- Posts: 930
- Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 11:14 am
- Location: Dodge City, KS
Outta Leftfield wrote:I think it's possible to overspend on the bullpen at 80M. And that means less money for everything else.
One recent team of mine at the 80M level won 101 games with Narleski (1.85 M), an R3, and LaPalme (1.77 M), also an R3, as my two main relievers. I had a 5 man rotation. My other two pure relievers were a .56M guy and a .5 M guy.
My total bullpen expenditure was 4.68M, or just under 6% of my overall 80M budget. And the results weren't bad. Narleski pitched 182.2 innings and LaPalme pitched 93.2 innings. They combined for a 21-11 W/L and 39-22 saves. The two cheapo relievers combined for 69.1 innings, a 3-1 W/L and 3-1 saves. I got a few relief stints out of SP/RP starters.
The rest of the money on this 101 win team went into starting pitching and offense. My hitters scored 1065 runs--which they couldn't have done if I'd lavished money on a bullpen where the #3 & #4 guys pitched just a few innings. My run differential was +250.
https://365.strat-o-matic.com/team/1533409
Notice that Outta Leftfield's total pitching was just under $28 million.....If you had to replace one of his cheapo relievers with a Burke or other super reliever....and still kept total pitching under $32 million you could experience consistent success.