Back to Boards

Pitcher stamina" old vs modern


Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

I just had an idea that, if it isn't too hard to implement, I think would improve the sim by adding layers of strategy and value to players currently not being valued.

First, the issue:

By forcing all SP into a 5-man rotation and having stamina based on (my guess) (IP/G)*17.5, you end up being able to get roughly the same amount of total innings out of 2000 Pedro Martinez, 1965 Sandy Koufax and 1913 Walter Johnson- about 240 or so IP in 32 GS.

IRL though, Pedro threw 217 IP, while Koufax threw 335, and Big Train 346

That is a big difference in value that older guys are losing.

The solution is to have two stamina ratings for pitchers- 1) the current in game rating of how many pitches they can throw stays the same; 2) a between game rating: how many days rest a pitcher needs after pitching. It could be calculated as (162/G)-1, rounded up.

2000 Pedro= (162/29)-1=4.58; so, 2000 Pedro can throw 131 pitches per start, but he needs 5 days rest after each start, which means if you get him you may need to carry 6 SP

1965 Koufax= (162/43)-1= 2.76; Koufax can throw 136 pitches per start, but only needs 3 days rest between starts. That means he could potentially be in a 4-man rotation

This will also trickle down to RP

Right now, Edwin Diaz (who IRL had 73 IP in 723 G) has a 23 stamina and can throw 85 games and 120 IP, while 1974 Mike Marshall (who threw 208 IP in 106 G) has a 34 stamina and will throw maybe 150 IP in 85 games

Under the proposed system, Diaz would need to rest after every appearance (making 82 games his max), while Marshall would be able to throw 2 games in a row before resting (giving him a 108 game max).

The result should be about 100 IP of difference you can get out of Marshall vs Diaz instead of the current 30 IP. Again, guys like Marshall are now valuable.

A wider variety of pitchers are valuable, a wider array of strategies become usable, AND all the stats are already in the game and easily available for users.

Thoughts?

Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

Great idea. These guys have been undervalued for a long time. Even if not as effective,they eat innings,rest the other pitchers,prevent injuries and make the whole staff better

Re: Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

Interesting concept,,, I could see this possibly being an option for custom leagues.... I think it would create an awful lot of confusion and issues in auto leagues... it makes some sense for RPs for sure, but we're already suspending our disbelief by mixing players from different eras... Sandy Koufax and Big Train are already among the most dominant players on PC, so getting to throw them every 3 days feels like a massive advantage. The site used to value total IPs more and so you used to see Joe McGinnity drafted well ahead of say Max Scherzer, and nobody really thought that felt right. Certainly Pedro Martinez could not have put up those numbers if he had pitched as many innings as Ed Walsh, but they were such different times it's hard to know *what* Pedro would have been in 1909 and what Ed Walsh would have been in 1998.

Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

Let me begin by saying that I obviously love the game as is. I want to push back a little bit on what you said, but with the caveat that maybe what I am about to point out is a feature and not a bug.

One of the things that makes PC unique among baseball sims is that it does not adjust for park or league/era context. We take the stats at face value. At first I thought this was a weakness of the sim that I would put up with because it is free. But after thousands of games, I actually see it just as a unique feature. There is something fun about taking the stats at face value and having dead ball era guys be the fastest and give up less HR, and modern guys have more Ks and more HR.

So, I agree that it "seems" wrong to value Iron Joe McGinnity over Max Scherzer.

But, taking stats at face value ALREADY creates results that don't seem right.

1931 Lefty Grove is a 9 rank in ATG and never drafted. Lefty Grove is a top 10 pitcher of all time and his 1931 season is tied for 35th best in history since 1901 as measured by WAR.

2000 Manny Ramirez is 87 rank and 93 rank offense (if you use as DH). He is always drafted and almost always starts. His OPS+ that year was an excellent 186 and he was 4.8 WAR

1959 Hank Aaron is 59 rank (75 offense) and almost never drafted and is a bench player if he is. But in 1959 Aaron had a 183 OPS+ and 8.6 WAR.

Of course, Lefty pitched in a crazy offensive era, Manny hit in a high offensive era, and Hank hit in a more pitching friendly era. When we take the stats at face value, Manny is an all time great, Hank and Lefty are not.

That does not seem anymore wrong than McGinnity having more value than Scherzer.

So, by not valuing total innings/games started more and instead forcing all SP into a 5-man rotation, you are normalizing stats just a little bit. I'm saying it is better, if we are taking stats at face value, to FULLY take them at face value. Koufax and Walter Johnson SHOULD be insanely valuable. They put up Pedro numbers but over WAY more innings.

If we want to get into "what would Pedro do in 1909", then that is a totally different sim engine that needs to adjust for era and park in some manner.

In the current sim we don't need to know what Pedro would do in 1909. We are saying all stats exist on a level playing field and we play it out. That means Pedro did what he did- put up insane numbers, but over only 29 starts.

One final point- Max would still be much more effective per game that McGinnity, so who you value more is a matter of strategy. If I can grab 5 good pitcher and build around pitching and D, I want Scherzer and Grienke, etc.

If I am building an offensively oriented team, maybe I want guys like McGinnity so I can just draft 3-4 good pitchers and then focus on offense.

In my mind, anything that increases the number of viable pathways to building a winner and broadens the number of players that have potential value, is a good thing.

Re: Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

wow what a well-stated detailed argument, kudos :)

Re: Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

You have hit upon something I have long felt was lacking in ATG. In general, I have no problem with the sim and the results are what they are. I just think it is a bummer that Lefty Grove, Bob Feller, Warren Spahn etc are not on teams, not to mention Hank Aaron, Roberto Clemente, Al Kaline etc.

My theory was that maybe we needed a new league that was a little more selective about who was included. There are a lot of players that only had one great season that are on all rosters. I have thought maybe if we eliminated those players then these other players would slide up the rankings and wind up on more rosters.

Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

You’re right… My point was Max’s stats are actually better than McGinnity’s so I think the sim was “fixed” to appreciate that better. But I guess that is irrelevant to this discussion.

I’d have to chew on this for a bit. I think you’d be introducing something that could have potentially disastrous impacts and create more aggravation than benefit. Not to say I am dismissing this entirely because I’ve long been thinking about changing the rules around pitching (or at least offering it as an option).

First let’s establish we’re mainly talking about ATG leagues here. Other leagues don’t really have this issue. But let’s just focus on the “how many days rest” does a pitcher need discussion. If you start treating deadball pitchers as players who need little rest, you’re effectively cutting the field of pitchers down dramatically. You’re also cutting out the need for a full 5 man rotation which removes strategy, the need to manage your depth, the need to prioritize pitchers in the draft, etc. there are a lot of impacts to this sort of change. It was intentional to force a modern day 5 man rotation in the leagues.

The Lefty Grove / Bob Feller discussion is legit and a different issue entirely. This discussion is purely about stamina between appearances.

The other possible unintended impact is that offense already suffers in ATG leagues. The overall league BA is much lower than other leagues. Once Koufax and Mathewson and Johnson etc can pitch more often, you’re going to have a league with such little offense I wonder if anyone would find it compelling.

I think there could be ways to make pitcher value more interesting, such as penalties if a pitchers goes over his appearances, or starting to allow any pitcher to play any role, so SPs in the bullpen or RPs opening. Then suddenly a mid-rank dead baller becomes quite intriguing as an RP who could eat innings.



Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

Whether we agree with josh or not, he has done a lot of research on this. Kudos to him and Guy!

Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

Yes let me be clear I always love Josh’s input and ideas! I only push back on things when I know from experience there could be impacts we’re not completely thinking through.

Re: Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

that was a really nice read. felt like i was browsing fangraphs for a second. well done mr bonds!

Re: Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

Judge Chamberlain Haller : Mr. Gambini?

Vinny Gambini : Yes, sir?

Judge Chamberlain Haller : That is a lucid, intelligent, well thought-out objection.

Vinny Gambini : Thank you, Your Honor.

Judge Chamberlain Haller : [firm tone] Overruled.

Re: Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

Thanks Guy,

You raise some really important points about unintended consequences.

I used to play Whatifsports baseball a long time ago and I remember dead ball guys like John Clarkson being on 2-man rotations. That was ridiculous and had to be fixed.

Luckily, the really egregious stuff is before 1901 and you smartly limit ATG to 1901. If you used (162/G)-1 for days rest between starts, there are no pitchers since 1901 that could go in a 2-man rotation. There are only 7 pitchers (and 10 seasons) since 1901 that could go in a 3-man rotation, and only 3 of those seasons (Mathewson, Walsh, Chesboro) have WHIPs under 1.

So, really you would be giving owners the chance to have a 4 or 5 man rotation. Since many of the best pitchers would need a 5 or even 6 man rotation, having good pitching would still require mostly 5 man rotations (unless a 4 man was a specific strategy, in which case you are trading off some per inning efficiency for durability).

For instance, I have an ATG team I just drafted where the rotation is

2000 Pedro
1965 Koufax
1986 Mike Scott
1980 JR Richard
1972 Roger Nelson

A strong rotation, but not atypical given an early round emphasis on it and Koufax as keeper. Under my proposed system they would need the following days of rest/be able to make the following number of starts

2000 Pedro: 5/27
1965 Koufax: 3/41
1986 Mike Scott: 4/32
1980 Richard: 9/16
1972 Nelson: 4/32

So, I only have 148 starts and would need a spot starter, or trade JR's awesome stats for a more durable starter. Of course, you could also set a minimum as a 4 days rest and let Pedro and JR make 32 starts. Then I can set Koufax at 1 and get 41 starts out of him and limit the rest to about 30.

The worst case you get is a rotation of 1904 Chesbro, 1908 Walsh, and 1908 Mathewson. But that rotation is not going to dominate as Walsh is the only elite starter.

I do agree with your worry about suppressing offense though, and that may make it not worth it in the end. Maybe RP appearances could work though without throwing things off too much.

Thanks for considering and the conversation. Wonderful game and wonderful owner/webmaster!

Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

All jokes aside, I also see value in considering Josh's idea, and I'm glad that (as always) Guy considers things and weighs options.

Here is an additional point I'd like you to consider. If you limited this to ONLY guys who pitched over 310 IP, (or whatever arbitrary number you chose that limited how many got "4 day status"), there would be no ability to corner the market on them. You might get 1, but no way would you get 4.

Therefore, having SOME guys who can go every 4th day would not eliminate the need for a 5 man rotation, it would just allow the sim to pitch the guys who can go every 4 days more frequently.

a normal rotation goes
1
2
3
4
5
and repeats in order until there's a day off, or something weird happens where someone goes really short in their outing, and then they are available sooner than usual.

when that happens, the sim looks at the ladder and says "when more than 1 guy is available, whoever is highest in order set by the manager pitches next" and that sorts itself out.

so with nothing unusual happening, in 16 team starts (10% of the games) the ace would NORMALLY pitch 4 times, and the other four guys 3 times each.

In this thought experiment, if you had 1 GUY who could pitch every 4th day and the rest can only go every 5th, the rotation now looks like:

1*
2
3
4
1*
5
2
3
1*
4
5
2
1*
3
4
5

In that same 16 game stretch, you'd have a case where the ace still pitched 4 times in 16 games, and the other four guys still pitched 3 times each.

But the ace gets to HIS 4th start in game 13, not game 16 as it was before. So, stretching that out over the course of the season, he would pitch more and that would be a testament to his value.

and of course, if you magically somehow had 4 of those guys, you're right that you'd get 40 starts out of each of them, and you 'd never need a 5th man... but realistically, that's not likely to happen because the market for SP would quickly shift to reflect those "4 day guys" enhanced value

SO I propise that you look at capping it at 10-15-20 guys, pick a number you like. Then you'd only be giving the "bonus starts" to guys who earned them by pitching in the real world frequently enough and effectively enough to be drafted in ATG.

Or, open it to 50 total guys, but have some of them stink compared to the rest of the pool. Then, if you want to draft bad guys who pitched 400 IP and they pitch poorly, you're free to do so.... but there would be very few guys who have BOTH durability and effective stats.

I think we should consider allowing that to reflect in the game, if feasible.

Re: Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

you guys are good. No wonder I rarely win. lol

Re: Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

A resounding yes on eliminating the SP/RP designation and just going with a P designation instead- would be cool to be able to use openers a la Tampa Bay

Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

you can do that, you just have to find SPs with really low stamina and you can pull them before pitch count...ive done this in several leagues. if a commish is creating draft classes he can even create some SPs with very low stamina

Re: Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

I will not play in leagues with fake players

Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

Or give some RP's the ability to start who have done so before with a RP/SP designation?

Re: Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

That's the perfect solution. That way,you don't get a guy who will bomb just because he didnt have the stamina in the first place. As a past or current spot starter.there is no guarantee but he a realistic chance,especially with a short start

Re: Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

I love the idea of a swing man designation

RP who started a few games, but also SP who also pitched out of the bullpen (like Allie Reynolds on Casey’s Yankees)

Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

Right . Should work both ways but only for those who have experience doing that

Re: Re: Pitcher stamina" old vs modern

Even better,let any starter work out of the pen. I remember Randy Johnson offering to do that in the World Series after he had already started 3 games. Would also work well with tired pen or injuries. Depending on how rested the starter is or is not,he could work a short time or long relief