Bullpen management: notes from the CD-ROM

[RICHARDMILTER]

apolivka said:[quote:65888f84a9]The strictly assigned "roles" that many managers love to cling to for their bullpens these day, in my opinion, cost teams quite a few wins. What really irks me is putting in the closer when being up by 3 in the 9th with the bottom of the order coming up. Pretty much anyone in the bullpen can probably "save" that game. Then the next game the score is tied in the 8th and you've got 2-3-4 coming up, but the closer never comes in!!! In many games the 7th or 8th could be much more important than the 9th, but the rigidly assigned bullpen roles can't be tampered with...

Come on managers. A manager's "role" is to win games, not to get saves for his closer. Drives me nuts. The save is one of the most overrated stats in baseball. Luckily in simulations, we don't have to worry about contracts with bonuses for saves.[/quote:65888f84a9]


I could not agree more with this whole post. You are right on the money. It is maddening how stupid real MLB managers can be sometimes.

[coyote303]

[quote:392cc041e9="rmilter"]apolivka said:[quote:392cc041e9]The strictly assigned "roles" that many managers love to cling to for their bullpens these day, in my opinion, cost teams quite a few wins. What really irks me is putting in the closer when being up by 3 in the 9th with the bottom of the order coming up. Pretty much anyone in the bullpen can probably "save" that game. Then the next game the score is tied in the 8th and you've got 2-3-4 coming up, but the closer never comes in!!! In many games the 7th or 8th could be much more important than the 9th, but the rigidly assigned bullpen roles can't be tampered with...

Come on managers. A manager's "role" is to win games, not to get saves for his closer. Drives me nuts. The save is one of the most overrated stats in baseball. Luckily in simulations, we don't have to worry about contracts with bonuses for saves.[/quote:392cc041e9]


I could not agree more with this whole post. You are right on the money. It is maddening how stupid real MLB managers can be sometimes.[/quote:392cc041e9]


I agree.

Even the media is hooked on this new mentality though. Franklin Morales came in the 9th inning last night and got his second career save for the Rockies (Huston Street, their regular closer, is hurt). The commentators were saying how transitioning to closer (from setup man) was even harder than when Franklin transitioned from starter to the bullpen.

Somehow, I just don't believe pitching the 9th inning instead of the 8th inning is harder than going from starting to relieving.

[CHARLESBELL]

Now that I am playing my first team with the v2 bullpen rules I have a couple of questions about setting up my closers/set up as described here.

What isn't really clear to me is whether you just used the settings or a combination of settings and roles.

If I understand this correctly, here is how Nathan and Hoffman would be set up under the v2 bullpen roles:

Nathan
Check slow hook and <6 inning
Set roles as both closer and setup for both L/R

Hoffman
Check slow hook, <8 inning
Set roles as both closer and setup for both L/R


Lastly, I understand that by placing Hoffman's roles below those of Nathan that Hoffman won't be used if Nathan is available.

However, I'm not sure how you set Hoffman to only be used in "tight games." What roles are used to do that?

thanks, great read!

[pwhitsel]

Good point, Charliewb. It would help a lot of us out to specify which roles are defined to maximize the closers. I know I spent a lot of money on a strong pen in 2008 and I'm getting more IP out of my middle men than on Papelbon and Geary. I'd like to maximize their use, especially Papelbon, to make sure I have a stronger advantage in the late game situations. If one of our researchers could put their findings into HAL Super Bullpen 2.0 terms that would be awesome.

Thanks guys!

[MARCPELLETIER]

Hi Charlie,

Sorry, your question went under the radar, but basically, yes I had all the settings that you declined in your post.

But in addition, I had Nathan first in "middle inning" (which is the go-to reliever between the 1st and 6th inning), so that, in interaction with "don't come before the 6th", he can come in for the 6th inning.

Also, by having Hoffman in "tight games", I meant not using him other than set-up, closer, tied games.

[artie4121]

Greetings All,

I'm a relative newbie here. I've been struggling through my first season, and had SOME good fortune, but what I do NOT know about TSN SOM could fill a book.

Reading this thread, and using Nathan and Hoffman as examples, as they are both R1/C6 closers, how far could they survive from the 6th to 9th innings if they are brought in early? Isn't this asking for trouble extending them beyond their fatigue levels? OR, as I see implied here, does "success breed endurance?"

I've had good luck using a 4-man team of F9 relievers for an inning or two at the most, but if they someone with a C1 or C2 disposes of 6 of 7 batters in two innings, can they be used for a third or fourth inning without fear of them melting down from fatigue?

Thoughts?

Thanks,

Artie

[Mean Dean]

It sounds from what you wrote like you understand how it works, but just to be safe, I'll break it down anyway.

In SOM terms, a "closer situation" can only occur in the 9th inning (or later). When it becomes a SOM "closer situation", the number of outs that the pitcher has already recorded is subtracted from his closer rating. This is why a C6 can safely come in to start the 8th inning. He records three outs in the 8th. The game becomes a closer situation in the 9th. The three outs he previously recorded are then subtracted from his C6, making him C3. That still leaves him three outs to get through the 9th, meaning that he should be able to close the game out with very little fear of tiring. (He would have to throw a lot of pitches and/or give up a lot of runs in the 9th -- i.e., pitch lousy -- in order to tire in this scenario.)

If the C6 closer comes in to start the 7th inning, then once it gets to the 9th inning, [i:84c41193cf]six[/i:84c41193cf] outs will be subtracted from his C6, making him C0. He will thus be in danger of tiring as soon as he gives up a hit or walk. It's true that if he simply never gives up the hit/walk, then it never becomes an issue. So yes, "success breeds endurance", in that sense. And it's also true that just because the pitcher gets fatigued doesn't necessarily mean that he can't finish up the game -- a fatigued superstar might well still be better than a fresh scrub. Overall, I think we would still have to be talking about a really, really great reliever. (Or a distinct lack of other decent options.)

Notwithstanding closer rules, a reliever also becomes fatigued after he goes two innings over his fatigue rating. So if the closer is in fact R1, you're gonna have a problem bringing him into the 6th. He will automatically tire after completing the 8th. Again, there are situations where a tired closer is still better than the other options you've got. But probably not all that many.

Of course, you will want to consider future games as well. A R1 is not really meant to have 3+ IP outings, and the computer will want to rest him afterwards. If you do it in one game, you might be costing yourself in the next game; if you do it a couple of games straight, you might be costing yourself for longer than that.

[ergie63]

[quote:a23b51bc9b]A R1 is not really meant to have 3+ IP outings, and the computer will want to rest him afterwards. If you do it in one game, you might be costing yourself in the next game; if you do it a couple of games straight, you might be costing yourself for longer than that.[/quote:a23b51bc9b]

Interesting. Is this something HAL calculates during a game? "(sigh) I guess I won't use Grant today 'cuz he pitched yesterday." My relief pitchers always start out at F9. Is there something else going on?

The reason I ask...

I have a situation where 2008 Balfour is getting pounded mercilessly. I'm trying to figure out if its something I'm doing wrong. I use him as the go to person after the starter peters out. There is no correlation between rest days and blow ups.

After 103 samples off his card he is giving up nearly double the number of walks expected and after 138 samples off hitters cards they are creating about 12 runs/27 outs which is like facing an entire line up of $8,000,000 hitters. Contrast this number to my starters who face hitters capable of only about 7 runs/27 outs off their cards. One would expect this number to be fairly consistent across all pitchers of the same arm R/L in the long run.

Of these 241 samples, 207 have been at F9 level. There is only slightly worse aggregate performance at levels F8 or below.

It could be random clumpiness, but the sample size is getting large enough where its starting to seem like Balfour is suffering some kind of fatigue related penalty. If so, it is not indicated by the F levels on the box score. Yet the quoted remark about carryover fatigue would seem to indicate otherwise. If so, what's the secret to make the suffering stop?

[Mean Dean]

I don't think that explains your situation, no. If the guy would be tired when he comes in, the computer tries not to bring him in at all; that's what I was alluding to. And if HAL does have to bring him in tired, then, well, he'd be tired. Looks like Balfour is just pitching like total crap...