POLL - Super-Reliever Usage

[rburgh]

Two things about the super reliever strategy.

1. If you're using it, and I can't run your $4 million starter out of the game before the 6th, shame on me. Most teams at $100 million or more will do that a high percentage of the time.

2. If you're spending that kind of money for a relief ace at $80 million or less, I applaud you. But I personally can't see it.

As PKB or someone noted above, getting those guys to pitch more than 200 innings is very difficult. There is a fine line between starters who are so bad as to consistently need relief and starters who are so bad you are in a hole so deep when they leave the game that you can't catch up. I have personally never achieved this "nirvana," and don't really want to expend the credits to try to find it.

This is a baseball simulation, loosely based on real life players and their single season performances. If some no-talent wonder had a magical year based ona small number of appearances (Dale Murray, Gates Brown, Milt May, etc.), God bless him. If they put that year's card in this game, and you draft it and DON'T figure out how to maximize its usage within the parameters of the (flawed) game engine, then my opinion is that you're nuts.

If you're heavily into "realistic performances," play the single season games. If you still have problems with overusage of guys who had very few appearances, there are plenty of outside leagues (see the SOM site) where appearances are limited.

I hope that Bernie makes that an option for league creators. I suspect that, if he does so, very few of the current ATG players will join them.

Why?

Because you'll have to have a 400+ AB C to go along with Milt May, or maybe (horrors!) you'll have to carry three significant catchers.

Because you'll only be able to nurse about 30 starts out of Pedro, and you'll have to set him on MAX 7 IP to do even that. That also goes for most of the modern day starters. You'll have to actually USE your 5th starter now and then.

Because you'll have to have real starters in Fulton, and probably about 500 quality relief innings, in order to be competitive. And that will take away your opportunity to try to set a runs scored record.

Because guys with 601 (AB+BB) will be less than 1% more valuable than guys with 599 (AB+BB), instead of the current 7% or so.

My guess is that there would be a huge divide between guys who play appearance limited leagues and guys who play under the current rules.

And.

If Bernie WERE to implement some sort of system where relievers just became perpetually F0 when they used up their innings, either (a) it would be predictable, and there would be a strategy of "draft Sutter, use him up, replace him with Radatz, use him up, replace him with ....", or (b) it would be unpredictable, and people would go through the roof about yet another unpredictable hidden game engine code.

So the problem would not really go away, except that, by the time the playoffs rolled around, that team would have a less than stellar bullpen. It would still be a viable strategy, though. And, what would you recommend be done about playoff innings? There would be huge, and heated, debates about THAT.

Sorry to ramble along, but there is no easy (and certainly no universally acceptable) answer to this issue.

My vote - laissez les bon temps roulez. If you can beat me with a super reliever, come on. If I'm unwilling to change to a better strategy, shame on me.

[Casey89]

The [i:41d4354971]basic[/i:41d4354971] problem here is [b:41d4354971]pitchers rarely get injured[/b:41d4354971]. In real life, pitchers are far more susceptible to both nagging injuries that cause them lose a start or two, and serious season-ending injuries. Pitching puts an unnatural strain on the throwing arm, and too much stress will cause it to break down. We all know that.

However, in this game there is no "injury factor" per se except for days rest allowed between starts and a standard 1/108 chance of an injury roll when facing only one of the nine batters, an almost microscopic probability of injury IMO.

The problem would be solved if pitchers had an injury roll on their cards, just like the batters do. (Manny Ramirez might play 162 games, but it's very unlikely). Relief pitchers should have a 3 or 4 injury chance. Use them sparingly like in real life, and you're probably OK. But try to get 250-300 innings out of a R3 reliever, and he's bound to get injured and miss many games.

[The Last Druid]

It would be cool if there was a way to increase pitcher injury probability as a function of overuse.

Problem is that in real life it might not manifest in the single season we deal with. I always think of Norris, Keough etc. when this issue comes up. They were fine the year Martin overused them but after that...

[supertyphoon]

I sometimes wish there was a way on this forum to vote "thumbs up" on comments I like and "thumbs down" on the ones I disagree with.

[geekor]

[quote:81a6e0e055="rburgh"]Two things about the super reliever strategy.

1. If you're using it, and I can't run your $4 million starter out of the game before the 6th, shame on me. Most teams at $100 million or more will do that a high percentage of the time.

2. If you're spending that kind of money for a relief ace at $80 million or less, I applaud you. But I personally can't see it.

As PKB or someone noted above, getting those guys to pitch more than 200 innings is very difficult. There is a fine line between starters who are so bad as to consistently need relief and starters who are so bad you are in a hole so deep when they leave the game that you can't catch up. I have personally never achieved this "nirvana," and don't really want to expend the credits to try to find it.

This is a baseball simulation, loosely based on real life players and their single season performances. If some no-talent wonder had a magical year based ona small number of appearances (Dale Murray, Gates Brown, Milt May, etc.), God bless him. If they put that year's card in this game, and you draft it and DON'T figure out how to maximize its usage within the parameters of the (flawed) game engine, then my opinion is that you're nuts.

If you're heavily into "realistic performances," play the single season games. If you still have problems with overusage of guys who had very few appearances, there are plenty of outside leagues (see the SOM site) where appearances are limited.

I hope that Bernie makes that an option for league creators. I suspect that, if he does so, very few of the current ATG players will join them.

Why?

Because you'll have to have a 400+ AB C to go along with Milt May, or maybe (horrors!) you'll have to carry three significant catchers.

Because you'll only be able to nurse about 30 starts out of Pedro, and you'll have to set him on MAX 7 IP to do even that. That also goes for most of the modern day starters. You'll have to actually USE your 5th starter now and then.

Because you'll have to have real starters in Fulton, and probably about 500 quality relief innings, in order to be competitive. And that will take away your opportunity to try to set a runs scored record.

Because guys with 601 (AB+BB) will be less than 1% more valuable than guys with 599 (AB+BB), instead of the current 7% or so.

My guess is that there would be a huge divide between guys who play appearance limited leagues and guys who play under the current rules.

And.

If Bernie WERE to implement some sort of system where relievers just became perpetually F0 when they used up their innings, either (a) it would be predictable, and there would be a strategy of "draft Sutter, use him up, replace him with Radatz, use him up, replace him with ....", or (b) it would be unpredictable, and people would go through the roof about yet another unpredictable hidden game engine code.

So the problem would not really go away, except that, by the time the playoffs rolled around, that team would have a less than stellar bullpen. It would still be a viable strategy, though. And, what would you recommend be done about playoff innings? There would be huge, and heated, debates about THAT.

Sorry to ramble along, but there is no easy (and certainly no universally acceptable) answer to this issue.

My vote - laissez les bon temps roulez. If you can beat me with a super reliever, come on. If I'm unwilling to change to a better strategy, shame on me.[/quote:81a6e0e055]

Actually the reason it won't be implemented is the pricing. You would essentially need to reprice the entire set based on usage, which in turn would (programming wise) basically make it an entire different set (as different as 2010 and ATG). On top of creating different rules.

But it would satisfy the purists not sure how much play it would get however.

[The Last Druid]

:!: By consensus we could agree that this means thumbs up

and :?: means thumbs down

[macnole]

[quote:067a5ae7bf="nevdully's"]I'm with Roosky here.

So it isn't the very unrealistic amount of innings an rp pitches that make some people think its cheating...its just the cost of the rp....Funny ask almost everyone here which players far outperform their price and you'll get plenty from all...No complaint there though... No complaints when Max Lainer pitches 5X his actual card or when B. Tincup throws 6X his card ..No cries of cheating there huh...no cries of unrealistic performance there ....Just a Hall of Records with teams that stole almost 700 bases, hit 500 hrs, drove in 1600 runs....individuals that hit 100 hrs, drove in 250, scored 250... Cheaters all of them...Some of you crack me up.[/quote:067a5ae7bf]

I don't think this matters, as I agree with rburgh, but Nev I have to use your "just because it's allowed by the rules doesn't mean you should do it!"

What kind of society is this? {insert a touching story about my kid and the lessons I learned}
:D

All in good fun--I agree there are so many other things that are intrinsic to the game and we can't rip this one away without tearing the fiber of so many other things we've found to be acceptable within the realm of SOM-O.

I would love to be able to do an AB/IP limited tourney style deal, but that's really a whole different game, and not just about relievers.

[Stormcrow2012]

I read and agreed with a lot of interesting posts. I think if there are people who want realistic usage out of their Strat-O-Matic players they should make a theme league out of it. But then like someone said, the pricing would be all wrong. Unless you did a usage theme with the live draft function.

[PotKettleBlack]

[quote:904de0cab9="Petrosian"]It would be cool if there was a way to increase pitcher injury probability as a function of overuse.

Problem is that in real life it might not manifest in the single season we deal with. I always think of Norris, Keough etc. when this issue comes up. They were fine the year Martin overused them but after that...[/quote:904de0cab9]

Mike Marshall.
1973 - 179 IP.
1974 - 208
1975 - 109 with an extra run of ERA.
1976 - 99 with an extra .75 run of ERA
1977 - 41
1978 - 99 IP back to quality
79 - 142
80 - 32 and an ERA over 6

Perpetual Pedro Feliciano is an interesting case as well.
Got into over half of the Mets games in 08 (86g - 36 on zero rest) 09 (88 g ) and 10 (92g!). Fewer innings than appearances.
2011 - Shelved by the Yankees.