'Stopper' role available regardless of era

[jpeters1734]

Perhaps we need innings limits to go along with roles

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by kq76

I think I might understand what you mean, but I'd like to hear it from you exactly what you think the difference between them is.

The way I see it used in OOTP is the stopper is the ace, the go to guy in the bullpen. If he comes in, he will finish what he started, unless he gets lit up. So, this guy will pitch quite a few innings out of the pen. He will get saves, because of when he pitches, but he won't be used with saves in mind. What I don't see is the AI bringing him into a game in a tight spot in the 7th to get out of a jam and then going to another guy to finish the game. From 1972 to 1978 Rollie Fingers never threw less than 100 innings. Once you change the "use of closer" setting to normal you will see the game begin to bring in that best relief pitcher with the "save" stat in mind.

Another way to look at this, is to google Rich Gossage and think of some of the rants he's went on over the years.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by David Watts

The way I see it used in OOTP is the stopper is the ace, the go to guy in the bullpen. If he comes in, he will finish what he started, unless he gets lit up. So, this guy will pitch quite a few innings out of the pen. He will get saves, because of when he pitches, but he won't be used with saves in mind. What I don't see is the AI bringing him into a game in a tight spot in the 7th to get out of a jam and then going to another guy to finish the game. From 1972 to 1978 Rollie Fingers never threw less than 100 innings. Once you change the "use of closer" setting to normal you will see the game begin to bring in that best relief pitcher with the "save" stat in mind.

Another way to look at this, is to google Rich Gossage and think of some of the rants he's went on over the years.

In his peak years Gossage averaged 1.69 inning/appearance. His multi inning stints were offset by many short "modern closer" type appearances. He finished 83% of his appearances. Similarly Rollie Fingers finished 81% of his appearances while averaging 1.68 innings/app in his peak

I've yet to see an example of this mythical stopper who gets replaced by another pitcher after putting out the fire. They don't exist. The stopper was the closer too. He wasn't held back or not used because the team was trailing. Bullpen management was very different. Guys like Gossage and Fingers were used unless they couldn't go. When they couldn't go someone else did and probably finished the game as well. That was the logic of the time, managers used the next guy in line

Astoundingly in 1976 Rollie Fingers in 70 appearances finished 29 of 34 team losses,blowing 8 saves 5 of which were losses and losing 6 others. No modern manager would use a pitcher like that. Of 18 appearances made in the 7th inning 14 were GF.

By contrast Familia of the Mets in 2016 pitched in 13 losses out of 78 appearances finishing 7.

Gossage's usage was a little more closer like but in 1975 he finished 14 of 24 losses that he appeared in.

[joefromchicago]

It sounds like the stopper role was supplanted by the closer role when teams started specializing with set-up men and ninth-inning close-out specialists. No one uses relievers like Gossage and Fingers were used, except maybe by Joe Maddon in the post-season. So the question is: how could a team use both a stopper and a closer? Aren't they, for all practical purposes, mutually exclusive?

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by joefromchicago

It sounds like the stopper role was supplanted by the closer role when teams started specializing with set-up men and ninth-inning close-out specialists. No one uses relievers like Gossage and Fingers were used, except maybe by Joe Maddon in the post-season. So the question is: how could a team use both a stopper and a closer? Aren't they, for all practical purposes, mutually exclusive?

You and RCW are saying what I tried to say, but much clearer.

[byzeil]

Originally Posted by joefromchicago

It sounds like the stopper role was supplanted by the closer role when teams started specializing with set-up men and ninth-inning close-out specialists. No one uses relievers like Gossage and Fingers were used, except maybe by Joe Maddon in the post-season. So the question is: how could a team use both a stopper and a closer? Aren't they, for all practical purposes, mutually exclusive?

I agree and would like the option in my fictional world to use my relievers like Gossage and Fingers were used.

[kq76]

Originally Posted by joefromchicago

So the question is: how could a team use both a stopper and a closer? Aren't they, for all practical purposes, mutually exclusive?

Rich has some pretty good stats there (I didn't realize those guys so often finished off games, I should go back and look at some game logs), but I don't think they're entirely mutually exclusive. I know I'd like multi-inning closers like how Rich showed Gossage and Fingers were, but I'd also like to see, for lack of another term, firemen. Rich calls them mythical and maybe game logs show that relievers weren't used like that all that often back in the day, but I do think we're starting to see them used like that now and I would like to see them in the game.

[joefromchicago]

Originally Posted by byzeil

I agree and would like the option in my fictional world to use my relievers like Gossage and Fingers were used.

Now I'm confused. Didn't you say you wanted every role to be available? So you want both a stopper and a closer on your staff, right? Or am I missing something?

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by joefromchicago

Now I'm confused. Didn't you say you wanted every role to be available? So you want both a stopper and a closer on your staff, right? Or am I missing something?

That's the impression I've been getting all along as well. That's why I said I think what folks may want is for Markus to add another role (maybe called modern stopper) patterned after how the Indians used Andrew Miller down the stretch and in the post season. As the game is programmed now, I really can't see how the stopper and closer roles could coincide. The stopper is the closer.

I think it's going to be interesting to see if what we seen last year in the MLB is a new strategy that more and more teams use or was it just the Indians dealing with a ton of injuries and the Cubs being managed by a cat that hails from his very own universe.

[joefromchicago]

Originally Posted by kq76

Rich calls them mythical and maybe game logs show that relievers weren't used like that all that often back in the day, but I do think we're starting to see them used like that now and I would like to see them in the game.

I don't think the statistics bear that out. Most relievers who are "save specialists" are brought on in the ninth inning.

Looking at the stats from the past season and ranking relievers according to saves, the first pitcher listed whose "most common inning to enter game" wasn't the ninth inning was Ken Giles of Houston, followed closely by Tony Watson of Pittsburgh. Both recorded 15 saves in 2016. From the stats, it looks like Giles started the season as a middle reliever (he didn't record his first save until May 26 and didn't get his second until August 9). When he was finally used as Houston's closer, he was always brought into the game in the ninth inning or later. Watson was somewhat similar - he didn't record his first save until August 2. Before then, he was a middle reliever/left-handed specialist. Afterward, he was used in tandem with Mark Melancon and always appeared in the ninth inning or later.

So I guess I'm not seeing managers bringing in their best relievers in the eighth inning or earlier (except, as I mentioned, in the postseason, when strategy is different). That's far different from, say, the 1970s-80s. Guys like Bruce Sutter, Dan Quisenberry, and Kent Tekulve averaged about 1.5 innings per appearance during their careers. No closer today comes close to that.

I agree, then, with RchW: I don't see any evidence of a manager today using a stopper/closer combination, nor was there such a thing in what might be termed the "era of the stopper," roughly 1950-1990. A team's best reliever then was the "stopper," and a team's best reliever now is the "closer."

[joefromchicago]

Originally Posted by David Watts

That's the impression I've been getting along as well. That's why I said I think what folks may want is for Markus to add another role (maybe called modern stopper) patterned after how the Indians used Andrew Miller down the stretch and in the post season. As the game is programmed now, I really can't see how the stopper and closer roles could coincide. The stopper is the closer.

I think it's going to be interesting to see if what we seen last year in the MLB is a new strategy that more and more teams use or was it just the Indians dealing with a ton of injuries and the Cubs being managed by a cat that hails from his very own universe.

Miller is a middle-reliever and was used primarily as such in 2016 by both the Yankees and the Indians. He got one save in the postseason and he won a game in which he entered in a non-save situation. Cody Allen is the closer for the Indians, and he was used as such in the postseason, where he recorded six saves.

But postseason strategy is different, and both Francona and Maddon used their closers (Allen and Aroldis Chapman) in ways that they didn't use them in the regular season. Allen, for instance, pitched more than an inning six times in the postseason - he did that only seven times during the entire regular season.

So I'd be happy if the OOTP AI would use relievers differently in the postseason. I'm sure that would be extremely complicated to program, but it makes more sense to do that than to introduce a mythical stopper/closer combination.

[byzeil]

Originally Posted by joefromchicago

Now I'm confused. Didn't you say you wanted every role to be available? So you want both a stopper and a closer on your staff, right? Or am I missing something?

Yes, sorry for the confusion, I'd like every role available so that I can choose to use a stopper (like Gossage) or a closer or both if I so chose. Even if this behavior isn't directly mirrored in baseball history I think it is a valid choice to make in at least fictional games.

The basic issue that I brought up is that the game selectively makes the stopper role available based on, I believe, the time period the game thinks my current league is in but maybe it is strictly connected to the setting for how common the use of the closer is. Whatever the reason I'd like to see that be eliminated and the GM given the option to choose which roles he'd like to use.

NABL online league in 2033: stopper not available (not sure the closer usage setting)
TMBU online league in 2084: stopper is available (closer usage setting is 'normal')

[byzeil]

I just tested changing the 'Use of closers' setting.

If it is set to 'very rarely', 'rarely', 'normal' then the 'stopper' role is available.
If it is set to 'often' or 'very often' then the 'stopper role is not available.

So that may be the only determiner and I'd like that to be removed.

[byzeil]

Originally Posted by David Watts

That's the impression I've been getting all along as well. That's why I said I think what folks may want is for Markus to add another role (maybe called modern stopper) patterned after how the Indians used Andrew Miller down the stretch and in the post season. As the game is programmed now, I really can't see how the stopper and closer roles could coincide. The stopper is the closer.

I think it's going to be interesting to see if what we seen last year in the MLB is a new strategy that more and more teams use or was it just the Indians dealing with a ton of injuries and the Cubs being managed by a cat that hails from his very own universe.

If the 'use of closer' option is set to anything but 'often' or 'very often' BOTH roles are available currently. The game doesn't just give us one or the other. It either gives us both or just the closer. So based on the 'use of closer' option I can use both a closer and a stopper if I so choose. I'm not arguing that that makes sense, it may not, but it is an option.

Specifically in online leagues I'd like the option of what roles to use up to the GMs and have all of them as options.

[David Watts]

Originally Posted by byzeil

If the 'use of closer' option is set to anything but 'often' or 'very often' BOTH roles are available currently. The game doesn't just give us one or the other. It either gives us both or just the closer. So based on the 'use of closer' option I can use both a closer and a stopper if I so choose. I'm not arguing that that makes sense, it may not, but it is an option.

Specifically in online leagues I'd like the option of what roles to use up to the GMs and have all of them as options.

Have you ever tried using a stopper and a closer at the same time? I'd be curious how that works. May have to test it, unless someone else wants to

[RchW]

In 1988 stopper and closer were interchangeable terms. See the reference to a no longer effective Gossage. Mitch Williams never seemed anything but a closer by usage to me.

Cubs Give Up Palmeiro to Get Bullpen Stopper - latimes

[RchW]

Originally Posted by kq76

Rich has some pretty good stats there (I didn't realize those guys so often finished off games, I should go back and look at some game logs), but I don't think they're entirely mutually exclusive. I know I'd like multi-inning closers like how Rich showed Gossage and Fingers were, but I'd also like to see, for lack of another term, firemen. Rich calls them mythical and maybe game logs show that relievers weren't used like that all that often back in the day, but I do think we're starting to see them used like that now and I would like to see them in the game.

I just want to clarify; I'm not against expanding roles, mixing roles and making them available across all types of OOTP leagues. I'm a fictional guy all the way.

I felt the "stopper" role was a bit of a myth based on my possibly hazy memories of Al Hrabosky back in the day. He was a classic closer. In 1975 Hrabosky finished 41 games, Mike Garman 36 and the rest of the 130 GF were spread amongst 12 other pitchers. It adds credence to the fact that managers of the time used their best guys a lot but when they were not available they just used who was left. Rigidly defined roles were not common.

[byzeil]

Originally Posted by David Watts

Have you ever tried using a stopper and a closer at the same time? I'd be curious how that works. May have to test it, unless someone else wants to

Haven't tested it. Probably have done it without really thinking about it. Would be interesting to test to see what exactly the difference is in OOTP.

Closer 'usage options' are '9th or later', '8th+ or later' and '8th or later'
Stopper 'usage options' are '8th or later & lead', '8th & close game' or '7th & close game'

[jpeters1734]

I've done this once. If I remember correctly the closer would come in, pitch an out, and the stopper would comenin

[ThePretender]

Don't you get the same effect by setting your CL to pitch in high leverage spots? If not then yes this would be a good addition.