using a MR as a starter, common?

[Painmantle]

Originally Posted by muz

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?

I'm absolutely 100% sure that if that was something that would work IRL somebody in MLB would already be doing it...But knowing the evolution of pitching staffs through out History maybe it will happen 50 years from now!

[beorn]

Originally Posted by RchW

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.

Interesting. WAY back (maybe OOTP 2?) before there were online leagues, I played a ton on my own. I would sim by the week until late in the season, then, play out crucial games. I definitely came away with the sense that I was playing two entirely different games, that different tactics worked well, that different players played well, etc.

At the time, the game had a clutch rating for players, so I was unsure whether it was this mechanic kicking in, whether it was simming versus play-by-play, or just a small sample size.

Had not wondered about that issue for many years, but in a similar vein, I think Markus has some rather questionable "streak code" in the game. A player being "hot" or "cold" is not the game reporting on performance in the past few games, but rather a temporary under-the-hood change of rating... And I suspect that this same mechanic is used for injuries at a particular position, and for team performance over a period of time. Very hard to prove, but my experience makes me believe it to be true.

[muz]

Originally Posted by Painmantle

I'm absolutely 100% sure that if that was something that would work IRL somebody in MLB would already be doing it...But knowing the evolution of pitching staffs through out History maybe it will happen 50 years from now!

Why would you think that? It took teams two decades to appreciate OBP, and still some teams don't. Teams still use "closers" for no reason at all. They still bunt. They still sign "proven veterans." Teams do all sorts of dumb things.

Yes, they are now competing on finding the new inefficiency, but GMs don't want to go too far out on a limb lest they lose their job. So they look for inefficiencies in the standard places. Heck, teams could gain one or two free wins a year simply by telling the manager never to bunt. But they don't.

It's like in the NFL where teams still don't go for it on 4th down even though doing so would probably given them at least a free win per year.

[mgoetze]

Originally Posted by muz

Heck, teams could gain one or two free wins a year simply by telling the manager never to bunt. But they don't.

If I were in charge, the first thing I would tell the manager is that he is no longer allowed any IBBs.

It's like in the NFL where teams still don't go for it on 4th down even though doing so would probably given them at least a free win per year.

Actually it's only about 0.7 wins per year, see Advanced NFL Stats: Win Probability Forfeited 2012

[muz]

Originally Posted by mgoetze

If I were in charge, the first thing I would tell the manager is that he is no longer allowed any IBBs.


Actually it's only about 0.7 wins per year, see Advanced NFL Stats: Win Probability Forfeited 2012

In a 16 game season, .7 wins is a lot. But I think that's understating it, because it doesn't incorporate dynamic effects. On 3rd and 10, a team that knows it will go for it on 4th down might call a draw or screen to get it to 4th and 5. A team that knows it has 4 downs might be more likely to throw deep on first down. A team that strings together longer possessions will tire out opposing defenses.

The point is, sports teams leave wins on the table. IBBs is another good example

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by muz

Yes, they are now competing on finding the new inefficiency

Tampa Bay thinks it's bad makeup.

[Fyrestorm3]

Originally Posted by beorn

Had not wondered about that issue for many years, but in a similar vein, I think Markus has some rather questionable "streak code" in the game. A player being "hot" or "cold" is not the game reporting on performance in the past few games, but rather a temporary under-the-hood change of rating... And I suspect that this same mechanic is used for injuries at a particular position, and for team performance over a period of time. Very hard to prove, but my experience makes me believe it to be true.

My experience says otherwise. I see the "hot" and "cold" symbols after a couple games of a guy performing great or poorly, respectively, and then after a game or two of being back to average, it goes away. In fact, a player with the "hot" symbol next to his name is, in my experience, more likely to have an 0-4 day at the plate, due simply to the law of averages.

[TribeFanInNC]

Originally Posted by muz

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?

It's not like this has never been done. The Rockies did something like this recently. I remember Tony LaRussa doing it a bit when he was still with the A's (I think in that case, it was more of an injury thing...). I remember going to a game LaRussa pitched 3 guys for 3 IPs each.

I think the divergence from OOTP and MLB is the quality of RPs. In real life, RPs are generally guys that couldn't hack it for some reason as a starter. Either they are platoon matchups, or injury risks, or don't have good second and third pitches, etc... Basically, the starters are the best pitchers in baseball, save a few exceptions like Mariano Rivera. OOTP, on the other hand, tends to create good pitchers that in the game can't be good starters.

How would you create a real life 10-12 man staff of only good RPs?

[Ripamaru]

Originally Posted by TribeFanInNC

It's not like this has never been done. The Rockies did something like this recently. I remember Tony LaRussa doing it a bit when he was still with the A's (I think in that case, it was more of an injury thing...). I remember going to a game LaRussa pitched 3 guys for 3 IPs each.

I think the divergence from OOTP and MLB is the quality of RPs. In real life, RPs are generally guys that couldn't hack it for some reason as a starter. Either they are platoon matchups, or injury risks, or don't have good second and third pitches, etc... Basically, the starters are the best pitchers in baseball, save a few exceptions like Mariano Rivera. OOTP, on the other hand, tends to create good pitchers that in the game can't be good starters.

How would you create a real life 10-12 man staff of only good RPs?

I think there could be some merit to this. Because relievers are not good enough to start but can go through the order once effectively. If you have a poor rotation this could help you considerably.

The concern I have is wear and tear. Teams try to get their starters deep into games to keep the bullpen from wearing down, even if there were 5 more pitchers in the pen would it make up for the pen having to throw every inning?

Right now teams have 6-7 guys in a pen and they throw somewhere between 2-4 innings per game (bullpen as a whole, not individuals, just a guesstimate) This strategy would mean well over twice the workload while giving them less than twice the man power. This would seem to put a strain on them, unless you increased your "starters" workload to 3-4 innings and then subbed, also removing the one inning closer would help.

Here is my concern.....If you take away the starters and have 11 men in the pen: Not counting any extra innings games you might have

162 games x 9 innings = 1,458 innings / 11 pitchers = 132.54 innings per pitcher. This is nearly double the work load that a lot of relievers have now. Even if you shorten the bench and have 12 pitchers it is still 121.5 per.

This will mean more injuries to the pitchers in the pen while possibly reducing injuries to those who would have started. The relievers could physically throw that many innings, stamina is for the most part a myth but this would expose the lesser pitchers more.

You would need 11-12 very good relievers, a lot of bullpen pitchers now are one inning or less specialists. If you were to have any of them it would mean even more work for the others. You would need to get a few decent starters and convert them, a couple closer types, and a few setup men. Use them all for 2-3 innings per outing.

It could be done, would probably be cheaper to have several setup men and 3-5th starter types than paying top of the rotation guys.

[goalieump413]

If the concept works, then I'd design a pitching staff with a 4 man rotation, rather than a 5 man, leaving an extra reliever in the pen. By pitching your "starter" MR's a maximum of 5 innings each, you'd leave the 'pen with 4 innings(+) to handle. If you build your team properly, adding established relievers that have a moderately good stamina (simming) rating, then they'd wear down evenly, not front-loaded into the season.

One of the biggest exploit advantages is the beginning team salary, allowing you to go after veteran sluggers or sign high potential players to long extensions. I say exploit, as I have before, because I doubt this advantage would last long. Your starters would catch on and demand more money eventually.

Let's say you paid a typical starting 5-man rotation an average of $8M a year. That leaves "X" number of dollars remaining to spread to your 7 other bullpen pitchers. Those bullpen guys don't make as much per player per year. But in my 4-man MR rotation, I'd need to sign better MR pitchers, meaning the averaged cost per pitcher for the whole staff would still end up around the same. Basically, starters make more dough because of expected workload/success.

The other possible drawback to using MR's as SP's is come playoff time (if you make it). I know OOTP, by default, doesn't take into account using only your top 3 starters in the post season, like it should , but if/when it did, those dominant starters are needed to win elimination games. I wouldn't rely on an obove average MR to win in October.

One last thing: It's less likely you could gain much of a pitching platoon advantage with a staff built like this, because you're scheduling your relievers to pitch on a more regular basis, regardless of who's in the on-deck circle.

[TribeFanInNC]

Yeah, conflicted on how the best way to do it. Ideally, each RP would face a hitter only once. But that is really only two innings. For it to work, I think you'd need two pitchers to get you through six innings, then you could use back end current bullpen usage to finish the game. I don't think the quasi starter could go five innings. Hed be facing guys for third time by then. That sounds more like what the Rockies tried to do.

[goalieump413]

I've got it! Play a pitcher at 1st base, and swap them out willy nilly

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by beorn

but in a similar vein, I think Markus has some rather questionable "streak code" in the game. A player being "hot" or "cold" is not the game reporting on performance in the past few games, but rather a temporary under-the-hood change of rating...

Pretty sure that's not true.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by beorn

Interesting. WAY back (maybe OOTP 2?) before there were online leagues, I played a ton on my own. I would sim by the week until late in the season, then, play out crucial games. I definitely came away with the sense that I was playing two entirely different games, that different tactics worked well, that different players played well, etc.

At the time, the game had a clutch rating for players, so I was unsure whether it was this mechanic kicking in, whether it was simming versus play-by-play, or just a small sample size.

Had not wondered about that issue for many years, but in a similar vein, I think Markus has some rather questionable "streak code" in the game. A player being "hot" or "cold" is not the game reporting on performance in the past few games, but rather a temporary under-the-hood change of rating... And I suspect that this same mechanic is used for injuries at a particular position, and for team performance over a period of time. Very hard to prove, but my experience makes me believe it to be true.

I don't think it's anything other than me making better strategy decisions. I'd bet some cash that playing out games results in more wins for human players given a suitable sample size.

[Ripamaru]

The game doesn't account for using the top three pitchers but when the playoffs start I go to a 3 man rotation.

The fact that the AI uses all five gives me an added advantage in october since I always have talent in the rotation.


If you were using the reliever strategy I would use my closer types at the start of the game or the best pitchers I have for 3-4 innings. You could use them more often due to the extra days off. The results should give you a boost over the regular season.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Ripamaru

The game doesn't account for using the top three pitchers but when the playoffs start I go to a 3 man rotation.

The fact that the AI uses all five gives me an added advantage in october since I always have talent in the rotation.


If you were using the reliever strategy I would use my closer types at the start of the game or the best pitchers I have for 3-4 innings. You could use them more often due to the extra days off. The results should give you a boost over the regular season.

The AI does not use 5 SP in the playoffs. It uses 3SP and I use 4SP which gives me a huge advantage in the 6th and 7th games of playoff series I've been after Markus to allow for changes in AI SP usage in the playoffs. It's just another way to make the game too easy.

[muz]

Originally Posted by Ripamaru

I think there could be some merit to this. Because relievers are not good enough to start but can go through the order once effectively. If you have a poor rotation this could help you considerably.

The concern I have is wear and tear. Teams try to get their starters deep into games to keep the bullpen from wearing down, even if there were 5 more pitchers in the pen would it make up for the pen having to throw every inning?

Right now teams have 6-7 guys in a pen and they throw somewhere between 2-4 innings per game (bullpen as a whole, not individuals, just a guesstimate) This strategy would mean well over twice the workload while giving them less than twice the man power. This would seem to put a strain on them, unless you increased your "starters" workload to 3-4 innings and then subbed, also removing the one inning closer would help.

Here is my concern.....If you take away the starters and have 11 men in the pen: Not counting any extra innings games you might have

162 games x 9 innings = 1,458 innings / 11 pitchers = 132.54 innings per pitcher. This is nearly double the work load that a lot of relievers have now. Even if you shorten the bench and have 12 pitchers it is still 121.5 per.

This will mean more injuries to the pitchers in the pen while possibly reducing injuries to those who would have started. The relievers could physically throw that many innings, stamina is for the most part a myth but this would expose the lesser pitchers more.

You would need 11-12 very good relievers, a lot of bullpen pitchers now are one inning or less specialists. If you were to have any of them it would mean even more work for the others. You would need to get a few decent starters and convert them, a couple closer types, and a few setup men. Use them all for 2-3 innings per outing.

It could be done, would probably be cheaper to have several setup men and 3-5th starter types than paying top of the rotation guys.

You might be right. The system might need to have one (maybe two) innings eater as an anchor just to prevent wear and tear. On the other hand, if the RPs are pitching on a relatively standardized schedule (i.e. no back to backs), they might be able to handle an increased workload.

I think finding 11 quality RPs wouldn't be hard at all if you don't have to find any good starters. Draft starters. If they don't really pan out as starters, make them relievers. If they do, then trade them to some other team for that team's 2 or 3 best RPs. Most teams would make that trade.

You can also reduce wear and tear by optioning the younger pitchers back and forth from the minors.

P.S. You won't be pitching 9 innings per game unless you are really good on the road, in which case that's a good problem to have. I suspect that the solution to extra innings games is to just give up after 11. That will only cost you a couple of games per year at most, and will be more than compensated (I think) by the efficiency of the system.

[The Game]

In my A-Z League I am forced to use 2 MR as SP. One has a Stamina of 1, the other 2. The 1 guy is the better pitcher. in 2 starts so far one of which i played the other i simmed he averaged 85 pitches (Pitcher Stamina set to Normal). The other guy in 1 start threw 62 pitches threw in relief in other game. Both are 4 pitch MR. Both are real players. Not sure if this added anything to the convo as I have not read the last 2 pages just wanted to share.