 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Sim Forums » Latest News » Late Inning Data
tmills777
April 22, 2006 at 08:16PM View BBCode
I go for the control pitcher over the hard-throwers; interestingly, a team of A velocity actually had an ERA of about 3.50. What gripes me most about a lot of my A-A+ control pitchers is the number of walks they have been giving up. One game I lost we gave up 9 walks. One of my teams had a game and I started my "Ace" [if an 11-8 record is worthy to have one called an "Ace."] The score was 1-0 them and my "Ace" got the first two outs and then gave up a single. No problem, but the next guy walked [one of four for this A+ control freak]. The next batter singled, driving in the runner on second and we were down 2-0. Start of next inning my #1 pick hit a tater and closed score 2-1 where it remained and my Ace is now 11-9. My relievers are still having trouble getting 1-2-3 in the ninth.
windstarz2
April 27, 2006 at 05:26PM View BBCode
my closer goes thru streaks where he gets nobody out. his era is always high but he will still end up with 30 or so saves every year. i dont think ratings matter much for closers. quite a few teams put their worst reliever as the closer and seem to do just as well.
tmills777
I got a new closer B+/B+ but he hasn't been needed yet.:lol:
April 27, 2006 at 05:49PM View BBCode
I traded my "Ace" for a C+/A starter. The other manager thought he was getting a deal. The guy I got threw a 5-hit shutout his first start and then followed up with another complete game 5-1. My previous 'Ace"...? His first start: 8 innings, 10 earned runs and he STILL won!!I got a new closer B+/B+ but he hasn't been needed yet.:lol:
jzyehoshua
You'd have to set manager preferences to take out starters and relievers as soon as they start to tire... You'd have to change your manager preferences before each game so the relievers already tired would be at the end of each list and thus less likely to be used... But the result would be you'd be getting a lot more rested pitchers in the game so your ERA should drop dramatically, right?
Assuming the problem was nailed on the head, I think that should work... I think I'll try that :D Thanks for the idea :D
For example, right now in my main league I have 5 relievers all with ERA's between 4.10 and 5.55 so they're not too dissimilar. Now, my setup man is the only one with 5 bars. I simply change my manager preferences for my rotation so for the next game he's the 1st pick to come in. My middle reliever and closer are both at 4 bars. I set my preferences so they're both taking up all the 2nd and 3rd picks for all categories. Then I just set long relief and setup/closer as the last 2 categories for all groups.
Assuming all these stats are right and the conclusion right, my relief corps will ideally be much more effective next game.
[Edited on 6-13-2006 by jzyehoshua]
June 13, 2006 at 05:13AM View BBCode
Alright everyone, if the problem is bringing in tired relief pitchers, here's a way it could be managed to bring in rested ones... It would take work though, but is a theory anyway.You'd have to set manager preferences to take out starters and relievers as soon as they start to tire... You'd have to change your manager preferences before each game so the relievers already tired would be at the end of each list and thus less likely to be used... But the result would be you'd be getting a lot more rested pitchers in the game so your ERA should drop dramatically, right?
Assuming the problem was nailed on the head, I think that should work... I think I'll try that :D Thanks for the idea :D
For example, right now in my main league I have 5 relievers all with ERA's between 4.10 and 5.55 so they're not too dissimilar. Now, my setup man is the only one with 5 bars. I simply change my manager preferences for my rotation so for the next game he's the 1st pick to come in. My middle reliever and closer are both at 4 bars. I set my preferences so they're both taking up all the 2nd and 3rd picks for all categories. Then I just set long relief and setup/closer as the last 2 categories for all groups.
Assuming all these stats are right and the conclusion right, my relief corps will ideally be much more effective next game.
[Edited on 6-13-2006 by jzyehoshua]
jzyehoshua
Like it says in the rules "Relievers: Relief pitchers can pitch in the game as long as they have more than 1 energy bar. However, relievers with less than 5 energy bars will experience diminished skills for the next game. The more tired a relief pitcher is, the less effective he will be. The amount of energy a relief pitcher has depends on three factors: his Endurance rating, how many days out of the last 5 he has pitched in, and how many batters he has faced in those outings. You can see how much each pitcher has faced in the last 5 days by clicking on the energy bar for a relief pitcher."
Since relievers are less effective if tired but can still be brought in if having over 1 red bar, why doesn't ABE decide to bring in the least tired reliever? Or maybe have a setting in the preferences so you can do that...
June 13, 2006 at 05:18AM View BBCode
Speaking of which, if relievers are getting hit harder if their endurance is lower, maybe ABE should add a variable or something so it's less likely to bring in relievers even if the manager preferences say to depending on what their energy bars are.Like it says in the rules "Relievers: Relief pitchers can pitch in the game as long as they have more than 1 energy bar. However, relievers with less than 5 energy bars will experience diminished skills for the next game. The more tired a relief pitcher is, the less effective he will be. The amount of energy a relief pitcher has depends on three factors: his Endurance rating, how many days out of the last 5 he has pitched in, and how many batters he has faced in those outings. You can see how much each pitcher has faced in the last 5 days by clicking on the energy bar for a relief pitcher."
Since relievers are less effective if tired but can still be brought in if having over 1 red bar, why doesn't ABE decide to bring in the least tired reliever? Or maybe have a setting in the preferences so you can do that...
jzyehoshua
June 13, 2006 at 05:31AM View BBCode
Hmm... just noticed that "bring in most rested bullpen pitcher" option for bullpen use... Hypothetically, couldn't one set the settings for more than and less than runs to 0 so that the most rested bullpen pitcher would always be brought in? Then you could also set your manager preferences as you normally would and ABE should bring in the most rested, in case of a tie-breaker as your prefs suggest, right?
BleedRed
I have my doubts about the tie-breaker part. Generally, ABE doesn't have a lot of plan B type logic. He will probably just used the most rested pitcher (i.e. the one who pitched to two batters eight days ago right before the other guy pitched to two batters eight days ago in the same game).
The rest is correct and one option for this if you have an ensamble bullpen.
June 13, 2006 at 01:38PM View BBCode
Originally posted by jzyehoshua
Hmm... just noticed that "bring in most rested bullpen pitcher" option for bullpen use... Hypothetically, couldn't one set the settings for more than and less than runs to 0 so that the most rested bullpen pitcher would always be brought in? Then you could also set your manager preferences as you normally would and ABE should bring in the most rested, in case of a tie-breaker as your prefs suggest, right?
I have my doubts about the tie-breaker part. Generally, ABE doesn't have a lot of plan B type logic. He will probably just used the most rested pitcher (i.e. the one who pitched to two batters eight days ago right before the other guy pitched to two batters eight days ago in the same game).
The rest is correct and one option for this if you have an ensamble bullpen.
lvnwrth
Regardless of the underlying problem, this problem still persists: If you use your SD bullpen like a normal MLB team uses its bullpen, your relievers are gonna get creamed on a regular basis, and your closer is going to blow a bunch of saves.
June 13, 2006 at 02:11PM View BBCode
If the problem really is tired relievers, then the obvious conclusion is that relievers tire too easily. A closer who works one inning (or even two innings) every other day should not be tired. In fact, if he is degraded at all, it should be extremely negligible.Regardless of the underlying problem, this problem still persists: If you use your SD bullpen like a normal MLB team uses its bullpen, your relievers are gonna get creamed on a regular basis, and your closer is going to blow a bunch of saves.
jzyehoshua
It seems like those 2 little changes would solve this whole problem...
June 14, 2006 at 12:45AM View BBCode
Hmm... I wonder if there's any chance of a SimD change then? Could ABE be changed so for manager preferences, the default is 0's and most rested to be brought in? Could ABE also be changed so if more then one reliever is rested, then whichever one the manager preferences dictate could be brought in?It seems like those 2 little changes would solve this whole problem...
barterer2002
The problem is that SD users don't tend to use their bullpens like a normal MLB team. How many times do relievers appear in 100 games in SD. In MLB 80 is typically a high for the season. In SD, pick a reliever with C+ or higher endurance and pitch him every day for an inning at a time and he'll keep coming back the next game. In MLB such an overused pitcher will be injured and his career ruined.
June 14, 2006 at 12:50AM View BBCode
Originally posted by lvnwrth
If the problem really is tired relievers, then the obvious conclusion is that relievers tire too easily. A closer who works one inning (or even two innings) every other day should not be tired. In fact, if he is degraded at all, it should be extremely negligible.
Regardless of the underlying problem, this problem still persists: If you use your SD bullpen like a normal MLB team uses its bullpen, your relievers are gonna get creamed on a regular basis, and your closer is going to blow a bunch of saves.
The problem is that SD users don't tend to use their bullpens like a normal MLB team. How many times do relievers appear in 100 games in SD. In MLB 80 is typically a high for the season. In SD, pick a reliever with C+ or higher endurance and pitch him every day for an inning at a time and he'll keep coming back the next game. In MLB such an overused pitcher will be injured and his career ruined.
lvnwrth
I don't disagree with you about the overuse of certain relievers. For a long time I resisted it, but there's just no upside to managing your bullpen like a major league bullpen...none...at all. I tried, for a long time. And the results were two: no IC's for your relievers, and they get hammered anyway. So why not take that A overall, C+ endurance guy and pitch him 120 times?
June 14, 2006 at 01:34AM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
Bart,
I don't disagree with you about the overuse of certain relievers. For a long time I resisted it, but there's just no upside to managing your bullpen like a major league bullpen...none...at all. I tried, for a long time. And the results were two: no IC's for your relievers, and they get hammered anyway. So why not take that A overall, C+ endurance guy and pitch him 120 times?
barterer2002
I don't have access to all my former teams but here's an example of what I'm talking about. My first decade of play in the EBL I tried to keep my relievers under 80 games and let everyone pitch with some regularity. The results are as follows:
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&year=1968&teamid=3482]1968 Chicago Breeze EBL[/url] (4 relievers with ERAs 2.04 or below and the fifth with a 3.38)
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1969]1969 Chicago Breeze[/url] (5 relievers with ERAs below 3.38)
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1970]1970 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1971]1971 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1972]1972 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1973]1973 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1974]1974 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1975]1975 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1976]1976 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1977]1977 Chicago Breeze[/url]
The problems for me as I had to replace the original five was that I didn't give my young pitchers enough games and/or innings to develop to their full potential and so as the decade progressed my pitching staff got worse. I stemmed it for a while by trading for relievers that other teams had developed (Encarnacion, Coughlin and Minor are all examples) but didn't really develop my own until around 1979 when I started to develop [url=http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?playername=nobody&mode=stats&id=1484425]Roberto Mcquillan[/url] full force (still kept him under 90 games though)
June 14, 2006 at 02:52AM View BBCode
Well I do think that if you had four or five quality relievers and managed them in MLB style they would perform but I certainly agree with you that it hurts development. Basically you've got to have a bullpen of 5 A- guys over 29 so that you're not hindering development.I don't have access to all my former teams but here's an example of what I'm talking about. My first decade of play in the EBL I tried to keep my relievers under 80 games and let everyone pitch with some regularity. The results are as follows:
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&year=1968&teamid=3482]1968 Chicago Breeze EBL[/url] (4 relievers with ERAs 2.04 or below and the fifth with a 3.38)
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1969]1969 Chicago Breeze[/url] (5 relievers with ERAs below 3.38)
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1970]1970 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1971]1971 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1972]1972 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1973]1973 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1974]1974 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1975]1975 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1976]1976 Chicago Breeze[/url]
[url=http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=3482&year=1977]1977 Chicago Breeze[/url]
The problems for me as I had to replace the original five was that I didn't give my young pitchers enough games and/or innings to develop to their full potential and so as the decade progressed my pitching staff got worse. I stemmed it for a while by trading for relievers that other teams had developed (Encarnacion, Coughlin and Minor are all examples) but didn't really develop my own until around 1979 when I started to develop [url=http://www.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?playername=nobody&mode=stats&id=1484425]Roberto Mcquillan[/url] full force (still kept him under 90 games though)
CardShark
You can't compare a pitcher that pitches 100 games in SimD to real life. In real life, if a team only went with a 5 man bullpen the whole year, there would be guys with 100 games pitched. You can't have an 11 or 12 man staff which every team does, so you are forced to have 5 in the pen. And if your good relievers are 28 or older, you can't have depth.
Great, great point. Pitchers pitch in MLB tired all the time and don't get bombed. When Mariano Rivera has a 1.90 ERA, I'm sure it wasn't cause he was rested every time he pitched. I think the endurance penalty is way too harsh.
I think I read on the boards that an F endurance pitcher can pitch to 4 batters and then begins to tire. If this is true, then come on, that's just plain silly. What pitcher in the history of baseball would begin to majorly fatigue after, let's say 12 or 13 pitches?
June 14, 2006 at 02:57AM View BBCode
The problem is that SD users don't tend to use their bullpens like a normal MLB team. How many times do relievers appear in 100 games in SD. In MLB 80 is typically a high for the season.
You can't compare a pitcher that pitches 100 games in SimD to real life. In real life, if a team only went with a 5 man bullpen the whole year, there would be guys with 100 games pitched. You can't have an 11 or 12 man staff which every team does, so you are forced to have 5 in the pen. And if your good relievers are 28 or older, you can't have depth.
If the problem really is tired relievers, then the obvious conclusion is that relievers tire too easily. A closer who works one inning (or even two innings) every other day should not be tired. In fact, if he is degraded at all, it should be extremely negligible.
Great, great point. Pitchers pitch in MLB tired all the time and don't get bombed. When Mariano Rivera has a 1.90 ERA, I'm sure it wasn't cause he was rested every time he pitched. I think the endurance penalty is way too harsh.
I think I read on the boards that an F endurance pitcher can pitch to 4 batters and then begins to tire. If this is true, then come on, that's just plain silly. What pitcher in the history of baseball would begin to majorly fatigue after, let's say 12 or 13 pitches?
barterer2002
???????
June 14, 2006 at 03:13AM View BBCode
Originally posted by CardShark
You can't compare a pitcher that pitches 100 games in SimD to real life.
Great, great point. Pitchers pitch in MLB tired all the time and don't get bombed.
???????
CardShark
In other words, you can't compare games pitched per pitcher because teams in real life have more than 5 men in the bullpen. Obviously, spreading games out over 6 or 7 pitchers as opposed to 5, will result in less games per guy.
June 14, 2006 at 03:38AM View BBCode
You left out the rest of that quote.In other words, you can't compare games pitched per pitcher because teams in real life have more than 5 men in the bullpen. Obviously, spreading games out over 6 or 7 pitchers as opposed to 5, will result in less games per guy.
barterer2002
You feel that when I made a comparision that it isn't acceptable because major league baseball teams in general keep 6-7 relievers in the bullpen. At least now they do. Of course, historically this isnt' true at all and is an invention of the past decade. I would contend that pitching staffs in SD are much more like those of the seventies and eighties where teams didn't have 6-7 man bullpens but rather 4-5 man bullpens.
June 14, 2006 at 03:47AM View BBCode
But the point is, you're picking and choosing what you can compare to major league baseball.You feel that when I made a comparision that it isn't acceptable because major league baseball teams in general keep 6-7 relievers in the bullpen. At least now they do. Of course, historically this isnt' true at all and is an invention of the past decade. I would contend that pitching staffs in SD are much more like those of the seventies and eighties where teams didn't have 6-7 man bullpens but rather 4-5 man bullpens.
CardShark
Not sure what you mean here. The pitchers who are in the single seasons leaders for games are pitchers that had long careers and ironically, some of their best years were the years with the most games pitched. So I'm not sure if I agree with ya on that point.
Check out guys like Kent Tekulve, Mike Marshall, Julian Taverez, Jim Brower & Wayne Granger. Guys that are the single season leaders in games pitched (all around 90 or more). They've never had a history with injuries, and like I said, had their best years those years. Tekulve pitched til he was 42.
June 14, 2006 at 03:48AM View BBCode
In MLB such an overused pitcher will be injured and his career ruined.
Not sure what you mean here. The pitchers who are in the single seasons leaders for games are pitchers that had long careers and ironically, some of their best years were the years with the most games pitched. So I'm not sure if I agree with ya on that point.
Check out guys like Kent Tekulve, Mike Marshall, Julian Taverez, Jim Brower & Wayne Granger. Guys that are the single season leaders in games pitched (all around 90 or more). They've never had a history with injuries, and like I said, had their best years those years. Tekulve pitched til he was 42.
CardShark
Again, not sure if I agree with you. You're forgetting that in the 70s, most teams had a 4 man rotation, not 5. And definitely in the 50s and 60s it was 4 man. So a 10 man staff meant 6 relievers. Also, complete games were much much more common then, so the bullpen wasn't used as much.
In SimD, you have to use your bullpens alot if you want to win. Cause when a starter gets tired, he gets bombed.
June 14, 2006 at 03:53AM View BBCode
I would contend that pitching staffs in SD are much more like those of the seventies and eighties where teams didn't have 6-7 man bullpens but rather 4-5 man bullpens.
Again, not sure if I agree with you. You're forgetting that in the 70s, most teams had a 4 man rotation, not 5. And definitely in the 50s and 60s it was 4 man. So a 10 man staff meant 6 relievers. Also, complete games were much much more common then, so the bullpen wasn't used as much.
In SimD, you have to use your bullpens alot if you want to win. Cause when a starter gets tired, he gets bombed.
barterer2002
I'm not forgetting that at all. For the record I went back and looked at the 1979 NL (picked somewhat randomly). Of the 12 teams only one had more than five relievers appear in more than 30 games. (the mets).
In the entire history of baseball there are three men who have reached 90 games in one season. I can't even begin to imagine the last SD league that didn't have that every season. There are probably some out there but not many. You want to site the guys who were successful but ignore those such as
[url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/r/runyase01.shtml]Sean Runyan[/url]
[url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/v/villaos01.shtml]Oscar Villerreal[/url]
[url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/z/zimmeje02.shtml]Jeff Zimmerman[/url] or even
[url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/g/gagneer01.shtml]Eric Gagne[/url]
The truth is that there are many more pitchers in major league history that have broken down from overuse than have been successful with that overuse.
June 14, 2006 at 04:15AM View BBCode
Originally posted by CardShark
Again, not sure if I agree with you. You're forgetting that in the 70s, most teams had a 4 man rotation, not 5. And definitely in the 50s and 60s it was 4 man. So a 10 man staff meant 6 relievers.
I'm not forgetting that at all. For the record I went back and looked at the 1979 NL (picked somewhat randomly). Of the 12 teams only one had more than five relievers appear in more than 30 games. (the mets).
Originally posted by CardShark
In MLB such an overused pitcher will be injured and his career ruined.
Not sure what you mean here. The pitchers who are in the single seasons leaders for games are pitchers that had long careers and ironically, some of their best years were the years with the most games pitched. So I'm not sure if I agree with ya on that point.
Check out guys like Kent Tekulve, Mike Marshall, Julian Taverez, Jim Brower & Wayne Granger. Guys that are the single season leaders in games pitched (all around 90 or more). They've never had a history with injuries, and like I said, had their best years those years. Tekulve pitched til he was 42.
In the entire history of baseball there are three men who have reached 90 games in one season. I can't even begin to imagine the last SD league that didn't have that every season. There are probably some out there but not many. You want to site the guys who were successful but ignore those such as
[url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/r/runyase01.shtml]Sean Runyan[/url]
[url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/v/villaos01.shtml]Oscar Villerreal[/url]
[url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/z/zimmeje02.shtml]Jeff Zimmerman[/url] or even
[url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/g/gagneer01.shtml]Eric Gagne[/url]
The truth is that there are many more pitchers in major league history that have broken down from overuse than have been successful with that overuse.
lvnwrth
This is not true. It's only been in the last fifteen years that teams have gone totally away from 10-man pitching staffs, and even back then there were only a handful of pitchers (Marshall, Tekulve, Carroll, Granger) who pitched 90+ games in a season...ever.
June 14, 2006 at 04:54AM View BBCode
Originally posted by CardShark
You can't compare a pitcher that pitches 100 games in SimD to real life. In real life, if a team only went with a 5 man bullpen the whole year, there would be guys with 100 games pitched. You can't have an 11 or 12 man staff which every team does, so you are forced to have 5 in the pen. And if your good relievers are 28 or older, you can't have depth.
This is not true. It's only been in the last fifteen years that teams have gone totally away from 10-man pitching staffs, and even back then there were only a handful of pitchers (Marshall, Tekulve, Carroll, Granger) who pitched 90+ games in a season...ever.
CardShark
In the 50s, 60s & 70s, teams used 4 man rotations. So a 10 man staff equaled 6 relievers, not 5 like in SimD.
In the 50s, 60, & 70s, starters pitched deeper into games and didn't get shelled if they got tired (for whatever reason). In SimD, a B endurance starter can't pitch into the 7th inning on a regular basis, he'll get bombed if he does. If I set my preferences to anything other than "the instant they become tired," my starters get ripped in the late innings. And having it on "the instant they become tired" means they come out in the 6th or 7th inning, much like MLB today.
The fact is, in MLB if teams had a 10 man staff and a 5 man rotation, relievers would be appearing in 90+ games on a regular basis just like they do in SimD - Because endurance nowdays in MLB mimics endurance in SimD allowing about 6 effective innings from your starter. This is the reason teams DON'T have 10 man staffs in MLB - So guys wont have to pitch in 90+ games.
So the solution is: When a pitcher gets tired, he shouldn't lose as much effectiveness as he currently does. This way starters will be able to go a little deeper like they did in the 50s & 60s. Or, keep the endurance as is but allow 11 or 12 man staffs so we'll have pitchers who aren't tired in the late innings to prevent these 9th inning explosions.
June 14, 2006 at 05:35AM View BBCode
Maybe I didn't clarify, but here's the point I'm trying to make:In the 50s, 60s & 70s, teams used 4 man rotations. So a 10 man staff equaled 6 relievers, not 5 like in SimD.
In the 50s, 60, & 70s, starters pitched deeper into games and didn't get shelled if they got tired (for whatever reason). In SimD, a B endurance starter can't pitch into the 7th inning on a regular basis, he'll get bombed if he does. If I set my preferences to anything other than "the instant they become tired," my starters get ripped in the late innings. And having it on "the instant they become tired" means they come out in the 6th or 7th inning, much like MLB today.
The fact is, in MLB if teams had a 10 man staff and a 5 man rotation, relievers would be appearing in 90+ games on a regular basis just like they do in SimD - Because endurance nowdays in MLB mimics endurance in SimD allowing about 6 effective innings from your starter. This is the reason teams DON'T have 10 man staffs in MLB - So guys wont have to pitch in 90+ games.
So the solution is: When a pitcher gets tired, he shouldn't lose as much effectiveness as he currently does. This way starters will be able to go a little deeper like they did in the 50s & 60s. Or, keep the endurance as is but allow 11 or 12 man staffs so we'll have pitchers who aren't tired in the late innings to prevent these 9th inning explosions.
barterer2002
Now, you want us to believe that we have to use our rotations like major league baseball does today and pull the pitchers in the sixth/seventh inning range and that forces us to have relievers pitching 100 games etc. Its simply not true. My experience is that the teams that have a pitcher going 100+ games also have another pitcher going 15-20. It isn't that the first pitcher needs to pitch so much its a matter that the team overuses him because there is no fear of injury.
June 14, 2006 at 12:55PM View BBCode
CardShark I think you're way off base here. I've never had my settings for "pull the instant he gets tired" I find it foolish and unrealistic and my teams consistently pitch 15-40 Complete Games depending on how good the team is (the better teams have more complete games).Now, you want us to believe that we have to use our rotations like major league baseball does today and pull the pitchers in the sixth/seventh inning range and that forces us to have relievers pitching 100 games etc. Its simply not true. My experience is that the teams that have a pitcher going 100+ games also have another pitcher going 15-20. It isn't that the first pitcher needs to pitch so much its a matter that the team overuses him because there is no fear of injury.
lvnwrth
Teams in the 1950's definitely used a 4-man rotation. That was not so much true in the 1960's, and pretty much untrue in the 1970's.
You do make a good point about starting pitchers pitching deeper into games. That's one of the disconnects I see in SD. We have starters who suffer pretty significant late-inning degradation if they are used like a SP of the 1950's, 60's or 70's...but we are constrained by a bullpen composed as though it were 1950s-1970s.
June 14, 2006 at 02:53PM View BBCode
Originally posted by CardShark
Maybe I didn't clarify, but here's the point I'm trying to make:
In the 50s, 60s & 70s, teams used 4 man rotations. So a 10 man staff equaled 6 relievers, not 5 like in SimD.
In the 50's, 60's & 70s, starters pitched deeper into games ....
Teams in the 1950's definitely used a 4-man rotation. That was not so much true in the 1960's, and pretty much untrue in the 1970's.
You do make a good point about starting pitchers pitching deeper into games. That's one of the disconnects I see in SD. We have starters who suffer pretty significant late-inning degradation if they are used like a SP of the 1950's, 60's or 70's...but we are constrained by a bullpen composed as though it were 1950s-1970s.
lvnwrth
Marshall pitched in over 700 games; he pitched till he was 38; he threw 90+ games 3 times; the year he retired his ERA was 2.61. Tough to say that overuse burned him up.
Tekulve pitched in 1050 games; he pitched till he was 42; he pitched 90+ games 3 times and 85 another time; only his final season was poor, and as pointed out, he was 42.
Granger pitched in 451 games; he was pretty much done at 30, but even so, his last two seasons he had ERA of 3.65 and 3.66. His career might have been longer, but who knows. The guy didn't exactly have the classic pitcher's build - 6'2, 165 pounds.
Brower followed his season of 89 games with a season of 69. He was older when he did it, and its still a little soon to know if the 89 burned him out.
Eichhorn followed his season of 89 games with seasons of 60-70-65-54 and pitched effectively. Tough to say he was damaged by the 89 game season.
Kline followed his season of 89 games with seasons of 66-78-67-67, and is still an effective pitcher.
Quantrill followed his 89 game season with 50 games and didn't pitch well. But he was also 36 years old. Who's to say for sure if it was arm fatigue, or just age taking its toll?
Tavarez pitched 89 games at age 24. He's had 8 solid seasons since, working as both a starter and a reliever. No apparent damage to him, despite doing it at an early age.
Of the guys you mention:
It seems that Runyan was damaged from his 88 game stint.
Zimmerman had seasons of 65, 65, 66 and then his career ended. I'd just call this bad luck, not pitcher abuse. 65 games a year is not overuse.
Villareal pitched 86 games at 21 years of age and was clearly damanged.
Gagne pitched 77-77-70 before he got hurt. Hard to say which one of those seasons "blew his arm out", since the 2nd season was better than the first, and the third was comparable to the other two. Are you going to argue cumulative effect now, too?
There just doesn't seem to be a whole lot of evidence that throwing 90 games hurts a guy that much. Of the eight guys that have thrown 89+ games, only Brower (and possibly Quantrill, if you dismiss age) appears to have been really adversely impacted by the experience.
June 14, 2006 at 03:27PM View BBCode
On the topic of overuse and injuries:Marshall pitched in over 700 games; he pitched till he was 38; he threw 90+ games 3 times; the year he retired his ERA was 2.61. Tough to say that overuse burned him up.
Tekulve pitched in 1050 games; he pitched till he was 42; he pitched 90+ games 3 times and 85 another time; only his final season was poor, and as pointed out, he was 42.
Granger pitched in 451 games; he was pretty much done at 30, but even so, his last two seasons he had ERA of 3.65 and 3.66. His career might have been longer, but who knows. The guy didn't exactly have the classic pitcher's build - 6'2, 165 pounds.
Brower followed his season of 89 games with a season of 69. He was older when he did it, and its still a little soon to know if the 89 burned him out.
Eichhorn followed his season of 89 games with seasons of 60-70-65-54 and pitched effectively. Tough to say he was damaged by the 89 game season.
Kline followed his season of 89 games with seasons of 66-78-67-67, and is still an effective pitcher.
Quantrill followed his 89 game season with 50 games and didn't pitch well. But he was also 36 years old. Who's to say for sure if it was arm fatigue, or just age taking its toll?
Tavarez pitched 89 games at age 24. He's had 8 solid seasons since, working as both a starter and a reliever. No apparent damage to him, despite doing it at an early age.
Of the guys you mention:
It seems that Runyan was damaged from his 88 game stint.
Zimmerman had seasons of 65, 65, 66 and then his career ended. I'd just call this bad luck, not pitcher abuse. 65 games a year is not overuse.
Villareal pitched 86 games at 21 years of age and was clearly damanged.
Gagne pitched 77-77-70 before he got hurt. Hard to say which one of those seasons "blew his arm out", since the 2nd season was better than the first, and the third was comparable to the other two. Are you going to argue cumulative effect now, too?
There just doesn't seem to be a whole lot of evidence that throwing 90 games hurts a guy that much. Of the eight guys that have thrown 89+ games, only Brower (and possibly Quantrill, if you dismiss age) appears to have been really adversely impacted by the experience.
tm4559
i just don't see this with my teams as a rule, not on teams with reasonably good bullpens
http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=23282&year=1969
http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&year=1978&teamid=17472&sort=pstats_ip
http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&year=1988&teamid=30160&sort=pstats_ip
is the way those three pitching staffs were used not normal? i will say this much, i don't use the closer for every opportunity, if the pitcher has a shutout, then he tries to finish it himself. bringing in the closer in every situation is great for the stat padders, but it does put him out there in the yellow more than he should be.
i try to use the pen when they're really needed. why bring in relievers when the starters can finish the game. that is supposed to be their job, right? there is nothing out of the ordinary about the settings for those teams either, they are set to let the starters give up five, six runs or so. the relievers are on a fairly short leash when they do come in.
now, on teams with irregular pens, with some good, some bad, sure:
http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&year=2003&teamid=1507&sort=pstats_ip
and of course, the data is bound to be getting skewed by people still using pens where the settings are off, they are still married to the idea that pitchers must pitch often and pitch a lot to improve, which they don't need to with the soft cap anyway, just show up every three four days, pitch to a few batters, get 35-40 chances. but pitching staffs like this are bound to be distoring this data, we all know they are out there all over the place:
http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&year=2021&teamid=22448&sort=pstats_ip
[Edited on 6-14-2006 by tm4559]
June 14, 2006 at 04:39PM View BBCode
Originally posted by lvnwrth
Regardless of the underlying problem, this problem still persists: If you use your SD bullpen like a normal MLB team uses its bullpen, your relievers are gonna get creamed on a regular basis, and your closer is going to blow a bunch of saves.
i just don't see this with my teams as a rule, not on teams with reasonably good bullpens
http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&teamid=23282&year=1969
http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&year=1978&teamid=17472&sort=pstats_ip
http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&year=1988&teamid=30160&sort=pstats_ip
is the way those three pitching staffs were used not normal? i will say this much, i don't use the closer for every opportunity, if the pitcher has a shutout, then he tries to finish it himself. bringing in the closer in every situation is great for the stat padders, but it does put him out there in the yellow more than he should be.
i try to use the pen when they're really needed. why bring in relievers when the starters can finish the game. that is supposed to be their job, right? there is nothing out of the ordinary about the settings for those teams either, they are set to let the starters give up five, six runs or so. the relievers are on a fairly short leash when they do come in.
now, on teams with irregular pens, with some good, some bad, sure:
http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&year=2003&teamid=1507&sort=pstats_ip
and of course, the data is bound to be getting skewed by people still using pens where the settings are off, they are still married to the idea that pitchers must pitch often and pitch a lot to improve, which they don't need to with the soft cap anyway, just show up every three four days, pitch to a few batters, get 35-40 chances. but pitching staffs like this are bound to be distoring this data, we all know they are out there all over the place:
http://www.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?mode=pitcher&year=2021&teamid=22448&sort=pstats_ip
[Edited on 6-14-2006 by tm4559]