. I can tell you for sure that it's not just injuries; take a look at the injury report for the first day of ST and you'll see a more than usual number of injuries thanks to the effects of rust.

[robc]

In this post from Markus, he states that rust only applies returning from an injury longer then 14 days and entering spring training. http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...ml#post2936580

I think there should be in season rust for players riding the bench.

[RchW]

You'd have to define what constitutes enough playing time. It certainly can't be one-size-fits-all as rookies and inexperienced players may respond differently than long time utility players. Back up catchers may form a subset.

[robc]

Originally Posted by RchW

You'd have to define what constitutes enough playing time. It certainly can't be one-size-fits-all as rookies and inexperienced players may respond differently than long time utility players. Back up catchers may form a subset.

I agree that those would have to be defined. I just don;t know what those values should be . A decent start is that if a player is injured for 14 days or more, there is some rust. If a player doesn't play for 14 days, perhaps there should be some rust. Maybe this gets adjusted for their experience level. Maybe players with a good work ethic recover from rust faster. I don't know what the best design would be, only that it seems players should deteriorate if unused.

[LeiterFanatic]

Ahhh the glory days of APBA Baseball for Windows! Mike Timlin is itchy

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by robc

I think there should be in season rust for players riding the bench.

Sure, as long as it is an option that can be turned off. Otherwise, no way.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by RchW

You'd have to define what constitutes enough playing time. It certainly can't be one-size-fits-all as rookies and inexperienced players may respond differently than long time utility players. Back up catchers may form a subset.

Exactly, which is why I don't like the idea except as an option.

[mm7607]

Originally Posted by LeiterFanatic

Ahhh the glory days of APBA Baseball for Windows! Mike Timlin is itchy

I really loved that game. Also Earl Weaver Baseball for the Amiga.

[Qwerty75]

This would kind of be a "nice to have" if it was modeled correctly. However, I'm not sure there have been any studies on the effect of having extended rest on player performance. In the absence of these, I would want any "bench rust" effect to be minimal, and with that, it may not be worth it to add it at all.

I'm sure it would pose a challenge to get the AI to handle players correctly with this in place, as well.

[Qwerty75]

Originally Posted by robc

I agree that those would have to be defined. I just don;t know what those values should be . A decent start is that if a player is injured for 14 days or more, there is some rust. If a player doesn't play for 14 days, perhaps there should be some rust. Maybe this gets adjusted for their experience level. Maybe players with a good work ethic recover from rust faster. I don't know what the best design would be, only that it seems players should deteriorate if unused.

The flaw with equating 14 days off with an injury and 14 days without a game appearance is the kind of physical acitivities the player in each case is capable of. For the injured player, they often have no baseball activities for an extended time, then gradually work their way back with drills on specific skills then testing them in simulated or live games. The "rusty" bench player undergoes the full range of practice activities, minus the simulated game situations. I would think the bench player would play better coming back from a layoff because he should he's more physically prepared to play a game.

How to program "bench rust" into the game also depends on what real-life situation you're trying to model. Is it simply that a player without game action for an extended stretch will not perform at maximum, like a team with a long period of rest at the end of the regular season or between playoff series? Or do you want to give relievers who don't get "regular work" a penalty when finally called upon? Is there even a consensus for what constitutes the onset and degree of rust for a periods of inactivity for position players and pitchers, respectively?

On the face of it, getting this to work well would be diminishing returns, IMHO.

[robc]

I agree with the above comments that there would have to be some reasonable data to base it on. If Markus couldn't get a handle on how prolonged bench time should affect performance then it wouldn't be worth just guessing.

From a gameplay perspective I think it would be a good addition because to would add to the amount of meaningful choice the player could make. For example, your number 2 reliever is rested, but the number 4 reliever hasn't thrown in a game in 3 weeks. Do you try and get the number 4 reliever some work? Do you put the better pitcher in the game. It probably depends who you are playing, etc...

I just wanted to start the thread because:
1) To see if people think it would improve the game.
2) To see if people think players get rusty in real life when riding the bench.
3) For Markus to think about if this is worthwhile or desirable to add to the game.

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by robc

I agree with the above comments that there would have to be some reasonable data to base it on. If Markus couldn't get a handle on how prolonged bench time should affect performance then it wouldn't be worth just guessing.

From a gameplay perspective I think it would be a good addition because to would add to the amount of meaningful choice the player could make. For example, your number 2 reliever is rested, but the number 4 reliever hasn't thrown in a game in 3 weeks. Do you try and get the number 4 reliever some work? Do you put the better pitcher in the game. It probably depends who you are playing, etc...

I just wanted to start the thread because:
1) To see if people think it would improve the game.
2) To see if people think players get rusty in real life when riding the bench.
3) For Markus to think about if this is worthwhile or desirable to add to the game.

A couple of points here:

This would be fine for solo players who can play out one game at a time and have direct control over who they use off the bench/out of the pen.

For online leagues, no dice. Right now when simming several days, you have no control over who the AI is going to bring in when. Yes, you have depth charts and pitching roles (starter, reliever, closer), but there is no way to tell the AI I want "player X" used today, then "Player Y" tomorrow. If "Player Z" hasn't pitched for 6 days I want him used, but only if we're ahead by 3 or more runs.

You can set your team/player strategies, but you can't tell the AI to use a specific player. You might have your strategy set to hook starters quickly, but again, you can't dictate exactly which reliever you want brought in.

Without being able to control that, this feature would not be feasible for online leagues.

[68pirate]

I think the bigger issue here is the fact that in reality no major league team would have a pitcher on the active roster that doesn't appear for three weeks to a month, or a position player who is slated to "never" start a game as the depth chart often assigns. Any player that stays on an active roster for any appreciable amount of time will get appearances and or starts, so as not to become "rusty". I think OOTP doesn't mimic reality close enough in this area. If you sim a season it is common to find a position player with 60 games played and 8 total at bats, or a relief pitcher with only 10 innings pitched for the entire year, as examples.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by 68pirate

I think the bigger issue here is the fact that in reality no major league team would have a pitcher on the active roster that doesn't appear for three weeks to a month, or a position player who is slated to "never" start a game as the depth chart often assigns. Any player that stays on an active roster for any appreciable amount of time will get appearances and or starts, so as not to become "rusty". I think OOTP doesn't mimic reality close enough in this area. If you sim a season it is common to find a position player with 60 games played and 8 total at bats, or a relief pitcher with only 10 innings pitched for the entire year, as examples.

You never saw Cito Gaston manage? If he were an AI Manager there would be a lot of "nevers".

Edit;

I've simmed literally 100's of seasons maybe thousands. I've never seen anything like you say. I suggest some of your strategy choices may need tweaked.

I have a much bigger problem keeping the AI from spreading the playing time too much.

YMMV

[Henry]

I have to wonder; if "rust" is a miniscule effect, what is the complicated code and variables to define it worth when it "might" make a difference of one hit in a season? If "rust" is accurately modeled, one hit less at the end of the 15-30 day period the player is injured makes a difference of at most one percentage point in his BA over the season. It just doesn't strike me as something we need to define down to the smallest deviation.

For historical replays, it gets even more complicated for those looking for "close to exact" replays - since the final stats are already defined by the players "seasonal ratings" which already include any injuries he might have had.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not suggesting we ignore it completely, I'm just suggesting this isn't a big enough issue to further define the finer details.

[fintach]

One thing I've heard emphasized over and over in watching and listening to professional baseball: a player who can't learn to stay sharp on the bench isn't long for the major leagues.

If a guy comes off the bench and grounds out weakly four times, twice hitting into double plays, no one is likely to say, "aw, the poor guy is rusty. Give him a few more starts." They're more likely to say, "Back to the bench for him," or "Can we find a better backup?" (Note: I have heard people say, "This guy needs more regular playing time to get his bat going," but this referred to a player who got only one or two at-bats every game or two -- a situation that should not gather rust as has been discussed.)

As has been pointed out above, nothing certain has been determined by a broad study about bench time and rust. I definitely think bench time shouldn't be treated as injury, because they get full training time and the option of extra batting practice. I guess I could see it for players with Low or Very Low Work Ethics, but I'm still not sure how those play out.

Ultimately, if something like this is implemented, I hope it is optional. . .

. . . because it sounds like "clutch" to me -- something people think exists but has yet to be proven.

[markprior22]

There are a lot of variables to be taken into account but, in general, I'd really like to see something like this added to the game. There is a reason a manager uses his closer in an unusual game situation when he hasn't pitched for 3-4 days. If he didn't need the work to stay sharp, the mgr would be better off letting him sit in the bullpen unused for a week or two.

I don't know how to get the statistical analysis but it makes sense that batters need to face competitive pitching to stay sharp. I don't think batting practice and pitching machines can take the place of true game action. Most managers try to get bench players a start every week or so. I know it gives the starters a rest but I've got to believe it helps a little when you call upon the guy to pinch hit in the 9th vs a top closer also.

As far as analysis goes, do we have any proven stats about rust coming out of spring training or even rust coming off an injury? I think we all would agree that there is some degree of rust in certain situations but it is difficult to quantify. If a reasonable method could be figured out, I would love to see this implemented (as an option of course).

[The Wolf]

This issue is too complicated, too unstudied, and too variable by individual to ever be implemented accurately. It would be a clutch or luck rating all over again - something no one is sure about but that was just slapped in there based on feelings and guesswork.

[Rizon]

If this can be done correctly then I'm on board with it.