Young Arms

antiherowes · 05-23-2007, 07:30 PM

Does anyone know if young pitchers in OOTP are more likely to get injured like in the real world? I've got a young (23) ace who's already the best starter in the league, but he's on course for 230+ innings, which I'm sure is waaay too much. The problem is there are no stats for last year, since this is the first, so I have no idea how many innings he pitched previously. How many innings do you think I should let this guy pitch?

Curtis · 05-23-2007, 08:03 PM

That's an excellant question, and I hope someone comes along who can give you a better answer. In the meanwhile, I have this to offer:

Pitcher injury and negative development are primarily tied to something with a name like 'pitcher abuse points'. My understanding is that a pitcher accrues one abuse point (or whatever they're called) for each pitch from 101 to 110 in a single outing; two points for each pitch from 111 to 120; three points for each pitch from 121 to 130, and so forth. This means that a pitcher who goes 130 pitches in a single outing will rack up 60 abuse points, which is the same as he would get for going 120 pitches twice, 115 three times, or 110 six times.

Of course, it's not as simple as that. Pitching someone who's still tired from their last outing racks up abuse faster. Changing the average pitcher endurance up or down from 'normal' in League Setup will also have an effect. Probably pitcher age does, too. (I THINK I remember reading that pitchers under the age of 25 are more sensitive to overuse, but don't quote me.)

The point I'm trying to make is that a simple count of innings won't tell you as much about whether you're overusing a pitcher as knowing how many pitches (or innings, I suppose) he goes each time out. Having a guy pitch a complete game MIGHT hurt him twice as much as going eight innings and three times as much as going seven.

In your example, if the pitcher ends up with 234 innings in 36 starts in the modern day, that's 6.5 innings per start, and that may be high. If he's doing it in 40 starts in the 1970s, that's 5.85 per and might not bother too much. If he's doing it in 45 starts in the 1930s, that's 5.2 per, and he should probably be good — especially if he rarely goes more than six.

Does that clear it up any?

antiherowes · 05-23-2007, 11:31 PM

Ha, no, I would say that complicates things a bit! But thanks for the info, it's good to know.

A few questions you've raised for me: Does the 100-pitch system mean anything below that is risk-free? I had been considering holding my pitcher to 75 pitches or so, but I suppose there wouldn't be any sense in stopping him before he reached the 90's. Also, can you get rid of abuse points by giving a pitcher some downtime? And does a pitcher's endurance level have any effect on this––i.e. is a reliever with 32 endurance who makes 90 pitches an injury risk?

Curtis · 05-24-2007, 02:51 AM

Okay, now we're getting out of the realm where I know things and into the realm where I believe things, so take all of this as educated guessing only.

I believe that if you have pitcher endurance set to 'normal' in league setup, any number of pitches up to 100 shouldn't hurt AS LONG AS the pitcher is 100% rested before his start. If endurance is set to 'below normal' or 'low', I would guess that 90 and 80 pitches (or maybe 95 and 90), respectively, would be your uppermost safe limits. If endurance is set to 'above normal' or 'high' you can probably add 5 (or maybe 10) pitches per appearance to the safe limits per category above 'normal'.

For relievers the whole thing gets murkier. My personal policy has been that relievers should be limited to around 20 pitches if their endurance rating is 20 or less, and to whatever their endurance is (32 in your example) if it's above 20. Certainly, your relievers will (or should) dramatically lose effectiveness well before they reach 90 pitches, even if they have very high endurance ratings. Leaving a pitcher in after he loses effectiveness OR after he tells you he's tired during a mound visit is a bad idea.

The endurance rating seems to me to be primarily an indication of how long it takes a pitcher to recover from fatigue. If you have a pitcher with a 60 rating and another with a 100 who both go 100 pitches on the same day (say in a doubleheader or 28 inning game), and your league is set for five man rotations, I would expect the 100 endurance pitcher to be rested a day (maybe two days) before the 60 rated pitcher.

Thus, he'd be able to pitch more often because he recovered faster, or he'd be able to pitch longer effectively in any one appearance. I wouldn't neccessarily think he'd be able to pitch longer without raising his risk of hurting himself. He might be able to pitch more innings safely over the course of a season or career because he could pitch safely more often.

As for whether abuse points fade with rest, in game terms I don't know. Pitcher abuse points are something invented by sabrematricians, and the lone article I read about them indicated that they probably last a long time — maybe even for life. The article writer felt that if a pitcher suffered a lot of abuse early in his career, he could expect a short career. He used Mark Prior and his Cubs teammate as examples of pitchers who, years later, are still suffering from the effects of overuse in their first three seasons.

One other thing to think about is a pitcher's injury proneness. You can find this on the 'edit player' page of his player profile, in the lefthand column. He will have several pronenesses listed for several types of injury (many of the numbers will be 0). The higher the total number of the pronenesses, the more likely the player will be injured, regardless of what you do with him. (I had a number one draft pick who injured his throwing hand signing autographs before a game and was out for five months.)

This scale is neither linear nor expotential, but it does run from lowest-is-best to highest-is-worst. I have several pitchers whose totals are in single digits, including a '1' and a '2', and a few who run into three digits, including one who goes over 400. If you're a gambler, abusing pitchers with low proneness is a safer bet than abusing one who raises coyotes (don't ask).

I'm hoping someone else, maybe someone from the beta team, who can speak more authoritatively will chime in on this topic.

injury log · 05-24-2007, 08:56 AM

Also in the realm of where I believe things, not know them (nice phrase!), but as I understand it:

Pitcher Abuse Points are often used as a measure of injury risk in real life, although it is a very inexact science. As Curtis points out, the more pitches a pitcher throws when he is already tired, the more damage done- the idea being that it's generally safe to throw when mechanics are good, but that a tired pitcher will lose his mechanics, putting more strain on the arm.

Now, this has made me curious- does OOTP model Pitcher Abuse Points in its injury model? Will Carroll mentioned at Baseball Prospectus that he was involved with some of the injury modeling in OOTP (thus the 'Under the Knife' reports in the game), so it wouldn't surprise me.

In any event, there's no way to keep your pitchers 100% safe, no matter how you treat pitch counts. Some guys will just get hurt. You can reduce the risk, and in real life at least, there is a lot of research supporting the value of Pitcher Abuse Points as an indicator of injury risk. I'm curious whether the same applies in-game.

Curtis · 05-24-2007, 12:52 PM

It has been officially stated that Markus incorporated Pitcher Abuse Points (thanks for confirming that title) into 2007. Whether he uses them exactly as the sabrematricians do… Markus often adapts things, rather than following strictly along, sometimes for ease of programming and sometimes to satisfy his own feeling for what is 'right'.

Russ · 05-24-2007, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curtis

It has been officially stated that Markus incorporated Pitcher Abuse Points (thanks for confirming that title) into 2007. Whether he uses them exactly as the sabrematricians do… Markus often adapts things, rather than following strictly along, sometimes for ease of programming and sometimes to satisfy his own feeling for what is 'right'.

Okay, this is news to me. I've ruined many a young pitcher because I didn't know this.

injury log · 05-24-2007, 10:07 PM

Thanks for the confirmation that OOTP uses PAP, Curtis- very interesting!

Curtis · 05-24-2007, 10:12 PM

I'm STILL hoping someone from the beta team will jump on this, since it was a beta member who said it in the first place, NOT Markus.

antiherowes · 05-27-2007, 03:39 AM

Very interesting. This game seems to have more nuances than a 350-page manual could hope to address. For the time being, I think I'll put all my starters on a short leash. Thanks for the help.

05-23-2007, 07:30 PM	#1
antiherowes Bat Boy Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 10	Young Arms Does anyone know if young pitchers in OOTP are more likely to get injured like in the real world? I've got a young (23) ace who's already the best starter in the league, but he's on course for 230+ innings, which I'm sure is waaay too much. The problem is there are no stats for last year, since this is the first, so I have no idea how many innings he pitched previously. How many innings do you think I should let this guy pitch?

05-23-2007, 08:03 PM	#2
Curtis Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Watertown, New York Posts: 4,567	That's an excellant question, and I hope someone comes along who can give you a better answer. In the meanwhile, I have this to offer: Pitcher injury and negative development are primarily tied to something with a name like 'pitcher abuse points'. My understanding is that a pitcher accrues one abuse point (or whatever they're called) for each pitch from 101 to 110 in a single outing; two points for each pitch from 111 to 120; three points for each pitch from 121 to 130, and so forth. This means that a pitcher who goes 130 pitches in a single outing will rack up 60 abuse points, which is the same as he would get for going 120 pitches twice, 115 three times, or 110 six times. Of course, it's not as simple as that. Pitching someone who's still tired from their last outing racks up abuse faster. Changing the average pitcher endurance up or down from 'normal' in League Setup will also have an effect. Probably pitcher age does, too. (I THINK I remember reading that pitchers under the age of 25 are more sensitive to overuse, but don't quote me.) The point I'm trying to make is that a simple count of innings won't tell you as much about whether you're overusing a pitcher as knowing how many pitches (or innings, I suppose) he goes each time out. Having a guy pitch a complete game MIGHT hurt him twice as much as going eight innings and three times as much as going seven. In your example, if the pitcher ends up with 234 innings in 36 starts in the modern day, that's 6.5 innings per start, and that may be high. If he's doing it in 40 starts in the 1970s, that's 5.85 per and might not bother too much. If he's doing it in 45 starts in the 1930s, that's 5.2 per, and he should probably be good — especially if he rarely goes more than six. Does that clear it up any?

05-23-2007, 11:31 PM	#3
antiherowes Bat Boy Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 10	Ha, no, I would say that complicates things a bit! But thanks for the info, it's good to know. A few questions you've raised for me: Does the 100-pitch system mean anything below that is risk-free? I had been considering holding my pitcher to 75 pitches or so, but I suppose there wouldn't be any sense in stopping him before he reached the 90's. Also, can you get rid of abuse points by giving a pitcher some downtime? And does a pitcher's endurance level have any effect on this––i.e. is a reliever with 32 endurance who makes 90 pitches an injury risk?

05-24-2007, 02:51 AM	#4
Curtis Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Watertown, New York Posts: 4,567	Okay, now we're getting out of the realm where I know things and into the realm where I believe things, so take all of this as educated guessing only. I believe that if you have pitcher endurance set to 'normal' in league setup, any number of pitches up to 100 shouldn't hurt AS LONG AS the pitcher is 100% rested before his start. If endurance is set to 'below normal' or 'low', I would guess that 90 and 80 pitches (or maybe 95 and 90), respectively, would be your uppermost safe limits. If endurance is set to 'above normal' or 'high' you can probably add 5 (or maybe 10) pitches per appearance to the safe limits per category above 'normal'. For relievers the whole thing gets murkier. My personal policy has been that relievers should be limited to around 20 pitches if their endurance rating is 20 or less, and to whatever their endurance is (32 in your example) if it's above 20. Certainly, your relievers will (or should) dramatically lose effectiveness well before they reach 90 pitches, even if they have very high endurance ratings. Leaving a pitcher in after he loses effectiveness OR after he tells you he's tired during a mound visit is a bad idea. The endurance rating seems to me to be primarily an indication of how long it takes a pitcher to recover from fatigue. If you have a pitcher with a 60 rating and another with a 100 who both go 100 pitches on the same day (say in a doubleheader or 28 inning game), and your league is set for five man rotations, I would expect the 100 endurance pitcher to be rested a day (maybe two days) before the 60 rated pitcher. Thus, he'd be able to pitch more often because he recovered faster, or he'd be able to pitch longer effectively in any one appearance. I wouldn't neccessarily think he'd be able to pitch longer without raising his risk of hurting himself. He might be able to pitch more innings safely over the course of a season or career because he could pitch safely more often. As for whether abuse points fade with rest, in game terms I don't know. Pitcher abuse points are something invented by sabrematricians, and the lone article I read about them indicated that they probably last a long time — maybe even for life. The article writer felt that if a pitcher suffered a lot of abuse early in his career, he could expect a short career. He used Mark Prior and his Cubs teammate as examples of pitchers who, years later, are still suffering from the effects of overuse in their first three seasons. One other thing to think about is a pitcher's injury proneness. You can find this on the 'edit player' page of his player profile, in the lefthand column. He will have several pronenesses listed for several types of injury (many of the numbers will be 0). The higher the total number of the pronenesses, the more likely the player will be injured, regardless of what you do with him. (I had a number one draft pick who injured his throwing hand signing autographs before a game and was out for five months.) This scale is neither linear nor expotential, but it does run from lowest-is-best to highest-is-worst. I have several pitchers whose totals are in single digits, including a '1' and a '2', and a few who run into three digits, including one who goes over 400. If you're a gambler, abusing pitchers with low proneness is a safer bet than abusing one who raises coyotes (don't ask). I'm hoping someone else, maybe someone from the beta team, who can speak more authoritatively will chime in on this topic.

05-24-2007, 08:56 AM	#5
injury log Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 9,162	Also in the realm of where I believe things, not know them (nice phrase!), but as I understand it: Pitcher Abuse Points are often used as a measure of injury risk in real life, although it is a very inexact science. As Curtis points out, the more pitches a pitcher throws when he is already tired, the more damage done- the idea being that it's generally safe to throw when mechanics are good, but that a tired pitcher will lose his mechanics, putting more strain on the arm. Now, this has made me curious- does OOTP model Pitcher Abuse Points in its injury model? Will Carroll mentioned at Baseball Prospectus that he was involved with some of the injury modeling in OOTP (thus the 'Under the Knife' reports in the game), so it wouldn't surprise me. In any event, there's no way to keep your pitchers 100% safe, no matter how you treat pitch counts. Some guys will just get hurt. You can reduce the risk, and in real life at least, there is a lot of research supporting the value of Pitcher Abuse Points as an indicator of injury risk. I'm curious whether the same applies in-game.

05-24-2007, 12:52 PM	#6
Curtis Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Watertown, New York Posts: 4,567	It has been officially stated that Markus incorporated Pitcher Abuse Points (thanks for confirming that title) into 2007. Whether he uses them exactly as the sabrematricians do… Markus often adapts things, rather than following strictly along, sometimes for ease of programming and sometimes to satisfy his own feeling for what is 'right'.

05-24-2007, 10:07 PM	#8
injury log Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 9,162	Thanks for the confirmation that OOTP uses PAP, Curtis- very interesting!

05-24-2007, 10:12 PM	#9
Curtis Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Watertown, New York Posts: 4,567	I'm STILL hoping someone from the beta team will jump on this, since it was a beta member who said it in the first place, NOT Markus.

05-27-2007, 03:39 AM	#10
antiherowes Bat Boy Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 10	Very interesting. This game seems to have more nuances than a 350-page manual could hope to address. For the time being, I think I'll put all my starters on a short leash. Thanks for the help.