Why would you want to do this?  So you can bring the starter back earlier?   That's not very realistic. 

No, Mike. I want it because it is more realistic, as manager's will often not overwork a SP when a game is out of reach. See Cliff Lee vs. the Yankees on Monday.

Didn't Cliff lee go 8 on Monday night?  How is that relevant?

Posted by tecwrg on 10/21/2010 3:47:00 PM (view original):
Didn't Cliff lee go 8 on Monday night?  How is that relevant?

Cliff Lee went 8, but hadn't yet hit what would have been his make-believe target pitch count. Ron Washington indicated that he was going out there for the ninth inning had the game remained close. It was only when Texas scored 6 in the top of the 9th to turn it into a blowout that Cliff Lee was pulled prior to that make-believe target pitch count. 

I would just like to have that same sort of option available here in HBD. For the sake of realism.

He actually did go 8 against the Yankees.  Isn't 8 innings a lot for a starting pitcher?  

I looked it up!!!   Cliff Lee started 28 games this season.   He pitched 212 innings.   That's an average of 7.5 innings per game.   He actually pitched more on Monday than he averaged over the entire season.   That cokehead overworked Lee on Monday.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/21/2010 4:00:00 PM (view original):
He actually did go 8 against the Yankees.  Isn't 8 innings a lot for a starting pitcher?  

I looked it up!!!   Cliff Lee started 28 games this season.   He pitched 212 innings.   That's an average of 7.5 innings per game.   He actually pitched more on Monday than he averaged over the entire season.   That cokehead overworked Lee on Monday.

Usage and pitch counts change during the post-season. 

In this instance, Lee was expected to and prepared to pitch further in the game. It became unnecessary because the game became a blowout. He was then pulled because there was no need for him to go further into the game. That is precisely what is being advocated here. 

If you have nothing constructive to add to the thread, I invite you to take your personal attacks against Ron Washington - and anyone else for that matter - elsewhere.

The pitch counts are largely the determining factor in when/why pitchers are pulled from games when his team is winning.   What doesn't happen is exactly what you're asking for.    Had the Rangers been up 8-0 in the 5th, Lee would not have been pulled to start the 6th if his PC was at 47.   He was going to be sent out there until he reached whatever his pre-determined PC was and possibly beyond that if the situation dictated. 

MLB managers do not pull their SP because his team is winning big.    Your suggestion is rife for abuse and I know, as I'm sure WifS will, why anyone would want to do this.

Now, if you want your suggestion as an 8th inning default, I really wouldn't object to loudly.   But we both know that's not really what you want.  You want him out of there in the 5th-6th so he can come back at 100% after 3 days instead of 4.   I move my best pitchers around too.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/21/2010 4:26:00 PM (view original):
The pitch counts are largely the determining factor in when/why pitchers are pulled from games when his team is winning.   What doesn't happen is exactly what you're asking for.    Had the Rangers been up 8-0 in the 5th, Lee would not have been pulled to start the 6th if his PC was at 47.   He was going to be sent out there until he reached whatever his pre-determined PC was and possibly beyond that if the situation dictated. 

MLB managers do not pull their SP because his team is winning big.    Your suggestion is rife for abuse and I know, as I'm sure WifS will, why anyone would want to do this.

This is precisely where it comes down to the manager's judgment.

You're correct, Ron Washington almost certainly wouldn't pull him after 5 with an 8-0 lead, just because of what *could* happen with the Yankee offense and how badly he'd be skewered in the media if the Ranger pen blew the game. 

But what if it's 8-0 after 7? Or 8-0 after 6? Or 15-0 after 5? That's where the sliding scale (as with defensive replacements) is most useful. For my part, I've actually largely gotten away from using true stud SP, so it wouldn't impact me too much in that respect. I do, however, have some low health guys that start and I'd like to avoid injury to them whenever possible.

That, as much as anything, is what I'd use this option for. My 40-health pitcher is going to get hurt eventually on his own, but I sure would hate to see that happen in the 7th inning of a 9-0 game.

You're assuming that he's more likely to be injured on his 90th pitch than he is on his 50th pitch.   Do you have any tangible proof that this is true?  Or would it just be a "feel good" moment for you if he was injured in the 6th inning of a 3-2 game as opposed to the 6th inning of a 9-0 game?

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/21/2010 4:45:00 PM (view original):
You're assuming that he's more likely to be injured on his 90th pitch than he is on his 50th pitch.   Do you have any tangible proof that this is true?  Or would it just be a "feel good" moment for you if he was injured in the 6th inning of a 3-2 game as opposed to the 6th inning of a 9-0 game?

I am of the belief - and no, no tangible proof - that a player is more likely to get injured the more fatigued he is. I know for certain that there is in-game fatigue and that he is more fatigued on his 90th pitch than on his 50th, so I believe that he is more likely to get injured on his 90th pitch than his 50th.

Even if - for the sake of discussion because I think you agree with me that he's more likely to get injured on pitch 90 than 50 - the likelihood of injury remains the same regardless of fatigue, I am very willing to sacrifice IP from my low health starter in blowouts if it means he is more likely to be healthy for the post-season.

Put it this way, if he throws every 5th day for me and logs 100 pitches every time, he has a X% chance of being injured at some point in the season. If he throws every 5th day and logs 100 pitches 4 times out of 5, but only has to be called on for 75 pitches that 5th time, his chance of being injured is something less than X%.

Some managers, myself included, might value that reduced likelihood of injury. If you're not one of them, you'd be free to leave the "remove pitcher if up X runs in X inning" box unchecked, just like with player rest or defensive replacements.

Again, I'd abuse it in the same manner you hope to "use" it.    I want my ace out of the game when the game is "decided" because I want to bring him back early.  If I can get 38 starts from my ace instead of 35, that's better for me. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/21/2010 4:59:00 PM (view original):
Again, I'd abuse it in the same manner you hope to "use" it.    I want my ace out of the game when the game is "decided" because I want to bring him back early.  If I can get 38 starts from my ace instead of 35, that's better for me. 

OK, so my use would be legitimate in your mind. Fine.

Let me ask you a question regarding your "abuse" - 

Do you believe that a pitcher is just "off" some games? That a highly rated pitcher randomly has games where the engine just decides he is not going to be effective?

I look at the game as a game with a 600-sided dice(or whatever).    A good hitter is going to have positive results on 200 sides(or whatever).   Now, if you roll 600 times, it's unlikely that you get exactly 200 positive results.   But you'll always have a 1 in 3 chance of it.   An average hitter is going to have 150 positive sides.  Thus his chances of a positive result is 1 in 4.

Not sure if that answers your question.