penalties for too many ip's

[Fyrestorm3]

I'm not trying to make it personal, don't misinterpret me. There are plenty of settings that do what you want - the biggest being Pitcher Stamina (see RchW's first post), which can be tuned to whatever you want it to be. In an online league, you can contact the commish and see if he thinks it's a problem, too. And if he does, it can be fixed. As I said, I'm not disputing that there might be an issue in your specific league. But it's not an issue in the game as a whole.

Also, why are you ignoring Markus's post? The creator of the game himself just said that there are indeed penalties for pitchers pitching on 3 days rest.

[VanillaGorilla]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

Actually, modern research suggests that a 4-man rotation would indeed work if pitchers throw a bit less pitches per game and you throw in a spot starter every once in a while.

Since this is the suggestion forum, I will request again to return the spot starter option (with 2 slots, maybe, please?) and have the spot starter get the start when he is the more rested than anyone in the actual rotation when "start highest rested" is selected. Thank you,

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla

Since this is the suggestion forum, I will request again to return the spot starter option (with 2 slots, maybe, please?) and have the spot starter get the start when he is the more rested than anyone in the actual rotation when "start highest rested" is selected. Thank you,

Seconded.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by waltwa

What I checked is the recovery rate and I think it is too high for a modern league. My point is that the game should be structured so that regardless of the rules in an online modern league, teams should not be tempted to use 4 man staffs.

I am not quite sure what the rec rate for a sp is but I don't think it is as follows

day pitched Assuming the sp reaches close to pitch total- 0
1st day rec 20%
2nd 40%
3rd 60%
4th 80%
5th 100%

It seems to me what I am seeing is a 90% rec rate on day 4 and that is close enough too allow the sp to pitch.

But even if a team decides to pitch a sp on 90% rest the game if the settings are based on a 5man rotation everything should be done to penalize the team by increasing the injury factor or long term effectiveness of the sp and it is known in the general rules of the game so that teams (like real MLB) will simply not try 4 man rotations. The only exception will be if teams drop the pitch counts down to a low # like the rockies did in 2012

Matt Cain and Bumgarner are workhorses but they are also 20 mil $ pitchers. the sf giants are hurting for a 5th sp but they are not in the slightest tempted to start either guy with 3 days of rest.

I think it is ok to tamper with certain rules of the game such as salary caps,
fa comps etc but with player factors the game should try and stay as close as possible to the real game.

You keep ignoring the fact that many SP in this league are very high stamina. You also ignore the fact that the league is not a reflection of current day baseball. A 10 minute look at the SP in it makes it obvious. This is something the creators of the league obviously want and they accomplished that. Why don't you talk to the Commissioner if you don't like it.

There is certainly no functional game play issue here.

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by waltwa

Why do u insist on making this personal. What do u mean it doesn't seem right to me?

Is there a team in the last 10 years in MLB that has gone with a 4 man rotation unless like the Rockies they drop the pitch count to around 75. I am referring to the way the game is actually played in real life. I have no problem if anyone wants to utilize settings that allow 4 man rotations or any kind of rotation. But what I would like to see if that a player or an online league sets up the settings or rules on a 5 man rotation that the game is structured to penalize any team that would go against the settings of the game.

We have all kinds of options in the game

salary cap or not
draft pick trading or not
and so on down the line. that is fine with me. In
IN fact altho I have never played it this way I think its possible to play w/o players getting tired- I don't care. Play the game any way u want!

All I am asking for is an option that will set up the modern game in terms of sp usage the way the modern game is actually played. If u don't play it that way then penalties will ensue. Now if there is a way to do that then let me know what the settings are

Please do not give me this "what is right for me"

I want to see a league starting in 2013 (e.g.) where the setting is set to a 5 man sp staff. Then if u don't stick with the 5 man staff then penalties ensue.
However I see nothing wrong with an additional setting that sets up a modern league and allows staffs of any size.

Again if there is a setting or group of settings that will penalize sp's for pitching high innings either by injury or loss of effectiveness (immediate or careerwise) let me know and I will give it a shot in a solo league and see how it works out. That is I will set up the rec settings and then play a 4 man staff and see how it affects the sp's. Its possible that there may be injuries or immediate loss of effectiveness but I would also want to see the strong possiblility of long term loss of effectiveness and be warned about it in the game manual and that does not exist in the game as far as I can see.

I follow the sf giants and this very story has cropped up this year based on the fact that the SF sp's have missed almost no starts (based on 5 man rotation) and early in the season guys like Cain and bumgarner were being rocked and there was some fear that they may have been overworked since 2010. this is with a 5 man staff which means that the thought of a 4 man staff would either get the mgr. fired or at the very least the GM would step in and change the staff back to 5.

this is not a criticism of the game which I have played since the start and have bought every edition. But every year players see things that might be helpful to making a better league and this is something I have noticed. I hope Markus gives it some thought- if not I will continue to buy and enjoy the game everyday.

I have seen and been in several leagues that already have a solution for dealing with this. It's called a "League Rule". Lots of leagues put it right in their constitution that 5 man rotation must be used. Play-offs are up to owner.

This is a simple solution to your problem, rather than putting band-aids into the game to prevent it.

[The Wolf]

Agreed. This is an issue for the league, but not one for the game.

[waltwa]

Somehow I am not getting across the fact that I would like an option that reflects real usage of MLB.

If a league decides to play modern baseball and allows 4 man rotations and wants to play the game realistically there should be a penalty.

I guess the simple solution is to mandate 5 man rotations in modern online leagues.

I still like my idea. By the way if the owner can control the budget wouldn't it seem logical that he would not pay Cain 20 mil and then let a dumb mgr put him in the game every 4 days.

Maybe the modern game should only allow 5 man rotations!

markus take a look but that's it for me. I need 4 days off.

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by waltwa

Somehow I am not getting across the fact that I would like an option that reflects real usage of MLB.

If a league decides to play modern baseball and allows 4 man rotations and wants to play the game realistically there should be a penalty.

Why? It's very easy to use a 4 man rotation and not tire them out. Even with modern settings. You just limit their pitch count and have a deep pen.

OOTP models this well imo, if you overuse pitchers, they tire quicker. That has worked well in OOTP for a long time.

Originally Posted by waltwa

I guess the simple solution is to mandate 5 man rotations in modern online leagues.

Exactly

Originally Posted by waltwa

I still like my idea. By the way if the owner can control the budget wouldn't it seem logical that he would not pay Cain 20 mil and then let a dumb mgr put him in the game every 4 days.

Maybe the modern game should only allow 5 man rotations!

The option to only allow 5 man rotations is already there.

[Fyrestorm3]

Originally Posted by waltwa

Somehow I am not getting across the fact that I would like an option that reflects real usage of MLB.

If a league decides to play modern baseball and allows 4 man rotations and wants to play the game realistically there should be a penalty.

And somehow we're not getting across the fact that THERE IS a penalty:

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

In OOTP pitchers starting with 3 days rest (on the "Low" setting for pitcher endurance) do get a penalty for performance and increased injury risk, but if you have a staff of 4 workhorses (high stamina rating) you may get away with it with some luck. I personally wouldn'T do it, though.

[Le Grande Orange]

I would point out that starting pitchers in OOTP have it a bit different from real life in that there are no postponements in OOTP. There is nothing to disrupt the pitching rotations (and if one is using a game-generated schedule all the clubs will have off days at the same time). Postponements would definitely have some effect on the real-life pitching rotations and IP totals (though not nearly as much as in past years due to the current low rate of postponements).

[Mancandy]

A bit late to the party on this one, but I would like to point out that there is no evidence pitchers get injured or suffer long terms effects from pitching too many innings in a season, or too many innings by a certain age, or anything like that. It's all been debunked in recent years. There are countless articles on the subject, but here are some of my favorites:

Advanced NFL Stats: Verducci Follow-Up
The Year-After Effect
The Baseball Analysts: The Verducci Effect
Testing the Verducci Effect
Baseball Prospectus | Resident Fantasy Genius: Verducci Effect: Fact or Fake?

They all come to the same conclusion: it's an illusion. It's all selection bias/confirmation bias. There's no correlation between innings pitched and injuries.

I've started referring to this theory, commonly known as the Year After Effect or the Verducci Effect, as the Verducci Curse instead. Because it's a lot like the Sports Illustrated Curse, the Madden Cover Curse, etc. You're selecting a very small sample of people who had career years and then you're surprised by their regression to the mean, without ever using a control of any kind. When you do use a control, as some of the fine authors of the above linked articles did, the results do not support this theory.

I've been meaning to do an equivalent research piece on hitters, just to show how ludicrous this idea is. For example, I'd take all the players who hit 50 home runs in a season, then show how they were worse the following season, and claim that's proof you should bench a hitter when he has 49 home runs. It's the same logic, and would have the same type of "evidence" behind it, as this innings pitched nonsense.

To date, the only theory as to the causation of pitcher injuries that still holds some water is throwing too many pitches in any given game. The idea is that pitchers getting fatigued, and in turn losing their mechanics, is what causes an increased risk of injury. And that brings me to my final point...

I'll wrap this up but making a suggestion, since this is the suggestion forum afterall. Granted, it's a suggestion that will never be implemented, since it almost never happens in real life and very few users would take advantage of it...but I'd like to have the ability to use tandem starters, like the Astros did in the minor leagues this season. (For those unfamiliar with the term, as I'm sure many reading this are, a tandem starter system is putting eight starting pitchers in pairs of two and using each pair every four games, with fairly restrictive pitch counts. The starter goes for five innings or 75 pitches, then his tandem pitcher goes four innings or 60 pitches, and then you go to the bullpen if necessary. Four games later, they swap roles.) I know I can do this myself, and I have to varying degrees of success(obviously it's an abject failure in the NL, where you are routinely faced with needing a pinch hitter for your "second starter" well before they get to four innings or 60 pitches), but I'd like to easily be able to tell the AI to do it.

[waltwa]

I guess there are a lot of gm's and mgrs. in mlb who either can't or don't read.

but u do have a point In that I agree its not totally innings pitched but pitches thrown that would have a greater effect.

You have me wondering now in another direction. weightlifters,bodybuilders are suffering joint damage at a relatively early age due to the use of steroids which produce excess stress on the joints due to lifting heavier weight than their bodies would normally lift
. I just have to believe that MLB teams with all kinds of $ to spend on research have concluded that the same effect could (is ) happening to overused pitchers.

I just can't accept that every 5th game a team would be using their 5th sp instead of #1- it just doesn't make sense that 30 teams in mlb would all be laboring under the same wrong conclusion.

Again the Colorado experiment in 2012 of 75 pitches lasted just 1 year. Why?

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

I would point out that starting pitchers in OOTP have it a bit different from real life in that there are no postponements in OOTP. There is nothing to disrupt the pitching rotations (and if one is using a game-generated schedule all the clubs will have off days at the same time). Postponements would definitely have some effect on the real-life pitching rotations and IP totals (though not nearly as much as in past years due to the current low rate of postponements).

Game generated schedules do not give the same off-day to all teams. I use them all the time and I always get teams having different off-days. It works very well.

[Le Grande Orange]

You sure they're actually generated by the game? Remember, the first thing OOTP does is check if there's an existing schedule file which matches your league parameters. If there is it'll use that. If it can't find a match to an existing schedule file, then it generates a new one from scratch. The game comes with a very large selection of schedule files, and these have staggered off days and other realistic aspects.

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

You sure they're actually generated by the game? Remember, the first thing OOTP does is check if there's an existing schedule file which matches your league parameters. If there is it'll use that. If it can't find a match to an existing schedule file, then it generates a new one from scratch. The game comes with a very large selection of schedule files, and these have staggered off days and other realistic aspects.

I'm assuming the game actually generates a schedule when you click that button after clearing your schedule on the "Edit Schedule" page.

If I'm wrong, then I stand corrected.

Also, I checked the options tab after generating the schedule and the box where it shows the sched file info is blank, so again I'm assuming this also confirms the game actually generated a schedule.

If I'm wrong, then I stand corrected.


Lastly, I learned a long time ago in life to never assume anything, yet here I am assuming. So chances are I'm probably wrong.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by waltwa

I just can't accept that every 5th game a team would be using their 5th sp instead of #1- it just doesn't make sense that 30 teams in mlb would all be laboring under the same wrong conclusion.

Again the Colorado experiment in 2012 of 75 pitches lasted just 1 year. Why?

Group think has powerful effects on people. For example it's been shown that in football not punting at certain times when conventional wisdom calls for punting is an advantage to the team that doesn't punt. However the group think in the NFL is that a coach should never make a strategic decision that some analyst or fan could point to as having lost the game. Group think says it's more important not to lose even if it means using a less effective strategy.

In MLB the cost of starting pitching is so high that teams would rather use a sub-optimal rotation than explain an injury to their number one starter. The number one starter may get injured anyway but as long as he is being used in the conventional (for the time) way that's ok just bad luck. Even 5-7 years ago pitchers went on 4 days rest and number 5 starter was skipped when the team had an off day. Now the teams explain that it never hurts the top starter to get a little extra rest. That way no one can ever say they overused the pitcher who got injured. Not optimal but safe.

In one sense we can blame the 24 hour sports news cycle and the proliferation of analysts for all these poor strategies and adherence to conventional wisdom. The analysts especially and fans are not required to have consistent positions so they blow with the wind. If you pay attention you'll often find prominent analysts flip flopping on something they advocated earlier in the year especially if something went wrong.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

You sure they're actually generated by the game? Remember, the first thing OOTP does is check if there's an existing schedule file which matches your league parameters. If there is it'll use that. If it can't find a match to an existing schedule file, then it generates a new one from scratch. The game comes with a very large selection of schedule files, and these have staggered off days and other realistic aspects.

What do you mean by staggered days off? In MLB with some very few exceptions usually around opening day (for rainouts) and at the AS break, all off days are Mondays and Thursdays. Not all teams are off each Monday and Thursday but if a team is off outside the exceptions noted it will be one of those two days.

When I read staggered days off it suggests that teams can be off a number of different days. Perhaps this is picking nits but that is what I do from time to time.

[Painmantle]

Originally Posted by waltwa

overused pitchers.

I just can't accept that every 5th game a team would be using their 5th sp instead of #1- it just doesn't make sense that 30 teams in mlb would all be laboring under the same wrong conclusion.

This is not a Game issue, this is an issue with your ONLINE LEAGUE. This conversation shouldn't even be happening on the OOTP forums, This is a conversation you should be having with the Commish and other GM's of your league. Nobody here can do ANYTHING about this issue. It has many possible solutions all of which can only be implemented by your Leagues Commissioner.

If your league has automatic "League Evolution" turned on it is very possible that this is just a natural occurrence because of that setting alone.

And Frankly you said from the very beginning that your league is in 2061...that's 48 years from Modern Day Baseball and should not be compared to what you see in real MLB games today.

48 Years ago in MLB was 1965..Alot has changed since 1965...and a lot will change about baseball in 2061 and who's to say that what's happening in your league won't be exactly what is happening 48 years from now?

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by RchW

What do you mean by staggered days off? In MLB with some very few exceptions usually around opening day (for rainouts) and at the AS break, all off days are Mondays and Thursdays.

Staggered off days simply means all teams in the league aren't all idle at the same time. There are no league-wide off days. There's always at least a few teams playing even if most of the rest have that day off.

While league-wide off days are common in the minors, in the majors it's rare, and almost always confined to the All-Star break.

As far as I'm aware, schedules generated from scratch in OOTP always have league-wide off days.

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by waltwa

Blue noser its a little more complicated than that. I did check on the settings and they are geared to 2013. that is 5 man rotation and low sp stamina. the problem is that even tho those are the settings sp's can still pitch 250+ innings w/o any fear of injury or diminished effectiveness over the course of their career.

Bad reasoning. A trend or tendency does not mean that ALL pitchers should sustain injuries or suffer diminished effectiveness in their careers based on pitching 250+ innnings before they are 25. So, if you are seeing pitchers able to pitch 250+ innings without ill effects, you are experiencing realism and not a problem with the game. Consult the annals of baseball history to see where your expectation of OOTP is not in line with physical reality.

Anyone care to claim that Nolan Ryan suffered injuries or diminished effectiveness despite pitching 5 seasons of 250+ innings from the age of 25 to 30, including two seasons of 320+ innings? Did his dozen or so seasons of well over 200 innings somehow harm his career, which lasted until he was 46 years old?

Anyone care to argue that Don Sutton was highly injury prone or had a diminished career despite throwing 225 IP at the age of 21, throwing consecutive seasons of 250+ IP from age 24 to 31, and throwing 200+ innings for EVERY non-strike season for TWENTY-ONE straight years from age 21 to age 42?

How about Bert Blyleven? He threw his first 250+ inning season at the age of 20, then threw six more 250+ inning seasons through the age of 26. He went on to pitch 22 years in the majors and led the LEAGUE in IP at the ages of 34 and 35. He even threw 241 innings at the age of 38, and he never suffered an appreciable injury until he was nearly 40.

Jack Morris, Dennis Martinez, Gaylord Perry, Warren Spahn, Bob Feller, Sandy Koufax, Don Drysdale, Jim Palmer, Mike Maddux, John Smoltz, Frank Viola ... the list could go on and on of starters who threw huge innings in their 20's and did not suffer the ill effects that are implied as a penalty that should plague everyone who is used at these levels in OOTP.

For every pitcher in MLB who threw multiple seasons of 250+ innings in his 20's and then later suffered major injury problems or fell off in performance, I could probably find a comparable guy who is now in the Hall of Fame or otherwise saw no major injury history or drop in statistics. Some of those top pitchers eventually did fall away or wear out, but it was in their middle to late 30's when it's going to happen to virtually anyone anyway.

I'm sorry, but I don't buy any of the nonsense that comes from Bill James or other experts on this topic. Sure, you need to be cautious and responsible about how you handle pitchers, but it has nothing to do with statistics. Innings pitched totals don't cause baseball injuries. MLB has gone to the extreme based on some correlations that researches like Bill James have found. But correlation does not mean necessarily that you have identified causation.

Ultimately, it all comes down to genetics, conditioning, and many factors that far outweigh the number of innings pitched. Even off-the-field issues and psychological and drug problems are as much a factor as innings pitched. And all of these things are factors that, to my knowledge, James fails to control for in his research, so he's missing the largest portion of the equation.

The reality is that James and MLB GMs and managers have created an artificial level of stamina and an artificial notion of injury risk that is not truly evident from a thorough and scientifically controlled analysis of case histories. There is far too much physical evidence and other empirical indicators that have been ignored or overlooked, and until those are properly addressed, all involved are drawing invalid conclusions or working from faulty premises.