Archive of SportingNews.com's old SOM Baseball forum

Well, now that I have a stunning [i:f0d1478937]four months[/i:f0d1478937] of experience here and a moderate amount of success with the seven teams I've had (my four completed seasons have yielded two playoffs and one championship, and a total .511 record so far), I have to admit I am mystified by the 32% of this game they call "pitching."

I'm just now getting over a humbling, masterful defeat a few days ago by USBonds in an $80 mil. 2008 league where his Clayton Kershaw and Barry Zito beat my Danks and E. Santana in games 3 and 4, knocking my 90-win team out of the semis. I checked and could not find ONE INNING pitched in the four 2008 teams I have been in by either Kershaw or Zito. Both are under $1 and, frankly, not worthy of roster consideration in my book.

Well folks, I guess my book is wrong and I want to know why.

I've read and re-read Jeff (J-Pav's) secret formula and Luckyman and other's comments and threads that discuss throwing inexpensive pitching out there, but I can't understand how you can start pitchers with 5 or 6 or WORSE HR chances and 10 doubles, 15-20 walks and survive?

Is the subtext that [i:f0d1478937]hitting and fielding are THAT much more important than pitching?[/i:f0d1478937] It seemed that my opposing manager just picked guys from a HAT and said, "You got a glove? Two or so working limps? You'll pitch today."

And he won. Handily.

He was gracious (to boot), and modestly said that he caught me "on a bad night," but it has to be more than that.

How can a manager have the tolerance (or courage?) to take a chance on such low-end pitchers and in some cases whole STAFFS of such nickle and dime pitchers and WIN?

I'm not expecting a magic answer, but when I analyze my staff's strengths and weaknesses in certain parks, R vs. L, Home vs. Road, strong Def vs. weaker Def., etc., and spend enough ($33) on the right kind of pitching (Danks, Billingsley who wins Cy Young, Sheets, Lester, E. Santana, Lidge saved 41 and was stellar) plus Manny AND Chipper . . . and 207 Homers . . . and then to get beaten by Zito and Kershaw. (':x')

I have the greatest respect for managers who can do that.

Maybe I am being impatient with myself (I hate losing), and maybe MY method is not wrong, but I'm just envious of the "stones" that some managers have to "stretch the envelope" and field these low-end staff's and win.

My question to these guys is "How do you get away with it?" Inquiring minds want to know, dammit!

Thanks,

Artie

Can you post a link to his team and the league?

Were they spot starters he used for matchups purposes? Maybe he buried his pitching money into his relievers? Were his top 2-3 starters solid, then scrubs for 4-5?

Hard to give a good answer without checking out the rest of his team, but those are a few guesses.

You also have to remember that while there is skill involved in choosing the right players to match your stadium, etc., this is still a game of chance. Not every hitter card roll results in a hit, and not every pitcher card roll results in an out.

Thanks for replies, keyzick and Dave.

To Dave's response, I know of the luck factor, as we've actually conversed about. And patience, which I learned in that first league we played in in October where you won, as I recall, 100 games. I now hold off much longer before making moves than I did "way back then."

And keyzick, I don't want to post the other team about which I am speaking because he is still in the Championship series, and I don't want any outside factors involved at this point.

More later.

A

[quote:2036935440="Artie412"]I don't want to post the other team about which I am speaking because he is still in the Championship series, and I don't want any outside factors involved at this point.

A[/quote:2036935440]

Ahh...ok...didn't realize it was still going on

Before seeing the team in question, I'm going to guess you have a bunch of ballpark dependent hitters who have trouble hitting lefties, in a park such as PNC or similar park that is a death knell on hitters that are ballpark dependent, especially from the right side. I've never used Kershaw in 08, but both Zito and Pettite have been used with much success on some of my PNC teams. When drafting a PNC team in 08, I used to rank Pettite quite high, even if I had no plans on using him. I wanted NO part of anyone else using him on me.

Just as in real baseball, there are a million ways to win, and a million ways to lose. Most of my experiences is with the mystery card games, but I generally look for at most one dominant starter, and bargains with the rest of the staff. Over a season, the difference between (say) a 3.25 ERA guy and a 4.00 ERA guy only matters if your team is generating about 3.5 runs per game. If you have an offense that puts out 4+ runs per game, then you're wasting money if you pay through the nose for a starter who's winning 7-1 games. This is especially true if you have a competent bullpen.

Things I like spending money on: competent bullpens, on base percentage, switch hitters and right handed pitchers.

Things I do not like spending money on: middle infield offense (in the 70s game...obviously the recent years must be a different story), right handed BAL L hitters, moderately expensive starting pitching.

Thanks guys.

-- First, Jerlins guess is a split decision. I was in Rogers Center, which is totally balanced. But, I did have a 20 pt. gap vs. LHP across the slash line. But I was 22-17 vs. lefties. But what you are writing shows me that there is an obvious gap in my own education here. I like Pettite too, but he is very park dependent. Good points.

-- padrenurgle makes good points as well, and hits on my problem directly.

[quote:9e7e6adbe4]Over a season, the difference between (say) a 3.25 ERA guy and a 4.00 ERA guy only matters if your team is generating about 3.5 runs per game. If you have an offense that puts out 4+ runs per game,[i:9e7e6adbe4] then you're wasting money if you pay through the nose for a starter who's winning 7-1 games. [/i:9e7e6adbe4]This is especially true if you have a competent bullpen. [/quote:9e7e6adbe4]

I've read similar analysis by the Elite on here and the dime never really "dropped." My view has always been parochially "Good staff. Good defense. Good offense." What you are saying -- and what J-Pav, Luckyman and other have espoused seems to be "With pitching, anything more than what is [i:9e7e6adbe4][b:9e7e6adbe4]needed[/b:9e7e6adbe4][/i:9e7e6adbe4] is a waste of rosources that are needed elsewhere (offensive pop)."

(I think it was in a thread on "How much pitching do you need" or the "Secret Formula" that I read "invest in the relief pitching that you [i:9e7e6adbe4]need[/i:9e7e6adbe4].")

I also read one of the Vets here writing that his goal was (and I am paraphrasing) to "Score five runs a game and allow no more than four [i:9e7e6adbe4]and that to try and significantly increase that increment is not advisable and wasted effort.[/i:9e7e6adbe4] (I hope I'm not misquoting wrong).

Now I am beginning to understand that which I read.

The trick then ("trick" as in brain surgery being a "Trick") really is to be able to estimate just how much pitching you WILL get from the staff you picked and make sure you have an overall edge enough to win.

I guess seven teams is not enough to really figure all this out.

The more I learn, the smarter I find out YOU guys are.

Thanks for your wisdom guys.

Here is a 1999 team with only about $12mm spent on pitching that is that is on a pace to win 100 games in a division where the last place team is at .532 and is only about a dozen runs away from having the second fewest runs allowed. As you can see, the park situation and your defense can play a big part in the effectiveness of the cheapos. Almost all cheapos have a defect, but the league, the division and especially your park and defense can go a long way in increasing the effectiveness of somewhat mediocre pitchers. By the way, I was not sure if the team would be over .500 before the season. Also, you really aren't doing anything wrong if you are in the playoffs, He is right, on another day you would have hit Zito hard and you stellar staff would have held him in check.
[url]http://fantasygames.sportingnews.com/stratomatic/team/team_other.html?user_id=249965[/url]

As usual, you impress. That team does have all "1" defenders, but still . . amazingly mediocre staff from which you got terrific results.

And as for my playoff shocker, you certainly DO know what I'm talking about ;).

Good luck by the way.

Artie