Veteran SP put into long relief

[Rosco Peabody]

I see this every once in awhile. A veteran SP who is starting to wane statistically is on a computer's team and is made into simply a long relief pitcher. It would be one thing if the pitcher stunk, but they still have a good amount left in the tank. Oftentimes, they still have much better ratings than the guys put in the starting roles.

It just bugs me because it's a guy who has so many years in the league that he "earns" respect, but is relegated to a relief role.

Any suggestions? I'd like to force the computer to at least make the guy a #5 starter. I've tried going onto the team in commissioner mode and "forcing" the role to be a starter, but it doesn't seem to change

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Rosco Peabody

I see this every once in awhile. A veteran SP who is starting to wane statistically is on a computer's team and is made into simply a long relief pitcher. It would be one thing if the pitcher stunk, but they still have a good amount left in the tank. Oftentimes, they still have much better ratings than the guys put in the starting roles.

It just bugs me because it's a guy who has so many years in the league that he "earns" respect, but is relegated to a relief role.

Any suggestions? I'd like to force the computer to at least make the guy a #5 starter. I've tried going onto the team in commissioner mode and "forcing" the role to be a starter, but it doesn't seem to change

The AI has no emotions and is not influenced by outside pressures. You can't force AI teams to start certain players. It would be an exploit despite good intentions.

[andyhdz]

good post I noticed this too. A force starting pitching role would be nice considering we have it for other positions but if your manager doesnt allow you to do this it shouldn't work.

[NoOne]

There is a force SP, but you'd have to be GM of that team or GM-legacy mode on as a coach? etc etc. pretty sure when you switch back it reverts...

you can try editting his contract and add teh SP-promised role... it is not 100% effective fyi, but it may work. this will not revert, but the teams don't have to honor it either.

does "acting as" also change how scouting is seen? if oyu can see through their eyes in this respect, maybe their scout thinks differently about this older player. sometimes aging is not shown the first month or two it occurs, and each scout will be different with timing and accuracy of those changes.

if you look closely enough, there's a reason why the ai did this... it will always do it when enuogh factors add up to cause this funtion of the code to be used/enacted/whatever. once qualifications are met, it occurs. (qualifications can vary by gm etc)

odd things happen. this happens in real life too. as long as frequency isn't out of whack it's fine. if you focus on individual results, you will find numerous things that are not optimal for the individual.

reason why: baseball doesn't run from that perspective... the players are a labor force. the labor doesn't make policy or important decisions. their individual needs and wants are only important relative to the team as a whole. (exceptions? sure, but not common)

it is inevitable that many decisions are made for the greatest benefit of an orgnaiztion that is incredibly detrimental to the player... small and large issues...

think of kris bryant purposefully left in AAA for a few months so they saved more money in future. was that best for bryant? no. in hindsight was he clearly ready for the mlb at that time (was crushing AAA-pitching merciliessly too)? yes. did the cubs care 2 cents about kris bryant beyond what he provides on field when convenient for them? nope.

there's a reason why most ceo-types are high-functioning sociopaths. these are the decisions they make most of the time. what provides most success/$$/pide etc as opposed to every caring about what is 'best'.

in the case of baseball, i actually side with the high-functioning sociopaths/psychopaths. it's not involving greatest utility of anythign important... just entertainment/leisure. i would focus on most wins over time too. (which means i'd do that to kris bryant too, because the rules allow it and provides most success possible for the team, not the player.)

but, in a video game i like careers in addition to team success. they truely great ones i will never sacrifice mlb playing time when they are ready for it... i want them to get to 3000+ hits or 500+hr and they need all the time they can get. unlike real life, i don't have losing seasons, so it's a small cost to pay relative to success. i can afford it wihtout much of a blip. if that weren't true, i'd act as teh RL gms do.

[Rosco Peabody]

Originally Posted by NoOne

does "acting as" also change how scouting is seen? if oyu can see through their eyes in this respect, maybe their scout thinks differently about this older player. sometimes aging is not shown the first month or two it occurs, and each scout will be different with timing and accuracy of those changes.

I wondered this too, but it doesn't change it. The Veteran has better ratings than the SP the AI chose.

And it's not because the SP only has two pitches either because he has 4. I was trying to look to see the justification and all I could come up with is that the other guy is younger.

[ralphieboy]

Good original post. I have seen this as well. The unrealistic part is a lot of times these veteran pitchers command a pretty substantial free agent salary since they have been in the league a while.

The AI will spend a lot on them in the winter, and then immediately put them into basically a mop-up or middle relief role. It's a really bad strategy that sticks out.

[Rosco Peabody]

Originally Posted by ralphieboy

Good original post. I have seen this as well. The unrealistic part is a lot of times these veteran pitchers command a pretty substantial free agent salary since they have been in the league a while.

The AI will spend a lot on them in the summer, and then immediately put them into basically a mop-up or middle relief role. It's a really bad strategy that sticks out.

It wouldn't be as bad if there was a way to override it in Commissioner mode if wanted

[smiller]

I have had a top starting pitcher made into a closer, lead the league in saves, then switched back to a starter (fictional league). And vice-versa on the same team when the league leader in saves was then made a starting pitcher, then back to closer.

[Rosco Peabody]

Originally Posted by smiller

I have had a top starting pitcher made into a closer, lead the league in saves, then switched back to a starter (fictional league). And vice-versa on the same team when the league leader in saves was then made a starting pitcher, then back to closer.

Did you do this or the computer? Big difference.

[Dukie98]

In my historic league, Pete Alexander, who has 4 1/2 stars and is currently second in the NL in ERA, was sent down to the minors to make room for a 1-star 33-year-old pitcher with an ERA over 5.50. I went into commissioner mode to bring him back up and reinsert him in the rotation, and he immediately got sent back down again.

[Rosco Peabody]

Originally Posted by Dukie98

In my historic league, Pete Alexander, who has 4 1/2 stars and is currently second in the NL in ERA, was sent down to the minors to make room for a 1-star 33-year-old pitcher with an ERA over 5.50. I went into commissioner mode to bring him back up and reinsert him in the rotation, and he immediately got sent back down again.

This! This is the stuff that I find just TOO unrealistic. I can't come up with a scenario in my head where this should happen unless a guy has disciplinary problems

[smiller]

It was strictly the computer in my case. Both players were on another team from the one I general manage

[UltimateAverageGuy]

Some managers in real life dont know what the hell they're doing, and they think differently than you, treat it as such.

[NoOne]

just to teast: the dumb ones probably know a bit more than us, too

experience is the cause, not ability.

them still be dum.

[dpd376]

Try altering the scouting preferences to increase last years stats and decrease ratings. It seems to work for me.

[Cryomaniac]

Originally Posted by UltimateAverageGuy

Some managers in real life dont know what the hell they're doing, and they think differently than you, treat it as such.

That's how I view it.

I don't think it's necessarily that unreasonable for a long time SP to become a long relief guy at the end of his career to try and eek out a few more seasons.

[NoOne]

if you look at how players can be treated, they are poperty. (not a fan of that, on a personal level, fwiw.) mostly true of all labor

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by NoOne

if you look at how players can be treated, they are poperty. (not a fan of that, on a personal level, fwiw.) mostly true of all labor

Incorrect. They are treated as one who voluntarily signed a contract. That is wholly different than "property".

[NoOne]

Okay, that was an obvious exagerration. (fallacy fallacy)

that exageration doesn't make me wrong. they clearly aren't treated fairly and historically never have been -- as with all labor forces relative to big picture. (some 50-man company in BFE does it right - don't care, amounts to nothing in long term).

not all contract law is ethically and morally correct. (appeal to authority logical fallacy)

google "your logic fallacy is" -> cool website.

They may be treated better than your average janitor, but they are not treated like human beings on a few key matters. (not listed here, well maybe 1 or 2 below).

only recently are they allowed to go see their own child being born...

WTF?

i don't care if your country has paternity/maternity laws or not... that's f'd up. laws are not "right/wrong" and often lag behind current cultural thoughts. anyone who relies on laws (religious or secular) for a moral compass is dangerous.

"Hey, that's their contact... and we demand baseball everyday! No you can't see your kid getting born. Don't you get paid enough to sacrifice what everyone else gets?" <cracks whip> "LoL, listen to this guy: 'please sir, i want s'more' like oliver! Stupid, oliver"

classic reactionary's attitude.. i've got mine, and if you don't it must be 100% your fault.

days off.. they need more days off during season.. just becaues they make so much doens't mean i think they deserve some poor treatment. any thought like that is a sign of bitterness or worse psychopathy.

(i say this for pro mlb players, but obviously i care more about it for real daily laborers... pro mlb players should be one of the last to see improved working environments based on need. that doesnt mean that pro mlb players should not complain and demand proper treatment. 2 different situations, both need improvements... one more than the other.)

heck, under your reasoning we can bring back indentured servitude, if we passed the right laws about it... those idiots signed a contract... that's god's law even if you don't believe in him. it was the law so those people weren't doing anythign wrong by keeping people in financial slavery. really not much different than now... and working our way back toward that end with stagnant income since the 70's and record income for the top. yeah it's all peachy and the system is perfect! <holds hands over ears and loudly emotes:" a la la.. laalalal"

[Dyzalot]

Originally Posted by NoOne

Okay, that was an obvious exagerration. (fallacy fallacy)

that exageration doesn't make me wrong. they clearly aren't treated fairly and historically never have been -- as with all labor forces relative to big picture. (some 50-man company in BFE does it right - don't care, amounts to nothing in long term).

not all contract law is ethically and morally correct. (appeal to authority logical fallacy)

google "your logic fallacy is" -> cool website.

They may be treated better than your average janitor, but they are not treated like human beings on a few key matters. (not listed here, well maybe 1 or 2 below).

only recently are they allowed to go see their own child being born...

WTF?

i don't care if your country has paternity/maternity laws or not... that's f'd up. laws are not "right/wrong" and often lag behind current cultural thoughts. anyone who relies on laws (religious or secular) for a moral compass is dangerous.

"Hey, that's their contact... and we demand baseball everyday! No you can't see your kid getting born. Don't you get paid enough to sacrifice what everyone else gets?" <cracks whip> "LoL, listen to this guy: 'please sir, i want s'more' like oliver! Stupid, oliver"

classic reactionary's attitude.. i've got mine, and if you don't it must be 100% your fault.

days off.. they need more days off during season.. just becaues they make so much doens't mean i think they deserve some poor treatment. any thought like that is a sign of bitterness or worse psychopathy.

(i say this for pro mlb players, but obviously i care more about it for real daily laborers... pro mlb players should be one of the last to see improved working environments based on need. that doesnt mean that pro mlb players should not complain and demand proper treatment. 2 different situations, both need improvements... one more than the other.)

heck, under your reasoning we can bring back indentured servitude, if we passed the right laws about it... those idiots signed a contract... that's god's law even if you don't believe in him. it was the law so those people weren't doing anythign wrong by keeping people in financial slavery. really not much different than now... and working our way back toward that end with stagnant income since the 70's and record income for the top. yeah it's all peachy and the system is perfect! <holds hands over ears and loudly emotes:" a la la.. laalalal"

You deny people their own agency when you don't allow them to voluntarily sign contracts whose terms you may find objectionable. You are literally being the arrogant snob declaring that you know what is best for them better than they do. Also I have no problem with people signing contracts to be servants.