Pitching Staff Dilemma...My Experiment

[Outta Leftfield]

Thanks for all the input, and, since I'm playing with a free season here, why not try an experiment?

The question I want to investigate is--does it make more sense to pay 2-3M for a pitcher with 2-3 good years on his card, rather than pay 5-6M for a pitcher with 3-4 good years on their card?

I wasn't too enamored of my 4 man rotation after Valenzuela, but I found I couldn't part with Fernando. So, I'm going to keep him as my anchor starting every fourth day. Perez will pitch as often as possible, and the rest of the staff, all SPs or SP/Rs, will rotate around him. For a little less money than my four man staff, I have a staff of six potential starters. I havent' changed any of the five relievers already on my staff.

Valenzuela *SP
Perez
Schmidt S/R
Swan S
Lea S
Proly S/R

This gives me six starters, all of whom have some good years. If Valenzuela bombs, I can dump him and have even more cash to play with. The straight starters will start, the S/R's will fluctuate based on need and performance. I often end up with a staff something like this anyway, so why not try starting out with one? I've got strong up the middle defense, a pitcher's park, and a lot of great hitters, so the combo could work, if I can find five pitchers who can keep me in the game.

If people are interested, I'll issue periodic reports and you can also check the team link above.
:D

[Jablowmi]

Looking at the card data example below below, I think it is somewhat clear that a non* will be priced less than an * of the same caliber. This is probably due, in large part, to the number of potential innings pitched. However, if the goal is to locate ANY good starter, then sometimes a non* would be the way to go. Also, while a 5 man rotation may sometimes cost more than a 4 man, you do not need a $0.75 Ray Burris placeholder with a 5 man - the $0.75 is used to fund your 5th starter. I have often - to varying degrees of success - used a combo of * and non-* like you've used above.

Here's some sample data. I'm probably comparing apples to oranges, but for a quick review the following list the sum of the total OB and total TB, against leftys and rightys, for Swan ($2.37) vs. B Forsch ($4.08*):

Forsch

55 55
59 59
55 67
70 59
55 74

294 314 (total = 608)

Swan

48 28
46 60
67 40
41 58
92 71

294 257 (total = 551)

If you throw out their worst years, the totals are Forsch 479 and Swan 388. Note that Forsch gives up less HRs against R (natural and BP). That being said, it seems to me that Swan's card is clearly better (the 3 best seasons arguably belong to Swan). The difficulty, of course, is that you essentially must find 2 Swans to replace one Forsch.

[YountFan]

[quote:cab9051495]The difficulty, of course, is that you essentially must find 2 Swans to replace one Forsch. [/quote:cab9051495]

Which is why I like the 4-man rotation.

[Paul5757]

[quote:e614e3607d]The difficulty, of course, is that you essentially must find 2 Swans to replace one Forsch. [/quote:e614e3607d]

This is a little bit of a misstatement when comparing 4 to 5. I think you need 1.25 Swans to replace one Forsch. You're forgetting about the other 3 or 4 starters. :D And hopefully, I'll have a ready replacement in the bp, while you're searching over a picked over FA market for another starter. (Because you usually wind up replacing at least 1 starter during the year.)

[Jablowmi]

I hear ya, YF, and I always go with 4 when I can, but I'd never forgo the opportunity to put together a 5 man staff when necessary. I often do it in a vet league where I know SPs will be in short order. You can get Pascaul, Candy or Oil Can with late selections rather than putting a higher-priced SP* in your top 7-10.

[Outta Leftfield]

[quote:05826c2ea8]And hopefully, I'll have a ready replacement in the bp, while you're searching over a picked over FA market for another starter. [/quote:05826c2ea8]

The issue of availablity had a lot to do with my series of choices and reversals (which prompted our friend 'steal third,' who is in the league, to just post me a "?????????" message because of my amazing string of roster changes.

If you recall, I started by drafting a 5-man so that I could put my hitters at the top of the draft. (This was after getting hammered in several drafts in a row.) And I got some great hitters. I figured the 5-man guys would be more available. Then the availability of Valenzuela on the free agent pool prompted me to try a four man rotation. BUT the other *SP starters I came up with were pretty lackluster group--the usual guys who are leftover after the draft, waivers and frenzy. The available SPs, including Swan (who is always worth a try, IMHO), seemed better than the available *SP. And so, with Toi San's prompting, that's why I decided to try my experiment. That question of availability is what sometimes drives me to a five man staff in desperation mid-year. All the FA *SPs have bombed out somewhere and the SPs on the table start to look pretty tempting. :D

I don't know if this experiment will work, but it seems to be worth a try. And in case some of the guys on my present staff bomb out, there are still a lot of good SPs left on the table. :D

[honestiago1]

Is if the replay #/inns. pitched mattered all the way through the season. The way it is now, you can 4-man all the way through, go through the "tired" spell that *'s have, and still get 280-300 innings out of your starters (if they all pitch for you all year long). Pitchers that actually put in 275+ innings each year were rare during the 90s. Pitchers that consistently went 250+ inns. per year, even more so.

If the fatigue factor were more pronounced, we'd ALL have to think about bringing along a spot starter. It would also make Blyleven, Morris, Fernando extremely valuable, since their IP's are uniformly high. Someone like Higuera, whom I really like, tops out at about 260 IP in one of his years, then has an injury shortened year. Imagine if that made a difference to the staff, as far as nabbing those additional IP's. I'd have to pay more attention to who my fifth starter was, rather than blow off a pick on a .75 place holder (which is what a lot of folks do).

Refresh my memory, but weren't 5-man rotations the norm during the 80s? And didn't all staffs at least toss a spot starter every now and then? That should be simulated, shouldn't it?

[LMBombers]

Another advantage of starting the season with a 5 man rotation comprised of SP and/or *SP is that if you start the season with a 4 man rotation and a .75 placeholder then you are sort of tied to a 4 man rotation throughout the year. What I mean is if one of your *SP turns out to be a bust then you are limited to other *SP free agents to pick from if you want the best pitcher in return. You have to ignore any SP free agents because you don't have a viable 5th starter to go with them. The only way to free up enough cash at this point is to downgrade a hitter or RP you already have as well and add 2 SP. If you start the season with either all SP or a mixed bag of *SP and SP then if one busts you can look to the free agents for either a SP or *SP without disrupting the rest of your roster or bypassing quality SP to find the best available *SP.

[honestiago1]

Noticed your roster moves in the league. About 40 more and you'll catch up with me (so what if I dropped and picked up the same guys three times each? It's all part of my John Kerry style of Gming.).

:)

[Outta Leftfield]

Are you the San Antonia Gila Monsters? Didn't realize it because you're using a different name as manager. I wouldn't be surprise if we're setting some kind of record for roster moves in the FA period. Fortunately we're adding and dropping a lot of the same guys. Otherwise we might push the limits of the "only 125 distinct players" rule. :D

You certainly have a stud 4-man rotation (Higuera, Key, B Smith, Drabek). I notice you haven't messed around with those guys. :wink: