Do real-life HBPs count toward PAs/injury risk?

[raslavens]

In other words, can Mauer, Edmonds, etc. who had more than 600 PAs including HBPs go down for 15 games?

[Paul_Long71]

pretty sure it's just ab + walks with hbp not included.

[The Last Druid]

They definitely don't count.

[size=24:0aa9c6a22f][color=red:0aa9c6a22f]Which is ridiculous.[/color:0aa9c6a22f][/size:0aa9c6a22f]

[rburgh]

Once again, the game is stuck with early 1960's baseball-think. Until Ron Hunt, Don Baylor, Craig Biggio, and Jason Kendall made getting hit by pitches an art form, people thought it was sort of random. A lot of that thinking comes from the beanball wars of the era, which culminated in the Marichal-Roseboro incident.

[FRANKMANSUETO]

And how HARD would it be to change the code to include HBP as part of PAs. PA Code = ABs + BBs + HBP. I could go further and add any type of sacrifice as well.

[PotKettleBlack]

Really, I'd base it on games and PA/game.

[rburgh]

It's not a question of how hard. It's a question of tradition. Plus, they'd have to reissue all previous card sets and all previous computer rosters.

I don't think it will ever happen.

Besides, they'd probably change the PA limits on the injury chart so that it only mattered for the guys who accumulate lots of extra HBP.

[The Last Druid]

Why would they have to change a single card?

[rburgh]

They'd want to change the physical cards so that the same rules applied to all card sets.

They'd have to change the computer rosters because right now they store exactly what you see on the stat display when you are browsing the cards. I don't recall that there are any vacant bytes in the card records to store more data.

And they'd want to have the computer cards the same as the printed cards.

[apolivka]

The injury risk is built into the price of the cards, so other than maybe wanting to play certain guys within a team strategy of low injury risk, what is actual benefit?

They don't include sacrifices either which is a PA without an AB. I think this is one of those things were they picked an "easy to look up" stat years ago with the table and dice game and don't see a huge reason to change it. IF they decided to change it, the number would almost undoubtedly go higher (like to 610 or something?) which would probably eliminate a bunch of the guys you are talking about, an then disqualify a bunch of guys that are already counted as "3 game injury max" and force a bunch of repricing.