using a MR as a starter, common?

[byzeil]

I just ran a 1/2 season test, actually ran it twice, to see if setting a pitcher to SP, MR or CL makes a difference in how they pitch and their stamina.

I cloned the player 4 times giving me 5 copies of the player on the team. I set 2 to the role of SP, 2 to the role of MR, and 1 to the role of CL. I then placed them in the starting rotation (SP, MR, CL, SP, MR) and then simmed from July 1 to the end of the season. Not a large sample size but it may show us something.

Doesn't look like the role the pitcher was in affected IP or # Pitches to any great extent. The only 5 CGs came from the 2 pitchers in the SP role.

Edit: To answer a comment in a later post: The team had full rosters and a full bullpen, I just fiddled with the 5 SP.

Take it for what it is. There are 2 passes of the test below,

[Ripamaru]

Originally Posted by TribeFanInNC

Hmmm....good question. I forgot about that little detail. I always remember about reserve rosters, but not the other part. I may indeed be wrong then.

I would hope they fixed that as only playing time will help develop a player. Plus it is quite hard to tell how much someone has improved if they don't play.

I don't bring up prospects to sit the bench unless that is their ultimate place. It just seems wrong.

[Ripamaru]

Originally Posted by byzeil

I just ran a 1/2 season test, actually ran it twice, to see if setting a pitcher to SP, MR or CL makes a difference in how they pitch and their stamina.

I cloned the player 4 times giving me 5 copies of the player on the team. I set 2 to the role of SP, 2 to the role of MR, and 1 to the role of CL. I then placed them in the starting rotation (SP, MR, CL, SP, MR) and then simmed from July 1 to the end of the season. Not a large sample size but it may show us something.

Doesn't look like the role the pitcher was in affected IP or # Pitches to any great extent. The only 5 CGs came from the 2 pitchers in the SP role.

Take it for what it is. There are 2 passes of the test below,

Not to nit pick but were those the only five pitchers on the team?

It would seem to skew the stats a lot if you use so few pitchers unless you are just in an era where that is considered normal....

For a modern day league I would want to see how they fared in a 5 man rotation vs normal starters and in a full bullpen vs other relievers.

[byzeil]

Originally Posted by Ripamaru

Not to nit pick but were those the only five pitchers on the team?

It would seem to skew the stats a lot if you use so few pitchers unless you are just in an era where that is considered normal....

For a modern day league I would want to see how they fared in a 5 man rotation vs normal starters and in a full bullpen vs other relievers.

No they weren't the only pitchers on the team. If they were the only pitchers they'd have all CGs. It was a 13 man pitching staff. I was just looking at the SP performance. It is a fictional modern setup. I just setup the starting rotation on one team in a 16 team league. They were in SP1-5 slots but with their roles set as seen above.

The bolded part above is exactly what I tested and the results show.

[RchW]

I should clarify that it definitely matters when you play games. As for simming I'll take your word for it but it still seems to me I've seen MR starting simmed games that don't get past 70 pitches.

Originally Posted by RchW

Hmm... it's most definitely not cosmetic when I play. If I use a MR as a starter without changing his role he will be lucky to go past 60 pitches no matter what his stamina. If I use him as a SP I can get 80-90-100-115 pitches depending on stamina.

[byzeil]

Originally Posted by Ripamaru

Not to nit pick but were those the only five pitchers on the team?

It would seem to skew the stats a lot if you use so few pitchers unless you are just in an era where that is considered normal....

For a modern day league I would want to see how they fared in a 5 man rotation vs normal starters and in a full bullpen vs other relievers.

Here is the Pitching staff setup used in the test:

[byzeil]

Originally Posted by RchW

I should clarify that it definitely matters when you play games. As for simming I'll take your word for it but it still seems to me I've seen MR starting simmed games that don't get past 70 pitches.

Well if the MR had a low enough stamina then of course. From what I've read and seen my test confirms how I've seen things work.

As far playing out games I don't know though I would be surprised if the AI handled it differently in games played our vs Simmed,or thinking about it maybe I wouldn't be that surprised.

[Fyrestorm3]

Originally Posted by byzeil

As far playing out games I don't know though I would be surprised if the AI handled it differently in games played our vs Simmed,or thinking about it maybe I wouldn't be that surprised.

I think it definitely makes a difference. Your test proves that, when simming games, there's virtually no difference between players' roles, but I play out my games. And I just started my long relief man again (the one who previously tired after 60 pitches three outings in a row), this time switching his role from MR to SP. He lasted almost 100 pitches before tiring.

[Painmantle]

Originally Posted by Fyrestorm3

I think it definitely makes a difference. Your test proves that, when simming games, there's virtually no difference between players' roles, but I play out my games. And I just started my long relief man again (the one who previously tired after 60 pitches three outings in a row), this time switching his role from MR to SP. He lasted almost 100 pitches before tiring.

I've been confirming this in my Ruth Dynasty for Months. In the Dynasty Ruth is both a Pitcher and 1B/LF. I have found that I needed to switch his position to SP before he pitches or he was worn out around 60 pitches, rarely making it into or past the 5th inning. Changed to a SP he has no problem going the distance and pitching as many as 130-150 Pitches depending on his day off before he starts from playing in the filed.

The Players "Role" is more than "cosmetic" imho when it comes to Pitching!

[goalieump413]

So to summarize what you guys have found, not only does the stamina rating not have a great effect on simming (checkmark) games, but only when playing out games do these ratings and roles take a more conclusive effect?

If so, why the difference? Was the game built on the idea that we would be playing out the games, and therefore the simmed games don't take into account roles and some ratings? Makes me think that there are a lot of other things that might be simplified for simming games, where the true gameplay model only exists if you play out the games.

[Fyrestorm3]

Originally Posted by goalieump413

So to summarize what you guys have found, not only does the stamina rating not have a great effect on simming (checkmark) games, but only when playing out games do these ratings and roles take a more conclusive effect?

Actually, no, the Stamina rating is the only thing that matters in this respect when simming games. It's the role you set the player to that makes a difference when you play out the game.

I have no guesses as to why.

[Ripamaru]

I have noticed a big difference in a lot of areas between simming and playing out games.

When I sim games my offensive production is better, by a significant margin, I win more games.

I took the same team and simmed through a whole season, then went back and played through the season and lost 15 more games. This was after I had started to suspect this was the case. I would play a month or so and stink, then sim a month and kick ass.

[Painmantle]

I hate to point out the obvious, but This particular "experiment" would have to be run about 998 more times before I'd put any credence in it, The sample size is just way too small

[byzeil]

Originally Posted by goalieump413

So to summarize what you guys have found, not only does the stamina rating not have a great effect on simming (checkmark) games, but only when playing out games do these ratings and roles take a more conclusive effect?

If so, why the difference? Was the game built on the idea that we would be playing out the games, and therefore the simmed games don't take into account roles and some ratings? Makes me think that there are a lot of other things that might be simplified for simming games, where the true gameplay model only exists if you play out the games.

No. When simming games stamina does have an affect on how many pitches a pitcher can throw effectively. The position a pitcher is set to (SP, MR, CL) seems to be cosmetic but how you you use the pitcher is not. A pitcher can be better being used as a MR compared to a SP or a CL. So it does matter where in your pitching staff that you put a pitcher.

[Certain Valor]

In my OOTP 13 franchise which I played through 2024 I noticed this quite a bit. CPU teams would plug in holes in their rotation with guys who had 35 or 45 stamina (on a scale of 100).

I haven't played enough of 14 to know if it's been different.

As a strategy, I used it quite often. If I had a team with a small budget, it's a way to get SP innings cheap. There's a larger bounty of middle relievers available in the draft and often in free agency, which means you can get SP innings cheaper.

It's obviously not as common in real life as in the game, so you kind of have to set your house rules in terms of how much you want to exploit it, if at all.

[goalieump413]

Originally Posted by Certain Valor

...As a strategy, I used it quite often. If I had a team with a small budget, it's a way to get SP innings cheap. There's a larger bounty of middle relievers available in the draft and often in free agency, which means you can get SP innings cheaper.

It's obviously not as common in real life as in the game, so you kind of have to set your house rules in terms of how much you want to exploit it, if at all.

So, taking your example, you build a team with a 5 man rotation, but make sure you have at least a couple more MR with a higher stamina rating (for simming games, thanks guys...) that can be emergency starters because the original 5 man guys might tire too quickly. And, I'm guessing, the salary savings make it more attractive?

Sounds to me like a built-in exploit possibility that could have some game imbalancing effects.

[muz]

FWIW, I built championship quality teams in OOTP 13 by staffing my pitching staff exclusively with relievers. Depending on their stamina, I would give them a pitch limit between 20 and 35. My "rotation" consisted of three relievers who would pitch 30 pitches a game. Then the bullpen would come in and typically dominate. I led the league in ERA every year I used the strategy. It's a good way to keep an impatient tightfisted owner at bay.

The relievers who "started" would have higher ERAs than the others relievers even though they generally didn't go through the lineup more than once. In fact, if a pitcher was in his arb year and having a strong season, I would move him to the rotation at the all star break so his ERA increased and his arb value decreased. The guys moved out of the rotation would perform better.

I haven't tried this in 14.

I'd really like a MLB to try this. It's the next moneyball. Plus, in the NL, teams could pinch hit for their pitchers basically all the time and gain a de facto DH.

[mgoetze]

Originally Posted by muz

I'd really like a MLB to try this. It's the next moneyball.

Just because it works in OOTP, doesn't mean it would work in real life. I think the differences between SPs and relievers is one of the weaker points in OOTP's model.

[muz]

Originally Posted by mgoetze

Just because it works in OOTP, doesn't mean it would work in real life. I think the differences between SPs and relievers is one of the weaker points in OOTP's model.

Obviously. But I think it would work in real life -- I had the idea before playing OOTP.

I think it would work because it's easy to find really effective relievers. There are a lot of mediocre starters who would be killer relievers -- in fact, that's where most relievers come from.

Right now, teams tend to employ mediocre starters as starters instead of converting them to the pen, because they are wedded to the 5 man rotation. If you're going to try to squeeze 150 IP out of your fifth starter, then you're better off running your mediocre pitcher in that role, rather than putting him in the pen and getting 65 really good IP.

But if you scrap the starter model, if you look to use all your pitchers on a 2 inning at a time, not more frequently than every other day type of system, I think it would work. It would keep injuries and payroll down. It's worth a shot for a lot of teams. What would the Royals have to lose?

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Ripamaru

I have noticed a big difference in a lot of areas between simming and playing out games.

When I sim games my offensive production is better, by a significant margin, I win more games.

I took the same team and simmed through a whole season, then went back and played through the season and lost 15 more games. This was after I had started to suspect this was the case. I would play a month or so and stink, then sim a month and kick ass.

For me it's the opposite. When I play out games I win at a higher rate. I think if you searched this you would find it more common.