RP endurance ratings

Anyone know how SOM comes up with its pitcher endurance ratings? Have never been able to figure them out.

Just a few examples from a small segment of the RPs:
Joe Page R2 60 games, 135.1 IP (2.25 innings per appearance)
Joe Sambito R3 (new card) 63 games, 91.1 IP (1.45 ipa)
Junior Thompson R3 42 games, 152.1 IP (3.62 ipa)
Dick Selma R4 73 games, 134.1 IP (1.83 ipa)
Dixie Howell R5 35 games, 73.2 IP (2.09 ipa)

No pattern there that I can see. So the endurance ratings must not be based on how they pitched during that specific season. But if not that, then what?

pitcher settings both team and individual plus game situations. none of the innings pitched look out of whack to me?

These are the innings they pitched in the seasons that their cards are supposed to reflect. I don't know why Howell would be rated as an R5 when, in the season that his card is for, he only pitched an average of just over 2 innings an appearance. Thompson pitched many more innings per appearance, and he is an R3. Page pitched more innings per appearance than Howell, but somehow, based on that, he is rated as an R2. Selma pitched fewer innings per appearance than either Page or Thompson, but he is an R4.

The more I explain it, the more confused I get.

If I had to guess, I'd say its a product of different eras. 1.5 IP per appearance in say 1986 is a totally different animal then some guy averaging 3 IP per appearance in 1922

That product of a different era game is a slippery slope. Duffy hitting .440 in the 1800s is not the same as a guy hitting .440 today. When it comes to fatigue ratings for relievers it should simply be based on the stats. If a guy averaged only 2+ innings and rarely went 4 then he should not have an R4 rating.

I don't think there's any real consistency to the endurance ratings. Maybe it's partly based on eras, but if that's the case, it only applies in some instances, and not to others.

The biggest issue is with Dale Murray. Much of the value of his card is based on that R4. Other RPs are equally effective, but have shorter endurance ratings (R1 or R2, for example).

Murray pitched only 69 innings in 1974 and averaged 2.16 IP per outing. that seems like it should be R2 or R3.... R3 would be most consistent with SOMs pattern for that period with a lot of relief aces of that era who might pitch about 135 innings with a similar IP per outing.

I think R3 should be the max, but that's just me

A couple of points... Junior Thompson started 11 games that season, so you have to take that into account.

There may also have been research done by SOM around actual usage. For example, suppose relief pitcher X has three appearances. In the first one he throws 5 innings but in the next two he comes in and gets the final out in the 9th inning. So now he has 5.2 IP in 3 games. Still think he should be an R2?

Not going to go back through the White Sox box scores, but....

Let's say Howell pitched 5 innings each in 10 of his games. That means in his other 25 games (about 70 percent of his appearances), he would have averaged less than an inning each.

In that case, I wouldn't rank him as an R5.

Or maybe he pitched 5 innings each in 15 of his 35 games (still well less than half). No, that's impossible, because that would leave negative innings for his other 20 games.

Meanwhile, I don't know any formula SOM could come up with that would make Sambito an R3 when he pitched almost an inning less per appearance than Page, who is a an R2.

And if Thompson was a part-time starter, wouldn't that be another reason to rank him as more than an R3? Or maybe give him a starter rating?

I still think someone at SOM headquarters just pulls these numbers out of a magic hat.

For example, suppose relief pitcher X has three appearances. In the first one he throws 5 innings but in the next two he comes in and gets the final out in the 9th inning. So now he has 5.2 IP in 3 games. Still think he should be an R2?

A good point but let's adjust it a bit. Suppose pitcher x has six appearances of 4 to 6 innings and follows that with 57 where he does not go at least 4. He actually has 45 games where he goes 2 innings or less. That is 71%. Still think he is an R4? Seems more reasonable to say he is an R3 and managed to stretch a handful of games out finishing up fatigued because there was nobody left rested to come in. Remember that R4 does not mean he gets tired in his 4th inning. By rules of the board game he only becomes eligible to get tired once he gives up the required number of hits/walks. Given how good that card is he could easily stretch out a small percentage of games beyond his point of weakness inning.

Though to be honest I would not have a huge problem with Murray getting the R4 if they just enforced a rule that said he needed to be rested for a game or more after pitching 4+ innings. Or if he does come in before he rests sufficient games he came in tired.

Consider:
Went 3 innings on May 9. Faced 3 hitters next day giving up 2 hits and an earned run. Fatigued? That was May 10. He did not pitch again for Montreal until June 18, more than 3 weeks later. injured or sent down to Memphis because he was tired and needed some time off.

He was not used for 4 innings or more again until July 13 when he went 6. That was followed by 3 days rest.

Went 4 innings on July 20 followed by a rest day.

So two solutions to his unrealistic overuse. Lowing the R4 rating or require rest after an outing relative to how many innings he pitched in previous outing.