AI response to starter injury in "strict order" rotations

[Sudy Nym]

The following happened in the modern-era internet league I participate in, the TSTBL. Sim periods average 14-15 days.


"On 7/21/09, closer Justin Kaye started a game for the first time in his career, to my knowledge. It was a 7-0 win by my Portland Beavers over the Salt Lake City Stingers. He combined with relievers Dave Borkowski and Terrance Bridwell for a three-hit shutout, going 5.1 innings with 1 hit and 1 BB allowed and 6 Ks for the win. The career-reliever with a "B" duration managed 75 pitches, 45 for strikes, and achieved a game score of 71. The box score can be found here.

Not bad for someone you'd never expect to see start, eh?

What I want to know, however, is why he started. I run a five-man, strict order rotation. You can find that here, under "Pitching Staff." Scheduled starter Rich Harden went down with a 1-2 week injury four days earlier, so that would explain why he didn't get the start on the 21st, but did get his following start. But wouldn't it have made far more sense for the AI to start the next guy in the order, Bobby Bradley, who was likely fully rested on three days' rest?

I would guess, perhaps, that setting your rotation to "strict order" won't allow a starter to move up a start under any circumstance, even if rested. Personally, I think that's taking "strict order" a little too seriously- especially when I'm not able to make changes in the middle of a two-week sim. In the case of injury, I imagine that the AI would then go with the best non-rotation pitcher on the staff, and it thusly picked reliever Justin Kaye- as I didn't have any pitchers with an endurance rating as starter. But my closer?! I would think that taking the best middle reliever would be the best solution- in this case, Leon Serrano. He's just about as good a pitcher as Kaye, and I can afford not to have him available for a few days (unlike my closer).

Quite frankly, I'm not unhappy that Kaye got the start- after all, it worked out terrifically. But I don't believe that he should have been given the start- that just defies the logic of having a closer. I'd hate to think what would happen if two of my starters went down with injury in the same sim, or something. I have a very strong starting staff, and only have the need to keep ten pitchers total on my roster, currently. I fear that the AI would give two different relievers emergency starts rather than using the three remaining starters on short rest (the latter which might just work out fine providing that there are off days in the schedule). Or even use the three starters and one reliever- were there no off days at all, that would work. But I get the feeling that that's not how it would go down.

I've seen rotations of three men in the modern era "work" in the regular season. Obviously, this isn't suggested- they wouldn't be able to pitch well, or for very long. But if that works, why is the AI starting my closer when there's a rested starter available in a five-man rotation? I assume that the "strict order" setting's scripting isn't exactly internet league-friendly when it comes to the possibility of injury. And I don't believe that I should have to keep an "emergency starter" on the staff at all times- because that just isn't practical. Not hard to do, but should I really have to? Nor do I want to go to a "start highest rested starter" rotation, as that just doesn't suit my needs currently."


This time around, it wasn't damaging to my team, at all. And while there are simple "work-arounds" to the alleged problem, I'm convinced that the script logic is just a tad flawed- at least with respect to internet leagues with longer sim periods. Not a major complaint, by any means. I'm sure that it's not something that comes up often, and is rarely noticed when it does. But in case there's a simple fix, I thought that it was worth bringing up. I've found the rotation settings to work extremely well in every other way.

Thanks.