Pitchers With Two Pitches

[ike121212]

Originally Posted by moore4807

So has anyone else seen a 5 star 2 pitch pitcher make the majors at 5 stars?

In 11, many many times. In fact, drafting 2-3 of these guys every year, then flipping them for SP's or position players was like using a cheat code. In my brief time GM'ing in 12, a college level RP felt like a sure thing.

[ike121212]

Originally Posted by gehrig38

Here's the thing, and I don't know how to portray this in 'code form' as I don't know how the engine works.
Every pitcher, with almost NO exception, has a third pitch. Whether that's good enough to register I don't know.
I see how it's simplified here, and likely for good reason, in that 2 pitches, even with awesome stuff, can get you hammered as a SP in the ML.
But I almost like that I need to go in and 'work' the superstar pitchers in giving them a third pitch.

For anyone who hasn't read it, this is from Curt. His opinion on the subject is infinitely more valuable than mine.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by ike121212

For anyone who hasn't read it, this is from Curt. His opinion on the subject is infinitely more valuable than mine.

Of course, he then proceeded to say he himself was a two pitch pitcher, maybe a two and a half. The easiest way to look at this is that these pitchers have a third or even a fourth pitch, but they are too bad to rate. I am not saying it is perfect, or that it shouldn't change. But it is what it is. Markus is using this to level out pitcher creation the best way he knows how. It really doesn't kill me one way or another. My worry in this was the people constantly saying there wasn't enough starters being created, but from what I can see the two pitch guys are never counted as starters in player creation, so no worries.

[Crimguy]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Markus is using this to level out pitcher creation the best way he knows how. It really doesn't kill me one way or another. My worry in this was the people constantly saying there wasn't enough starters being created, but from what I can see the two pitch guys are never counted as starters in player creation, so no worries.

Is he doing this? Did Markus say that somewhere? I'm not trying to sound like a dick, I'm just curious. In the week that I've had ootp12 I've seen the same thing as a lot of the posters here. 1) There are a ton of relievers available in the draft (my bottom tier farm teams have a total of 27(!) relief pitchers, half of which have decent potential); 2) most pitchers I've seen have only two pitches, and they're getting lit up every time they take the mound. I'd add a 3): There seem to be too much variety in pitches these guys have as well, but I'm no expert.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Crimguy

Is he doing this? Did Markus say that somewhere? I'm not trying to sound like a dick, I'm just curious. In the week that I've had ootp12 I've seen the same thing as a lot of the posters here. 1) There are a ton of relievers available in the draft (my bottom tier farm teams have a total of 27(!) relief pitchers, half of which have decent potential); 2) most pitchers I've seen have only two pitches, and they're getting lit up every time they take the mound. I'd add a 3): There seem to be too much variety in pitches these guys have as well, but I'm no expert.

This subject comes up in every version since the pitch ratings came out, and yeah. It is a place holder for relievers. Every two pitch pitcher gets "lit up?" Really? Hasn't been my experience at all when they are used as relievers. And I always have starters. It should be harder to develop good to great starters (notice how many real life teams have trouble having even one!).

[ike121212]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Of course, he then proceeded to say he himself was a two pitch pitcher, maybe a two and a half. The easiest way to look at this is that these pitchers have a third or even a fourth pitch, but they are too bad to rate. I am not saying it is perfect, or that it shouldn't change. But it is what it is. Markus is using this to level out pitcher creation the best way he knows how. It really doesn't kill me one way or another. My worry in this was the people constantly saying there wasn't enough starters being created, but from what I can see the two pitch guys are never counted as starters in player creation, so no worries.

Ya, that was a good read. I'd be content if there were more pitchers who could start or relieve and there was an meaningful decision on how to develop a pitcher.

The 2.5 pitch guys are my favorite in the game, as they are valuable as stop gap starters, long and middle relief. I wish there were a lot more.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by ike121212

Ya, that was a good read. I'd be content if there were more pitchers who could start or relieve and there was an meaningful decision on how to develop a pitcher.

The 2.5 pitch guys are my favorite in the game, as they are valuable as stop gap starters, long and middle relief. I wish there were a lot more.

Are you looking beyond the "five star" guys? I am finding in every class, all the four star guys have three-five pitches. Who knows how many of those will go to five stars as they develop further (my experience is they will gain velocity in the first couple of years as professionals. Especially the high-school guys. I've seen some big jumps there). I am only 5 years in yet. Let me see how the majors are looking with pitchers.

[ike121212]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Are you looking beyond the "five star" guys? I am finding in every class, all the four star guys have three-five pitches. Who knows how many of those will go to five stars as they develop further (my experience is they will gain velocity in the first couple of years as professionals. Especially the high-school guys. I've seen some big jumps there). I am only 5 years in yet. Let me see how the majors are looking with pitchers.

I'm not really looking at anything and most of my comments are based on 11, as my effort on 12 has been almost solely focused on financials. In the majors, I've always noticed that almost all pitchers are clearly starters or relievers (based on a 3rd pitch or stam).

In the real life MLB draft, one of the interesting discussions is whether a guy projects as a starter vs reliever in the majors or if he can stay at his primary defensive position. In OOTP, you know their precise defensive ratings. For pitchers, your only chance of changing roles is random chance. It doesn't ruin the game for me, but I think it could be a lot better and more engaging.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by ike121212

I'm not really looking at anything and most of my comments are based on 11, as my effort on 12 has been almost solely focused on financials. In the majors, I've always noticed that almost all pitchers are clearly starters or relievers (based on a 3rd pitch or stam).

In the real life MLB draft, one of the interesting discussions is whether a guy projects as a starter vs reliever in the majors or if he can stay at his primary defensive position. In OOTP, you know their precise defensive ratings. For pitchers, your only chance of changing roles is random chance. It doesn't ruin the game for me, but I think it could be a lot better and more engaging.

Sure. I agree. There are some "chance and changes" that happen, but a lot is pretty hard-coded.

[GrantDawg]

Btw, the two pitch pitchers aren't really what "chaps my hide" in the game. It is the three pitch guys with 6 stamina's that the AI will try to start! Who wants a starter that will only go 4 innings on a good day?

[ike121212]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Btw, the two pitch pitchers aren't really what "chaps my hide" in the game. It is the three pitch guys with 6 stamina's that the AI will try to start! Who wants a starter that will only go 4 innings on a good day?

lol, that bugs me too, unless they are 35'ish.

[udbacker58]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Btw, the two pitch pitchers aren't really what "chaps my hide" in the game. It is the three pitch guys with 6 stamina's that the AI will try to start! Who wants a starter that will only go 4 innings on a good day?

6 out of 20 I'm assuming? Because 6 out of 10 is plenty to be a starter that can go 110 pitches easy.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by udbacker58

6 out of 20 I'm assuming? Because 6 out of 10 is plenty to be a starter that can go 110 pitches easy.

6 out of 20, yup.

[Crimguy]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

This subject comes up in every version since the pitch ratings came out, and yeah. It is a place holder for relievers. Every two pitch pitcher gets "lit up?" Really? Hasn't been my experience at all when they are used as relievers. And I always have starters. It should be harder to develop good to great starters (notice how many real life teams have trouble having even one!).

You are right in that I'm trying to shoe-horn them into a starting role, as there are so few decent starters out there. However, when I see a guy with 18-20 stamina, it's hard to stop trying.

Is there a way to control their development, other than having a kick-ass pitching coach?

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Crimguy

You are right in that I'm trying to shoe-horn them into a starting role, as there are so few decent starters out there. However, when I see a guy with 18-20 stamina, it's hard to stop trying.

Is there a way to control their development, other than having a kick-ass pitching coach?

Nope. If there were something I'd really like in this game, it would be a different way of handling stamina. It drives me crazy to, to see a reliever with better stamina than 80% of my starters, and a starter with a 6-8 stamina. I would honestly have a base that players have the ability to pitch, say 5 innings (maybe 6). Then the number goes up and down from there, and fluctuates by the pitchers use. So, a guy that has been limited to the bullpen over the course of the season will have his stamina dip, but it could be built by up with regular starts. The players could still have a "cap" number to keep innings pitch from being extreme, and only few players that can complete games regularly. But most relievers "could" start if given time to build their pitch counts up. Pitch selection would keep some from ever being good starters.

[GrantDawg]

Btw, doing this little experiment with the feeders has been enlightening. It is very interesting how the AI deals with player creation. I'm at year 7 of my league. This year has the biggest draft pool so far (the first year didn't even produce enough players to go 30 rounds. The next five did, but almost to the exact number (900 players, it produced 930-954). This year, it is almost 1400! Yet, for pitching, it is by far the weakest year. 14 five star (compared to 30+ in previous drafts), o five star relievers and closers. Barely any closers set there at all, with many of the MR's I'm looking at that have good staminas and multiple pitches that will possible make starters.

Looking through the majors, seeing some strangeness. It is sort of confirming my overall suspicions re: too many two pitch relievers. I am seeing way too many multi-pitch starters still down in single A after their rule 5 draft protection time has expired. ie. they have been professionals for 4 years and never developed or aren't getting promoted. The two pitch guys have climbed up pretty quick, and are in triple A or in the majors already. So it is not the number made, it is the ease they develop that is the real problem. I know that whenever I drafted a reliever in this version or the last, they were most likely to be major league ready within two years. Starters are always a chore to get up.

This is all small stat set stuff. I'll know more once I get to the 20 year mark and every team is full of drafted players. Right now, even with what I've seen, it doesn't seem unbalanced. There are teams with no pitching, there are teams full of pitching, there are teams with relievers and no starters, and there are teams with starters and no relievers.

[GrantDawg]

Again, doing this is causing me to see interesting things. I am at 9 years, and I am shortlisting interesting players to follow their careers. All the two pitch guys I am following never developed another pitch (no surprise). Several have made it to the bigs as relievers, though a couple haven't. The starters (3 or more pitchers) are stalling in the minors for longer, but are starting to move up the ladder. I most listed starters with a really weak third pitch to see if they improve over potential. None have, though one guy has gotten called up a couple of times and did decent (with a third pitch slider at 5 out of 20).

The most interesting thing, though, was a five star starter. I noticed him in the latest draft because he was already sporting four stars in development. It was one of my fears for using the feeders, that players would be over-developed entering the draft. It hasn't happened, and this the first player with that much development I have seen, at it was a starter of all things.

Anyway, I go to the draft signing day to see where he and a couple of others sign, and I notice in my emails that there are FA rumours for him, and it has him signing a ML contract with the Astros. I was like "what the?". It ended up he wasn't drafted at all. I looked at his history, and realized that this was actually his second draft. He was drafted in the first year after four years at Texas the first pick of last years draft by the Dodgers, and they didn't sign him. He went back to the draft this year (sporting four stars in development now) and no one drafted him. He must have had some huge demands for no one at all to even pass a flyer at him. Instead, he became a free agent and signed a two year, 828,000 contract (this is 1988).

[Pdubya64]

It just goes to prove that there are a LOT of factors involved with development (among other things). I sometimes wonder if Markus wakes up in a cold sweat at night from all the roundy-round logic and if-then-else possibilities swimming around in his head...

[GrantDawg]

Crappers. I think I found (yet another) bug in creating a standard ML set-up in the "create a game" mode. It looks like two Arizona coast league teams aren't actually included in the Arizona League set-up. They have teams, but they aren't in the conference or schedule. Blast it. Anyone else seen this? If they have, I'll report it. It is the Giant's affiliate and the A's affiliate. I need to look to see if there are any others. Crap on a cracker. 9 seasons in is way too late to see that.