Pitch Counts

[Clay Dreslough]

2. I noticed a good number of pitchers averaged over 100 Pitches/GS (Livan Hernandez was around 120 Pitches/GS). I think you mentioned that a pitcher's endurance roughly equals the number of pitches he can throw before getting tired. I assume END tops out at 100. Just wondering what your stance on this is?

Great question. In early versions, Endurance was just meant to be a rating from 1-100, like a grade you might get in school.

But as I started playing around with pitch counts, I realized it also ended up being the right number of pitches for a pitcher to START to get tired.

That doesn't mean that if Livan has a 90 End you should pull him after pitch #90. It just means that on an average day, that's when he'll begin to get tired.

We know that starting pitchers are less effective (as measured by batting average, OPS, you name it) the 3rd time through a batting order. We're not sure whether this is because of fatigue or because the batter "adjusts" or "learns". But the underlying cause doesn't really matter. What matters is that the numbers show the even starters that average 120 pitches tend to be less effective about 2/3 of the way through their outing.

In Baseball Mogul, we model this by having the pitcher BEGIN to lose velocity, movement and control around the pitch count equal to his Endurance number. Just like the player aging curve, this deterioration happens SLOWLY at first and then accelerates. So, for example, if a pitcher has an Endurance of 85, he will start to lose some effectiveness (control and velocity and movement) around pitch number 85.

(This will happen sooner if he was already tired coming in, and it might happen later if he's having a great day on the mound).

As you can see from the attached graph, the decline at first is small. If it's the 6th inning and your middle reliever isn't great, it's a no-brainer to leave the starter in. It might be another 30 pitches before the starter's effectiveness is worse than the guy you bring in from the pen.

There are other factors, like lefty-righty matchups, and trying to protect your pitcher's arm (the articles on 'Pitcher Abuse Points' at Baseball Prospectus have some good research here). But in general, your starter can be your most effective option even after his pitch count has surpassed his Endurance rating. It's just a useful rule of thumb that once his pitch count gets up there, you should keep an eye out for signs of fatigue.

Clay

[disposablehero]

some of those same BP articles also confirm what i was stating in another thread about 4-man rotations, ie. they are doable and theoretically better for the team's W/L record.

having this 100 pitch count nonsense in MLB is a pet peeve of mine. there has been no study that ive read that says 100 is the magic number, yet managers adhere to it like its the first of the Ten Commandments

im glad to see this isnt the way BM goes about it *tip hat*

[Rongar]

If it's the 6th inning and your middle reliever isn't great, it's a no-brainer to leave the starter in.
Clay

On the contrary, Clay, I submit that there is plenty of food for thought on this strategy. I, for one, seldom or never allow my starter to go beyond the
fifth inning, for the following reasons

1) If ahead, at the time, he's the winner of record, good for my morale, if not his....I prefer my openers to have the wins, if possible, leaving the saves and low E.R.A.s to the firemen

2) In a tight game, if I know my business as a gm, there are always pitchers other than my not-great middle-reliever, available in the pen that I can rely on to relieve for one or more innings - I never hesitate to give an inning to another starter, since one inning doesn't affect his fatigue factor i.e. he doesn't require any rest days after that single inning.

3) In a lopsided game, I seize the opportunity to see what my untried, or underused pitchers can do...one never knows when a gem will sparkle

4) The minimum of five innings, ensures that my good starters are available, sooner than if I let them go beyond that i.e. they'd need only 3 rest days, instead of four or more, should I allow them to soldier on in the current game.

I must admit that I could let my starter go six innings - he'd still incur only 3 rest days, but I do like to "audition" other pitchers, as in para 3, above

5) My starters never throw tissy fits at being so abruptly yanked - after all, they're only icons!

[Rongar]

[QUOTE=disposablehero;544006]some of those same BP articles also confirm what i was stating in another thread about 4-man rotations, ie. they are doable and theoretically better for the team's W/L record.

I'd be very interested to read what you have written, Hero...would you please point me toward your post?

[RickD]

I look at pitch counts for guys and once they hit 100 + as long as my team is ahead by a bit I may leave him in but in a close game 100 and you are gone for a reliever.

[ohms_law]

Actually, I tend to agree (for somewhat different pitcher use reasons, but still). The game does somewhat force you to use limited variants of the standard pitching rotation.

Clay was working on a "modern closer use" briefly, during beta. I'm not sure where that work stands right now, but that'll be a good start. More control over pitcher user strategies in general would be a very welcome addition to the game.

[disposablehero]

some of those same BP articles also confirm what i was stating in another thread about 4-man rotations, ie. they are doable and theoretically better for the team's W/L record.

I'd be very interested to read what you have written, Hero...would you please point me toward your post?

i dont remember the exact thread, but its a pet peeve of mine so im sure it was along the lines of....

most #5-#7 pitchers suck pretty bad, so it would be better to go with your 4 best and have extra arms in the pen to pick up the slack. this way you get more innings from your best pitchers (~20-30+ from each of them), rely more on your pen (where rate stats are typically better), and use less $ in payroll (relievers cheaper than starters).

from studies ive read, there is very little, if any, extra risk to the pitcher's arm and some claims that its even better for them to go every 4th and cut out a bullpen/long toss session.

[boomboom]

i dont remember the exact thread, but its a pet peeve of mine so im sure it was along the lines of....

most #5-#7 pitchers suck pretty bad, so it would be better to go with your 4 best and have extra arms in the pen to pick up the slack. this way you get more innings from your best pitchers (~20-30+ from each of them), rely more on your pen (where rate stats are typically better), and use less $ in payroll (relievers cheaper than starters).

from studies ive read, there is very little, if any, extra risk to the pitcher's arm and some claims that its even better for them to go every 4th and cut out a bullpen/long toss session.

This is all explained in detail in Baseball Between the Numbers by Basebal Prospectus.

[Rongar]

most #5-#7 pitchers suck pretty bad, so it would be better to go with your 4 best and have extra arms in the pen to pick up the slack.
.

Hero, if we're talking about BM pitching, I can't agree with your opening statement (re #5 - #7), nor your subsequent advice (go with 4 best)

That said, I find myself practising what you preach.

I believe in cultivating half a dozen starters as insurance against injury (BM, it seems to me, from my own experience, and reading of other Members' woes, seems to have it in for top starters, putting lots of 'em on DL for the longest time); using my (non-sucking) #5; #6; and#7; in relief; besides having a class hurler or two to flog at season's end, thus solving some financial problems, and not least, the sheer pleasure of having that much talent in the pen.

As the season wears on, however, especially if my team is still in the race, I find myself chickening out and going for the best (fully rested) starter available...sometimes leading to a three man rotation!

[boomboom]

Hero, if we're talking about BM pitching, I can't agree with your opening statement (re #5 - #7), nor your subsequent advice (go with 4 best)

That said, I find myself practising what you preach.

I believe in cultivating half a dozen starters as insurance against injury (BM, it seems to me, from my own experience, and reading of other Members' woes, seems to have it in for top starters, putting lots of 'em on DL for the longest time); using my (non-sucking) #5; #6; and#7; in relief; besides having a class hurler or two to flog at season's end, thus solving some financial problems, and not least, the sheer pleasure of having that much talent in the pen.

As the season wears on, however, especially if my team is still in the race, I find myself chickening out and going for the best (fully rested) starter available...sometimes leading to a three man rotation!

Hey pick up this book (click here)

I believe he is talking about real life. Which Mogul should emulate. It would be a lot wiser to start 4 starters instead of 5.

The difference in statistics between 4 starters and 5 is minimal. Going back the past 15 seasons. It is something like a .262 OBAVG on 4 days rest, verses .266 OBAVG on 3 days....

Plus your 4 best starters start instead of you pitching the 5 starter who not up the caliber of your top 4 starters. The 5th starter basically takes away, 8 starts from your ace and #2.

[disposablehero]

Hero, if we're talking about BM pitching, I can't agree with your opening statement (re #5 - #7), nor your subsequent advice (go with 4 best)...

yea, not talking about BM. if i were, id go with 11 SP and no MR/CL

[ScorpioPrimus]

I tend to keep an eye on pitch counts, especially for relievers, as they tend to blow up within 5-10 pitches of passing their endurance level. However, there are other factors as well
If the starter's on top of his game and pitching effectively in spite of the pitch count, I will keep him in, and try for the complete game. Randy Johnson routinely has 150-pitch games for me, and I think one game he passed 200 pitches.
If the starter's over his pitch count but he's scheduled to bat in the next inning, I may try to carry him through the inning & avoid burning an extra pitcher or resorting to a double-switch, especially if my bullpen is battered.

As far as the rotation, I tend to use the five man rotation in the modern era. As I play it, a lot of the starters break down if you use a four-man rotation (they do anyway, but not as much). Usually my rotation consists of two stoppers under contract, two young starters at minimum, and occasionally a workhorse pitcher who can go 6-7 innings in the #5 spot. Sometimes that fifth spot will go to a faded ace with (say) 290+ wins as I try to give him a chance to go for 300.
As for the bullpen, the setup man, & occasionally one or both short men are closers in training, with endurance under 25 & a K/BB+H ratio of at least 1:1. Otherwise the short men may have endurance in the 30s or low 40s, and I look at their win-loss record & ERA. The middle reliever usually has endurance between 40-55, and the long man can be a kid destined for the rotation (endurance 70+) or a rating between 50-70.

[KPLM]

I've had a lot of success with 4-man rotations, just keeping the pitch counts down. I play with no DH (in either league), and more oftern than not will pinch hit for my pitcher when he first comes up after his pitch count exceeds his endurance; or if the pitch count exceeds endurance and the pitcher gets in a jam.

That keeps them usually at 80-90 pitches per outing, and I've found it possible at that level not to have a 4-man rotation without a lot of injuries (this is with 2k7; 2k8 still has too many bugs to play seriously, and I do set injury amount/severity to -30%/-70%, and may have to make them both -70% with 2k8).

[Dwright5]

Speaking of breaking down. Does a pitcher that throws 120 pitches every 5th day with an endurance rating of 85 have a bigger chance to get injured than one who throws 75 pitches per start with the same endurance and health ratings? There should be a cumulative effect of pitches thrown, but I don't know whether it's been tested in that way. I guess you could test it running two identical seasons, pitching a starter 120 pitches per game in one season and the same guy 80 per game in the other.

[ohms_law]

Yes.

The best way to test this is to use Play -> Until playoffs multiple times, and adjust the pitcher use settings to the extremes each time through. Try it with both Start on Short Rest and Pitch Through Trouble and High Pitch Counts all the way to the right and you'll see what I mean.