 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Baseball Beta Testing » Beta News » Pitcher Improvement Chances in OffSeason
tysonlowery
http://www.simdynasty.com/oldforum-viewthread.jsp?tid=23008&page=2
Here is how it will work. RP and SP are treated the same. The formula for determining number of improvements will be (IP / 5) + Games. The other change is that a pitchers first 25 chances will be distributed equally between control and velocity. After 25, he will get 50% Endurance chances, 25% control, and 25% velocity.
Also, the automatic endurance bonuses for going over 200 IP or 100 IP have been removed.
I think this will be a much better way to handle this. After the next OffSeason runs, we will have to look to make sure these ratios are being followed (Short Term league is coming to the end of their season).
Pitcher Improvement Chances in OffSeason
April 01, 2004 at 07:18PM View BBCode
I finally updated this, after our lengthy and productive discussions from earlier this year:http://www.simdynasty.com/oldforum-viewthread.jsp?tid=23008&page=2
Here is how it will work. RP and SP are treated the same. The formula for determining number of improvements will be (IP / 5) + Games. The other change is that a pitchers first 25 chances will be distributed equally between control and velocity. After 25, he will get 50% Endurance chances, 25% control, and 25% velocity.
Also, the automatic endurance bonuses for going over 200 IP or 100 IP have been removed.
I think this will be a much better way to handle this. After the next OffSeason runs, we will have to look to make sure these ratios are being followed (Short Term league is coming to the end of their season).
tysonlowery
April 02, 2004 at 07:13PM View BBCode
Correction, as someone pointed out in the HAL, this should have read (games + IP) / 5
BleedRed
April 02, 2004 at 07:25PM View BBCode
Is there a vision for how this affects transitions from RP to SP? Are endurance penalties (and now they would be penalties) still added for SP having a majority of appearances from the bullpen? I am just trying to get a feel for the system in testing. Thanks for the time.
arodtoo
[Edited on 4-5-2004 by arodtoo]
[Edited on 4-5-2004 by arodtoo]
April 05, 2004 at 12:26AM View BBCode
i don't know if this is the best way, i mean it makes it a lot easier to get SP improvments, and makes it harder to get RP improvments, if this is what it was meant to do, then it is great. A RP can come into 50 games(which isn't easy) and say he pitches 2 inngs per game, so he gets 100 innings, he gets 30 improvement chances, a SP who starts 30 games, and does 5 innings per game gets the same ammount of improvements, which i think is wrong, a RP gets to workout in between days, while a SP can't, i think you need to have a seperate system for both RP and SP. Also i think this might alter the balance of some leagues towards hitting, since pitchers it seem wil be getting fewer imporvement chances overall, so before this is moved over to the main site, i think we shoudl have a new way to calculate hitter improvement, or you will see almost all of the leagues dominated by hitting.[Edited on 4-5-2004 by arodtoo]
[Edited on 4-5-2004 by arodtoo]
hobos
On my team in the ST, improvement would go like this
RP-34
RP-42
RP-24
RP-40
RP-4 (the original owner only used 4 RP)
SP-41
SP-53
SP-41
SP-49
SP-51
My relievers average 35 chances and my starters average 47. That's a big difference. The averages for v/c chances are 30 and 36. A little bit more equal
These numbers represent a bullpen of 4 guys (I didn't include the 5th guy in my math). This means the RP averages are high. My guys pitched too many innings. If I added the 5th guy so the averages are lowered to normal status, then the averages are 29 and 27 for v/c
[Edited on 4-5-2004 by hobos]
April 05, 2004 at 12:47AM View BBCode
There's a flaw in your math arodtoo. 20 starts with 5 innings per start would gather 25 improvement chances. There would need to be 25 starts to equal 30 chances. Of course this isn't a huge difference and I am forced to agree with you. A SP can easily pitch 30 starts with 6 innings per start. A reliever would need to pitch 70 games with 2 innings per game to match that.On my team in the ST, improvement would go like this
RP-34
RP-42
RP-24
RP-40
RP-4 (the original owner only used 4 RP)
SP-41
SP-53
SP-41
SP-49
SP-51
My relievers average 35 chances and my starters average 47. That's a big difference. The averages for v/c chances are 30 and 36. A little bit more equal
These numbers represent a bullpen of 4 guys (I didn't include the 5th guy in my math). This means the RP averages are high. My guys pitched too many innings. If I added the 5th guy so the averages are lowered to normal status, then the averages are 29 and 27 for v/c
[Edited on 4-5-2004 by hobos]
andrew
SP- 76.2
SP- 74.8
SP- 74.4
SP- 72
SP- 61.8
RP- 174.8
RP- 99.6
RP- 87.6
RP- 61.6
RP- 39.2
As you can see my top 3 RP get tons of apperences, so they loaded up on chances. If anything this gives my RP too many chances. At least these RP improves are now spead over into endurance, unlike before.
April 05, 2004 at 01:20AM View BBCode
This is what how many chances my guys would have gotten under the new system last season.SP- 76.2
SP- 74.8
SP- 74.4
SP- 72
SP- 61.8
RP- 174.8
RP- 99.6
RP- 87.6
RP- 61.6
RP- 39.2
As you can see my top 3 RP get tons of apperences, so they loaded up on chances. If anything this gives my RP too many chances. At least these RP improves are now spead over into endurance, unlike before.
BleedRed
A SP would have to pitch 33 complete games (33 G + 33*9 IP) to end up with 66 improve chances (330/5).
Yet most of your starters and relievers are well above that mark. Just a misreading on one of our parts?
April 05, 2004 at 01:27AM View BBCode
Andrew, are you using the same formula. I am interested in results of this, but according to my math and application:A SP would have to pitch 33 complete games (33 G + 33*9 IP) to end up with 66 improve chances (330/5).
Yet most of your starters and relievers are well above that mark. Just a misreading on one of our parts?
hobos
April 05, 2004 at 01:29AM View BBCode
andrew, I think your math is wrong. Your top RP should have 874 IP+G. That's a little too outrageous. That means he's pitching every day with an average of 5.4 innings pitched. Assuming that's a typo, your second guy had 498 IP+G. Altogether, your numbers say your team averaged 28.4 innings a game. The equation is (games + IP) / 5, correct?
arodtoo
April 05, 2004 at 01:31AM View BBCode
i guess i just use my RP differently, i use my RP rarely, and for a few innings every time, and i use mainly 3 RP, so i would be hard to get my RP improvements to match my SP improvments. RP and SP improvments should be equal, they booth should improve at the same rate because they SP pitch for more innings, but don't practive as much on the side, while RP pitch less but practice more.
hobos
April 05, 2004 at 01:41AM View BBCode
Has it been considered to use (IP+G)/4 for RP? It would even up the improvement chances. If a starter went 33 starts and pitched 200 innings, he would get 46.6 improvements. If a reliever had 70 appearances and 100 IP, he would get 34 under the (IP+G)/5 equation but he would get 42.5 under the (IP+G)/4 equation. What are the major league averages for IP+G for both RP and SP? Those nimberrs might help
andrew
That is what I am going off. Notice it is NOT (IP + games)/5.
So this guy http://www.simdynasty.com/beta/player.jsp?mode=player&playername=nobody&id=9123 for 1952 would have [(159 IP)/5]+(116 apperences)= about 147
April 05, 2004 at 02:50AM View BBCode
You are right my RP is suppost to be 147 not 174 chances, but I still think one of us is using the equ wrong.Originally posted by tysonlowery
The formula for determining number of improvements will be (IP / 5) + Games.
That is what I am going off. Notice it is NOT (IP + games)/5.
So this guy http://www.simdynasty.com/beta/player.jsp?mode=player&playername=nobody&id=9123 for 1952 would have [(159 IP)/5]+(116 apperences)= about 147
arodtoo
April 05, 2004 at 02:53AM View BBCode
he then corrected it i thouight with
Correction, as someone pointed out in the HAL, this should have read (games + IP) / 5
andrew
April 05, 2004 at 02:58AM View BBCode
Well that would explain it :lol: . I thought the way I was doing it was kind of strange.
arodtoo
April 05, 2004 at 03:06AM View BBCode
by your way any pitcher in any league at any time who was below an A wouldn't be anything, that would be very funny to see implemented
jer2911
April 05, 2004 at 08:35AM View BBCode
I did the calculations with my pitchers from the Mickey Mantle League using their stats from last year. I also added a section using Hobos idea of "(IP+G)/4 for RP".jer2911 has attached this file: Pitcher_Improvements2 (KC Nerds '58).xls (application/vnd.ms-excel)
disciple
April 05, 2004 at 12:59PM View BBCode
Using Brad's example data, it looks like we are penalizing RP chances (versus SP). Is this the intended effect?
tysonlowery
One of the purposes is to treat RP and SP the same in regards to improvement chances so that people can't take advantage of any differences.
The 2nd purpose is to make it so that overusing a pitcher doesn't get you a ton of improvement chances in CTL and VEL - you lose half of these chances to the endurance category.
April 05, 2004 at 03:44PM View BBCode
Brad's SP have a ton of innings pitched - I would say more so than most teams.One of the purposes is to treat RP and SP the same in regards to improvement chances so that people can't take advantage of any differences.
The 2nd purpose is to make it so that overusing a pitcher doesn't get you a ton of improvement chances in CTL and VEL - you lose half of these chances to the endurance category.
jer2911
Wouldn't more typical data show most SPs getting about 200 innings and 5 or so RPs getting 50-90 innings each?
April 05, 2004 at 05:12PM View BBCode
Originally posted by tysonloweryYes. All five of them are very good and have A+ Endurance, so they get to stay in longer than most pitchers do.
Brad's SP have a ton of innings pitched - I would say more so than most teams.
Wouldn't more typical data show most SPs getting about 200 innings and 5 or so RPs getting 50-90 innings each?
moovolong
Could this new system, (IP+G)/5, be open to abuse? What if an owner sets his manager prefs to have the shortest possible leash for RP's, causing every RP to pitch to a few batters and get pulled, every single game? All of his RP's would rack up around 150 G's, resulting in about 20 extra improvement chances over someone without those settings. (This could also be done with SP's, but then the owner would never have a fully rested SP).
Would the benefits of using this loophole be worth the owner's effort?
To prevent it, how about capping the number of G's at around 50 (or whatever a reasonable max #games is for a RP), and just use IP/5 from there up?
[Edited on 4-7-2004 by moovolong]
Potential for abuse?
April 07, 2004 at 02:56AM View BBCode
I like the idea of changing pitcher improvements, and this seems like a good direction. I have a concern, though....Could this new system, (IP+G)/5, be open to abuse? What if an owner sets his manager prefs to have the shortest possible leash for RP's, causing every RP to pitch to a few batters and get pulled, every single game? All of his RP's would rack up around 150 G's, resulting in about 20 extra improvement chances over someone without those settings. (This could also be done with SP's, but then the owner would never have a fully rested SP).
Would the benefits of using this loophole be worth the owner's effort?
To prevent it, how about capping the number of G's at around 50 (or whatever a reasonable max #games is for a RP), and just use IP/5 from there up?
[Edited on 4-7-2004 by moovolong]
tysonlowery
April 07, 2004 at 05:14AM View BBCode
Somebody want to test this out and see if it can be accomplished?
jer2911
FYI... I have no steals because for this season I wanted to test whether players will attempt to steal home when that is all that is considered for stealing bases.
April 07, 2004 at 07:27AM View BBCode
I'll go for it... We would probably have to wait for the next full season to see the full results of it, but at least we can get an idea.FYI... I have no steals because for this season I wanted to test whether players will attempt to steal home when that is all that is considered for stealing bases.
jer2911
I've got it set to pull the SPs the instant they get tired (to get the most time for the RPs) and set to pull the RPs the instant they are tired. I also have it set to go Closer, Setup/Closer... etc... Long Reliever in every situation. I also have it set to use SPs out of the pen if necessary, just to see what that does.
Let me know if there's something else you want me to test, or if you want me to tweak my settings.
April 07, 2004 at 07:59AM View BBCode
Okay, my preferences are set. I hope I understood you right.I've got it set to pull the SPs the instant they get tired (to get the most time for the RPs) and set to pull the RPs the instant they are tired. I also have it set to go Closer, Setup/Closer... etc... Long Reliever in every situation. I also have it set to use SPs out of the pen if necessary, just to see what that does.
Let me know if there's something else you want me to test, or if you want me to tweak my settings.
moovolong
April 07, 2004 at 01:04PM View BBCode
Do you have it set to pull RP's after giving up 1 ER or 1 hit?
disciple
As a side note, St. Louis has started winning games on a more regular basis using this setting change:
Games 1-108
14 wins
94 losses
.129 winning percentage
Games 109-142
7 wins
27 losses
.205 winning percentage
April 09, 2004 at 03:00PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
Back at game 109 I changed my managerial settings to pull any RP after giving up [b]1[/b] Hit+ER+hbp+BB.
As a side note, St. Louis has started winning games on a more regular basis using this setting change:
Games 1-108
14 wins
94 losses
.129 winning percentage
Games 109-142
7 wins
27 losses
.205 winning percentage
Pages: 1 2