2/7/2013 12:39 PM
I have no proof of this, however, it seems to me that when a player(especially a pitcher) sits on the bench for multiple days at 100% and then comes in he always seems to perform better than his usual self.  Coincidence or has anyone seen anything to believe that there is some kind of rest factor built in?
2/7/2013 12:48 PM
I think what you're talking about is coincidence.  But a player at 100% will perform, over time, better than an equal player at 75%.
2/7/2013 12:49 PM
Coincidence. 

We have been told over and over and over that there is no rust/rest/streak/etc. factors built into the game; that all results are purely from ratings.
2/7/2013 2:04 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 2/7/2013 12:49:00 PM (view original):
Coincidence. 

We have been told over and over and over that there is no rust/rest/streak/etc. factors built into the game; that all results are purely from ratings.
Pretty much what I thought.  It just seems like it happens way to often for it to be coincidence.
2/7/2013 2:21 PM
Minor disagreement with tec.

A number of people have observed that when a pitcher is at 100% (rather than, say, 81(100)) on the day before he starts, his fatigue number dips less far after a similar length start; that is, all 100% are not equal with regard to fatigue.  Assuming that in-game fatigue works the same way as post-game fatigue, a pitcher who is rested one extra day will perform somewhat better on average, due to less in-game fatigue, than a pitcher who pitches on the first day he achieves 100%.

The reason it's a minor disagreement is that I haven't noticed that a pitcher who has had a long rest fatigues less than a pitcher who has just had a single off-day at 100%.  So I don't really think long rest helps.  But I feel certain that there are wide ranges of fatigue that all show up as 100%. 
2/7/2013 2:35 PM
I check all my teams at least 3 times a day and usually move pitchers up in the rotation if they are at 100% by the time they start.  Usually get some starters to start 34 to 35 times depending on the team.   Just wondering if I might be hurting my team more than helping. 

That fifth starter I brought in today sure performed well(6 shutout innings) after resting since 2/2 AM.

2/7/2013 2:42 PM
Posted by dedelman on 2/7/2013 2:21:00 PM (view original):
Minor disagreement with tec.

A number of people have observed that when a pitcher is at 100% (rather than, say, 81(100)) on the day before he starts, his fatigue number dips less far after a similar length start; that is, all 100% are not equal with regard to fatigue.  Assuming that in-game fatigue works the same way as post-game fatigue, a pitcher who is rested one extra day will perform somewhat better on average, due to less in-game fatigue, than a pitcher who pitches on the first day he achieves 100%.

The reason it's a minor disagreement is that I haven't noticed that a pitcher who has had a long rest fatigues less than a pitcher who has just had a single off-day at 100%.  So I don't really think long rest helps.  But I feel certain that there are wide ranges of fatigue that all show up as 100%. 
OK, I agree with that.  In fact, I've been saying for a long time that all 100%s are not equal regarding fatigue for pitchers.  However, whether in-game fatigue actually exists is debatable.  One would assume that it should be programmed into the game, but I don't think it's ever been conclusively confirmed or acknowledged that it is by ADMIN.

As to a long rested pitcher (multiple days at 100%) fatiguing less than a short rested pitcher (i.e., one day at 100%), I can definitely confirm that as true.  I tracked pitchers and fatigue patterns a couple of years ago for one of my minor league teams, did some crazy things with their pitching patterns, and got some pretty good data.  There does seem to be a maximum number of days of rest where you get no more benefit from additional days of rest.  I documented that it a thread, I'll see if I can find it.

2/7/2013 2:58 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 2/7/2013 2:42:00 PM (view original):
Posted by dedelman on 2/7/2013 2:21:00 PM (view original):
Minor disagreement with tec.

A number of people have observed that when a pitcher is at 100% (rather than, say, 81(100)) on the day before he starts, his fatigue number dips less far after a similar length start; that is, all 100% are not equal with regard to fatigue.  Assuming that in-game fatigue works the same way as post-game fatigue, a pitcher who is rested one extra day will perform somewhat better on average, due to less in-game fatigue, than a pitcher who pitches on the first day he achieves 100%.

The reason it's a minor disagreement is that I haven't noticed that a pitcher who has had a long rest fatigues less than a pitcher who has just had a single off-day at 100%.  So I don't really think long rest helps.  But I feel certain that there are wide ranges of fatigue that all show up as 100%. 
OK, I agree with that.  In fact, I've been saying for a long time that all 100%s are not equal regarding fatigue for pitchers.  However, whether in-game fatigue actually exists is debatable.  One would assume that it should be programmed into the game, but I don't think it's ever been conclusively confirmed or acknowledged that it is by ADMIN.

As to a long rested pitcher (multiple days at 100%) fatiguing less than a short rested pitcher (i.e., one day at 100%), I can definitely confirm that as true.  I tracked pitchers and fatigue patterns a couple of years ago for one of my minor league teams, did some crazy things with their pitching patterns, and got some pretty good data.  There does seem to be a maximum number of days of rest where you get no more benefit from additional days of rest.  I documented that it a thread, I'll see if I can find it.

Found it.  Middle of page 9 of this thread is where I start to present and explain some of my data.
2/7/2013 3:19 PM
That was an interesting read, thanks.  May change what I do with a grossly underperforming pitcher... I was resting them for a large number of games based entirely upon superstition.  I may rest them for 2-3 days past 100% and see if that affects performance at all.
2/7/2013 9:04 PM
This makes sense since in real life a well rested player will perform better than the pitcher who is in a three or four man rotation or is overpitched and not resting properly.  Although back in the day players pitched 300 innings with no problem. Not sure if the system takes this into configuration but I am guessing the guy with better durability should do slightly better not 100% rested than a low durability guy.
2/7/2013 10:11 PM
I remember something in a dev chat about pitchers having a "pool" of innings, and once they use them up, their effectiveness drops off.  Anyone else remember this?  I didn't take the time to search for it, but I don't think I'm making it up.

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.