What Makes a Good Pitcher?

[DMan77]

I realize this is probably one of those questions that's frustrating for vets to see...

I've read the manual and some of the posts around here so I have an idea on what each stat controls...

But I can't figure out what it is I should be looking for as I try to build a team.

If I look at my league's top pitchers by WAR, I have guys with high stuff, low control... But also guys with high control and low stuff... The #3 pitcher is 50/50/45... I see a pitcher with 3 75/75 pitches... But above him in the rankings is a player with a 60 FB, 55 curve, and 55 change...

The #1 pitcher is an overall 70... But the next 3 below him are 50's...

What do you guys look for in a pitcher?

[Dyzalot]

Going to give my insight but its based upon playing MLB quick starts and simming out a few decades. With the way the game has changed recently, I focus a lot more on movement than I used to, especially for starters. Anything to help keep the ball in the ballpark. I also like guys with high control who are groundball pitchers. That combo seems to produce results a little better than you might expect from just looking at raw ratings. I prefer starters with good movement and stuff or good movement and control over those with good control and stuff where the third attribute is lacking.

Also note that your defense can make a difference too. If you have a bunch of groundball pitchers with a mediocre infield behind them then they won't look as good as when they have good defenders at those positions. A flyball pitcher with good stuff and control but lacking in movement can look dominating in a large park with good outfielders but can struggle to look average in a smaller park with less skillful outfielders.

[NoOne]

this is all MLB-realted stats, not mil nonsense. the movement part, for example, will require some years in MLB, but you can guesstimate it fairly accurately too, but you wil be surprised occasionally, both negatively and postively for the same value, regardless.

stuff is probably the stongest correlation...

extremely high control can sometimes overcome a lower stuff, though. more rare, than the opposite though.

extreme movement will not make up for low stuff/control.. but it is important, nonetheless to not be abysmal.. resulting HR/9 is the key here... as long as not too high they can reach "elite" levels of performance.

basically ahigh stuff with just ~average control and ~61/100 movement will net a very likely great pitcher. Max/max+ stuff. if rp, max+, sometimes ~max-ish.

not limited to that, of course... you will find exceptions, but nothing you can bank on as consistently as what i mentioned (modern-like stats league only reference)... it's like going to vegas and betting against the odds, but when it happens, just take it. those exceptions require years of results to recognize, and by that time they may be too old to bother with.

one more think on movement -- if he's ~60/100 and "extreme groundball pitcher" it can only go down and it can go down A LOT! lol... so know what factors add up to movement. i think even pitch type influences movement (turn 100% accuracy on and compare profile ratings as you change them -- editor values are not the same as what's displayed, but with 100% accuracy it is how it's used by engine, same with 'stuff' - includes velo and i think gb%? note in editor about it.)

defense helps, but it's not the reason a player swings from a 3.50 to a 5.00 ERA or any 'bigly' effect like that (haha).

what's in their repertoire will influence results too... E.G. a really good KB included will result in lower BABIP against than other combinations of pitches.

i think a changeup elevates hr/9 a bit, but also increases other really good things.. so an elite changeup is an aweome pitch, but a mediocre one is maybe worse than a mediocre 'other' pitch.

the game uses overall stuff in the math, but clearly types of pitches do matter due to these obvious trends you can witness... the KB-effect is plain as day to see. the changeup is more of a guess form my experience and how it works in RL too. bad changeups get hammered worse than a bad fastball (which would be more about placement, i guess for a fastball) different combinations have some influence over results, even if overall stuff is all that is used. there must be some other impact not as apparent.

[DMan77]

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

Going to give my insight but its based upon playing MLB quick starts and simming out a few decades. With the way the game has changed recently, I focus a lot more on movement than I used to, especially for starters. Anything to help keep the ball in the ballpark. I also like guys with high control who are groundball pitchers. That combo seems to produce results a little better than you might expect from just looking at raw ratings. I prefer starters with good movement and stuff or good movement and control over those with good control and stuff where the third attribute is lacking.

Also note that your defense can make a difference too. If you have a bunch of groundball pitchers with a mediocre infield behind them then they won't look as good as when they have good defenders at those positions. A flyball pitcher with good stuff and control but lacking in movement can look dominating in a large park with good outfielders but can struggle to look average in a smaller park with less skillful outfielders.

Interesting... Thank you for the insights. I come from the land of OOTP15 being my last game so I too remember watching Stuff far more than Movement... The flyball/ground ball piece is interesting too. Maybe I'll try putting a staff together of groundballers and see what happens...

Could I ask you since you've been doing some simming, are you finding that individual pitcher's results and peripherals are staying somewhat consistent year to year for a bit? Is WAR or their WHIP and such jumping all over the place or is it somewhat normal, all things considered? Obviously ratings and such change...

Thanks again!

[NoOne]

if stats are shifting, more than they should -- autocalculate the modifiers.

you'll find whether fictional seed players (initial players) or RL players 2019 as they are replaced by fictionally created players for the draft, that things will shift a bit... somethings may shift more than others... they've really calmed this down over the years, though. better than your "15" experience for sure on this topic.

* fluctuation is normal... but if it's a gigantic amount, an autocalculate may be necessary. STats and AI settings page. only visible before season starts. i'd do it anytime 40-man rosters are well-definited by the AI.. i.e. later better than earlier.

so, just autcalculate the modifiers before season begins (preferably closer to opening day than day 1 of offseason etc..) and it will reign it in a bit.

don't do that every year... i'd doe it reactively as opposed to proactively.

[DMan77]

Originally Posted by NoOne

this is all MLB-realted stats, not mil nonsense. the movement part, for example, will require some years in MLB, but you can guesstimate it fairly accurately too, but you wil be surprised occasionally, both negatively and postively for the same value, regardless.

stuff is probably the stongest correlation...

extremely high control can sometimes overcome a lower stuff, though. more rare, than the opposite though.

extreme movement will not make up for low stuff/control.. but it is important, nonetheless to not be abysmal.. resulting HR/9 is the key here... as long as not too high they can reach "elite" levels of performance.

basically ahigh stuff with just ~average control and ~61/100 movement will net a very likely great pitcher. Max/max+ stuff. if rp, max+, sometimes ~max-ish.

not limited to that, of course... you will find exceptions, but nothing you can bank on as consistently as what i mentioned (modern-like stats league only reference)... it's like going to vegas and betting against the odds, but when it happens, just take it. those exceptions require years of results to recognize, and by that time they may be too old to bother with.

one more think on movement -- if he's ~60/100 and "extreme groundball pitcher" it can only go down and it can go down A LOT! lol... so know what factors add up to movement. i think even pitch type influences movement (turn 100% accuracy on and compare profile ratings as you change them -- editor values are not the same as what's displayed, but with 100% accuracy it is how it's used by engine, same with 'stuff' - includes velo and i think gb%? note in editor about it.)

defense helps, but it's not the reason a player swings from a 3.50 to a 5.00 ERA or any 'bigly' effect like that (haha).

what's in their repertoire will influence results too... E.G. a really good KB included will result in lower BABIP against than other combinations of pitches.

i think a changeup elevates hr/9 a bit, but also increases other really good things.. so an elite changeup is an aweome pitch, but a mediocre one is maybe worse than a mediocre 'other' pitch.

the game uses overall stuff in the math, but clearly types of pitches do matter due to these obvious trends you can witness... the KB-effect is plain as day to see. the changeup is more of a guess form my experience and how it works in RL too. bad changeups get hammered worse than a bad fastball (which would be more about placement, i guess for a fastball) different combinations have some influence over results, even if overall stuff is all that is used. there must be some other impact not as apparent.

Hmm okay, more interesting stuff (no pun intended) to think about...

It's tough when things seem to jump around a little bit month to month and season to season, but to be fair I haven't done a really intensive 5-10 year sim to see what's consistent.

Again it was a long time ago, but I remember after my first few weeks playing OOTP15, I knew what to look for and which pitchers were most likely to succeed in each new universe and new game I started... Granted that didn't always hold true! But it felt consistent anyway.

So far I'm struggling to get that same understanding here. My league's top guys have been pretty wildly different, as has what they offer pitch and skill wise.

Certainly makes for a fun and interesting experience!... But I am hoping to get a better mental 'check list' going as I progress.

[USF]

Originally Posted by DMan77

I realize this is probably one of those questions that's frustrating for vets to see...

I've read the manual and some of the posts around here so I have an idea on what each stat controls...

But I can't figure out what it is I should be looking for as I try to build a team.

If I look at my league's top pitchers by WAR, I have guys with high stuff, low control... But also guys with high control and low stuff... The #3 pitcher is 50/50/45... I see a pitcher with 3 75/75 pitches... But above him in the rankings is a player with a 60 FB, 55 curve, and 55 change...

The #1 pitcher is an overall 70... But the next 3 below him are 50's...

What do you guys look for in a pitcher?

I don't use WAR to evaluate Pitchers. I use FIP-, ERA+ and WPA.
I will use WAR to evaluate a non pitcher.

[texasmame]

For me - it's all about the CONTROL.

I can't stand for my pitchers to walk anyone.

[Whoofe]

I agree on the changeup. I am terrified of a starting pitcher that has 2 great pitches and a 40 for his third as changeup

[BirdWatcher]

Originally Posted by texasmame

For me - it's all about the CONTROL.

I can't stand for my pitchers to walk anyone.

What I love about this answer is that it hits on the point that what is good is also somewhat subjective.
I too hate it when my pitchers give up walks (especially to the first hitter of the inning or to the opposing pitcher- no DH in my world), and yet my one starting pitcher who has very poor control has led the league in ERA two years in a row. Great movement, good stuff (used to be very good, actually now trending towards poor, but he's 37 and very unlikely to get the third ERA title in a row). And extreme groundball guy with great infield defense behind him. Works out of a lot of jams with a timely K or, more likely these days, double play ball. So I've dealt with it. But if drives me to distraction sometimes.

What's good can be so contextual. But it's also about personal preferences.

[KBLover]

Defense gets downplayed but I find it helps.

The more batted balls you turn into outs, the more it will help all pitchers.It's not a guarantee but there are no guarantees on the baseball field.

I don't like high stuff/low control pitchers. They are very inconsistent from what I can see. I'd rather go the other way and prioritize defense, especially at key spots if I had to take one extreme over the other. I especially hate pitchers that basically have to strike everyone out (high stuff and fringe other two), because he's not going to strike everyone out, so he needs to help his team give good results when he doesn't, and coughing up walks and HR won't help that cause.

I also like high movement, especially when a lot of hitters are getting value from their home runs as is the case a lot of times if the league stays on the irl-like track (or even maximizes it with a lot of 40 Contact/40 AvK, 75 HR Power hitters) and/or teams move into power-hitter haven parks.

If the league has shifted to more high-average and doubles offense (like my OOTP19 save eventually did, high contact, high gap, high AvK), then I value movement less and control and defense more.

Pitch types, I mostly look for three solidly developed pitches for a starter (a 70/60/30 guy will lose stuff as a SP unless one is a knuckleball). Otherwise, I don't know how much pitch types matter beyond their impact on stuff (and it's platoon split).

[Shake Appeal]

Originally Posted by Whoofe

I agree on the changeup. I am terrified of a starting pitcher that has 2 great pitches and a 40 for his third as changeup

I wish we could influence pitchers' pitch mix to some degree over time. Tell them to scrap a junk change when they become a wipeout reliever. Or play up their breaking stuff. And also tell batters to focus on contact or plate discipline ... or sell out for power.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by DMan77

Hmm okay, more interesting stuff (no pun intended) to think about...

It's tough when things seem to jump around a little bit month to month and season to season, but to be fair I haven't done a really intensive 5-10 year sim to see what's consistent.

Again it was a long time ago, but I remember after my first few weeks playing OOTP15, I knew what to look for and which pitchers were most likely to succeed in each new universe and new game I started... Granted that didn't always hold true! But it felt consistent anyway.

So far I'm struggling to get that same understanding here. My league's top guys have been pretty wildly different, as has what they offer pitch and skill wise.

Certainly makes for a fun and interesting experience!... But I am hoping to get a better mental 'check list' going as I progress.

exactly why you can't put too much weight into small sample results.

things look a bit different than before. that's a big part of what you need to adjust. each year i have to adjust to the incremental changes they make... you are adjusting to multiple incremental adjustments at once... a larger deviation and a more strechted learning curve.

they could have adjusted some things that make my past years' experience completely wrong too.

just look at bryce harper.. he can have an insanely good year or a mediocre one, by judging a few years at beginnign of his career... yet to be determined on actualy reality of how great he is. in ootp he's insanely good, unless that has adjusted lately... always a great player to go after sans negative TCR.

cy young winners can go throw a dud the next year.

i'd find players that are consistent, not peak peroformers in any one year and base any perception on them... less likely to involve luck.

there are always exceptions to what i said above too, even if still very accurate and true for XX.

if you see an exception arise, but other people with similar ratings don't do nearly as well, that is either insane luck or something else under-the-hood that we can't see that influences results. with these types of exceptions, you need a good sample size to be certain of its truth.

where as a 128stuff / 61+move/50+control closer is almost guaranteed to have a great career in comparison to a 70stuff / 80move / 80 control closer/RP. a greater % of the first type will succeed at an elite level, but doesn't exclude the other from being dominant either. i've seen some good, but not elite stuff guys do some great things... it's just way less likely.

if i see a young enough player with a sample of data i can depend on that but he deviates from what i typically prefer, i am totally willing to let it ride on that guy... but if he's 32? (read: "older" whatever that may be) nope... things will change more quickly for that guy if his weakness dips much lower and change quickly.

a low stuff guy has a shorter distance to fall before it is an issue. (or true any rating that's 'borderline' elite results relative to other ratings)

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by texasmame

For me - it's all about the CONTROL.

I can't stand for my pitchers to walk anyone.

this is something i see deviate alot relative to 1 control value.

i think repertoire influences it or something.

i will definitely ignore their control rating if they can maintain a good bb/9 rate. it doesn't matter if their control is a "45/100" if they keep their walk-rate low over time...

ive seen guys with significantly lower control have better bb/9 than guys with higher control.. so there's more to it than just 1 factor on the walk rate. (large samples, not 1 year or in the case of RP you'll need ~10 years, lol, good luck on those)

this requires a suitable sample size... which then entails judging age and how long you'll be able to use them once you are certain of their results... or willngness to sign extension and how long etc etc... hindsight is great, but it doesn't warn of aging or TCR.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by Shake Appeal

I wish we could influence pitchers' pitch mix to some degree over time. Tell them to scrap a junk change when they become a wipeout reliever. Or play up their breaking stuff. And also tell batters to focus on contact or plate discipline ... or sell out for power.

if it raises overall stuff, it can only benefit the pitcher... ** overall stuff may be influenced by other things too as far as results -- like a KB and the example i gave above -- a KB will result in a lower BABIP against for those pitchers that have a KB. pretty certain a chgup increases hr/9, all other things remaining same about that pitcher and league -- and likely different effect if poor/average/good chgup too.

possibly the ratings of the kb matters relative to its influence? i don't now, i don't go after guys with a weak pitch in general, lol.

but, i was wrong about how the game uses stuff... there's some quantitative data, albeit slim, that points to the fact that a "40/10" pitch that also increases overall stuff will give better results... even though it wasn't enough data, it was really consistent and points in that direction.

so, leave those pitches. iused to go in and zero them out. -- house rule was that once i made the decision, i had to stick with it if it was just bad scouting data or something.

org's tell players what to do in development all the time... that's how i rationalized it, lol. "hey buddy, you're never gonna make it as a SP and we are developing you as an RP now.. so stop throwing that sh%$ pitch of yours that isn't going anywhere, lol"

but, it likely helps as long as it raises stuff on profile page. stuff on profile is a bit different than stuff in the editor -- see note in editor or manual on this.

[TomVeal]

It might help to look at the distribution of ratings. OOTP includes 446 pitchers on the opening day list of Major League players (including those on what troglodytes like me still call the "disabled list"). Their ratings break down as follows:

Stuff*: 70+ 57; 65+ 105; 60+ 181; 55+ 252; 50+ 348
Movement: 70+ 19; 65+ 40; 60+ 88; 55+ 155; 50+ 268
Control: 70+ 17; 65+ 47; 60+ 111; 55+ 173; 50+ 279

* Stuff depends in part on whether the pitcher is set to SP or RP. I haven't tried to account for that factor.

In my anecdotal experience, the value of high Movement and Control ratings falls off fairly swiftly. A pitcher with 60 control won't be fabulously more successful than one with 40. OTOH, 60 Stuff is a lot better than 50 Stuff. But those are impressions, not the results of data crunching.

[DMan77]

It is super interesting seeing the different opinions and approaches.

I'm trying to do read and run some sims to help make a better educated guess when looking at things. Right now I'm still struggling when I pull up a guys profile to figure out if he has a shot at one of those good years. Sometimes it seems like a guy who has a 55+ in everything does much better than a guy with 100/40/40.

In my (very limited!) research so far it seems like you need a pitcher with at least a 50 in each 3 categories for him to have a shot. But then again that's not always the case.

Just as a small sample size, here are a few different pitchers stats over 3 or 4 years. Based on 20/80 with increments of 5. Just ones I found as interesting subjects. I also chose them based on the least declining ratings year to year.

Alex Wood: 45s/50m/45c.... Sinker: 55, Slider: 60, Circle C: 65. Groundball pitcher, 91-93

2020: 9-11, 3.72 era, 1.19 WHIP, 0.8 HR, .283 BABIP, 114 ERA+
2021: 3-6, 3.65 era, 1.25 WHIP, 0.8 HR, .318 BABPP, 111 ERA+
2022: 13-9, 3.20 era, 1.31 WHIP, 1.3 HR, .272 BABIP, 128 ERA+


Chris Archer 55/45/55.... FB: 70, Slider: 70, Circle C: 65, Neutral, 95-97

2019: 10-13, 4.25 era, 1.33 WHIP, 1.4 HR, .297 BABIP, 99 ERA+
2020: 12-11, 3.62 era, 1.22 WHIP, 1.2 HR, .288 BABIP, 118 ERA+
2021: 19-5, 3.88 era, 1.21 WHIP, 1.4 HR, .291 BABIP, 110 ERA+
2022: 7-16, 5.45 era, 1.57 WHIP, 1.1 HR, .369 BABIP (!), 79 ERA+


Tyler Glasnow: 70/50/50... FB: 75, Sinker: 60, CB: 75, Change: 55, Neutral, 98-100

2019: 12-4, 4.22 era, 1.34 WHIP, 1.3 HR, .311 BABIP, 98 ERA+
2020: 10-13, 4.44 era, 1.25 WHIP, 1.4 HR, .315 BABIP, 94 ERA+
2021: 12-8, 3.44 era, 1.13 WHIP, 1.0 HR, .251 BABIP, 130 ERA+


Rick Porcello: 50/40/70... FB: 55, Sinker: 55, CB: 55, Slider: 60, Change: 55, Neutral 91-93

2019: 9-8, 4.41 era, 1.31 WHIP, 1.2 HR, .310 BABIP, 97 ERA+
2020: 12-11, 3.51 era, 1.17 WHIP, 1.3 HR, .267 BABIP, 123 ERA+
2021: 13-8, 4.46 era, 1.21 WHIP, 1.3 HR, .301 BABIP, 92 ERA+
2021: 6-13, 5.06 era, 1.39 WHIP, 1.3 HR, .311 BABIP, 90 ERA+


Joe Musgrove: 45/45/75... FB: 70, CB: 50, Slider: 60, Change: 45

2019: 13-9, 4.67 era, 1.33 WHIP, 0.9 HR, .319 BABIP, 90 ERA+
2020: 12-12, 4.33 ERA, 1.23 Whip, 1.0 HR, .303 BABIP, 98 ERA+
2021: 10-13, 4.93 era, 1.32 WHIP, 1.4 HR, .284 BABIP, 82 ERA+
2022: 3-9, 5.09 era, 1.45 WHIP, 1.5 HR, .327 BABIP, 89 ERA+


Danny Salazar: 55/45/45... FB: 65, Sinker: 55, CB: 50, Slider: 60, Change: 70, Neutral, 95-97

2019: 9-3, 3.95 era, 1.22 WHIP, 0.9 HR, .307 BABIP, 107 ERA+
2020: 13-8, 2.64 era, 1.13 WHIp, 0.8 HR, .270 BABIP, 158 ERA+
2021: 12-5, 3.26 era, 1.10 WHIP, 1.2 HR, .240 BABIP, 122 ERA+
2022: 12-6, 3.80 era, 1.23 WHIP, 1.3 HR, .265 BABIP, 106 ERA+

[TomVeal]

Only 105 out of the 446 Major League pitchers (OOTP rosters, opening day) are at least 50/50/50. Three (Sale, deGrom and Syndergaard) are at least 60/60/60. None is 65/65/65.

[Neezer]

Doesnt "Catcher Ability" make a huge difference?

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by Neezer

Doesnt "Catcher Ability" make a huge difference?

I wouldn't say "huge" but I could be wrong. I don't know the numbers "under the hood" so I don't know how much that makes a difference in OOTP. Does the best catcher make that much of a difference over the worst catcher in current MLB?