Opener/Follower questions

[x McLovin x]

Hey guys, I have 3 questions on openers/followers if you don't mind:

1) Lets say I have a 5 man starting rotation, and for 3 of the starters, I set their game strategies such that they are used as followers. Is this the same as having a 2 man rotation, with the other 3 inserted into the bullpen with a follower role (I believe it can be set using the secondary role for RP)?

2) How are openers and followers treated in SP vs RP statistics? Does a reliever's performance as an opener get bucketed into SP stats because he's technically starting? And do follower's performance get bucketed into RP stats? My preference is that opener's performance be included in RP stats (and vice-versa for followers) for obvious reasons...I hope that's how the OOTP system is currently calculating.

3) In the past in OOTP (and in real world) RP are generally not rewarded monetarily as much as SP via arbitration. How is OOTP handling the "starts" openers are making in terms of arbitration payouts? I feel as though the arbitration system may be pushing openers' salaries upwards as it's confusing them for actual SP and may be pushing followers' salaries downwards as it's confusing them for RP. I would think that the most accurate way to allocate compensation for pitchers now (if it wasn't already) would be to peg pay to total innings pitched (rather than starts/holds/saves, etc). Maybe there's an algorithm currently used/could be used that can differentiate between "opens" and "follows" for this purpose and assign some value to each?

Thanks in advance for your help!

[x McLovin x]

BUMP

Does anyone have any information on this? Thanks!

[TomVeal]

In answer to your first question, if you have three followers, you'll need three openers. If you don't, the AI will pick starters for the three blank spots in your five-man rotation and will ignore the follower roles.

I don't think that anyone knows the answers to your other two questions - probably not even the developers.

[Matt Arnold]

1. You don't necessarily need 3 openers for 3 followers, since openers act like bullpen arms and tend to be more rested. You can probably get by with 2 guys who will more or less alternate, and if they both happen to be tired, the game will either pitch the guy you wanted as a follower simply as a starter, or it will find another bullpen arm to act as an opener. It also won't really be like a 2-man rotation - it will act like a regular 5-man rotation, just when those guys' spot come up, you may sub in an opener.

2. Opener stats are still counted as SP stats.

3. This is certainly an interesting point. We'll certainly monitor things, and may adjust things as we go forward. A lot of the salary structure is based on innings, so an opener pitching 70 innings will simply have less stats to build an arbitration case for. However, in many cases, it doesn't matter as much - Openers will often not spend a long time in that role, neither would followers. And in either case, generally speaking they're not top arms being used in that fashion, so it's not like we're tending to sub out 30M Ace salaries for a 3M long relief salary for a follower.

[x McLovin x]

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

1. You don't necessarily need 3 openers for 3 followers, since openers act like bullpen arms and tend to be more rested. You can probably get by with 2 guys who will more or less alternate, and if they both happen to be tired, the game will either pitch the guy you wanted as a follower simply as a starter, or it will find another bullpen arm to act as an opener. It also won't really be like a 2-man rotation - it will act like a regular 5-man rotation, just when those guys' spot come up, you may sub in an opener.

2. Opener stats are still counted as SP stats.

3. This is certainly an interesting point. We'll certainly monitor things, and may adjust things as we go forward. A lot of the salary structure is based on innings, so an opener pitching 70 innings will simply have less stats to build an arbitration case for. However, in many cases, it doesn't matter as much - Openers will often not spend a long time in that role, neither would followers. And in either case, generally speaking they're not top arms being used in that fashion, so it's not like we're tending to sub out 30M Ace salaries for a 3M long relief salary for a follower.

Thank you very much for the responses! I do have a quick follow up on the 2 bolded points above.

1) Is there a way to prevent a reliever from ever becoming an opener if the other designated openers are tired? I'm generally okay with the follower making the start if the openers are too tired, but I definitely don't want random relievers assuming the role. For example, I'd prefer to avoid a situation where basically a lefty specialist is automatically plugged in to face Mookie Betts and J.D. Martinez in the first inning.

3) I could see the reliever salary becoming an issue for me. I generally place a huge emphasis on relievers for my teams and I can see my opener pitching 100+ innings with around 25-35 "starts". I'm using some higher end guys in some of these instances, so will the game view the player more like let's say, an arbitration eligible Kershaw (with lower innings pitched), or an arbitration eligible Dellin Betances? I think there's a risk that some relievers can end up breaking the arbitration system and be awarded $20+ million salaries in some cases.

Also, would I be correct in assuming the OOTP system wouldn't penalize a starter for being a "follower" ratings-wise as he's not accumulating games started, correct? I'd hate to have a high-upside starter who's getting his feet wet in the bigs as a follower wind up having his development hindered due to his usage.

Thanks again in advance!

[x McLovin x]

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

2. Opener stats are still counted as SP stats.

Also, is there any way around this? I basically have to completely take all SP and RP stats with huge error bars...For example, it'll be tougher to quickly figure out whether acquiring SP help or RP help is more of a priority because the data is basically intermingled. More often than not, my opener's stats will be better, possibly significantly better, than my other SP stats, potentially masking a weakness in the starting rotation.

Not sure if there's any real way this can be fixed, to be honest, because the lines between SP and RP are getting more blurred every year. Maybe there's a way to bifurcate Opener and Follower stats from SP and RP and have the game add Opener stats to the RP category and Follower stats to the SP category? Just spit-balling here.

[slugga27]

Originally Posted by x McLovin x

Also, is there any way around this? I basically have to completely take all SP and RP stats with huge error bars...For example, it'll be tougher to quickly figure out whether acquiring SP help or RP help is more of a priority because the data is basically intermingled. Not sure if there's any real way this can be fixed, to be honest, because the lines between SP and RP are getting more blurred every year. Maybe there's a way to bifurcate Opener and Follower stats from SP and RP and have the game add Opener stats to the RP category and Follower stats to the SP category? Just spit-balling here.

But this is done correctly. An opener is still a starter and a follower is still a reliever. We don’t want OOTP to be deliberately incorrect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by slugga27

But this is done correctly. An opener is still a starter and a follower is still a reliever. We don’t want OOTP to be deliberately incorrect.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree. Better to use a minimum innings qualifier if you want to separate out the guys who actually pitch a majority of the innings of the games they appear in. Maybe at some point MLB won't have starters per se, they will just recognize the guy in each game who threw the most innings. It depends on how the position evolves as well as the strategies around its usage.