In my present season in ABU, we are about 25 games from Roster Expansion. My team is leading its division by a healthy margin and battling for seeding and a first round playoff bye. on paper, my best reliver is Glenn Newfield - a stud closer with 75/80 splits, 75 control, two pitches rated 89 and 92, and a rubber arm (81 DUR, 43 STA). Despite his ratings, he started out the season awful and is presently 3-9 with 4 blown saves and a 6.33 ERA. About 35 games or so ago he went out with an injury, and coincidentally or not, right around that time my team really took off, going from a tight division battle into a battle for top seeding.

He now has 6 games left before he will recover, which would bring him back with 19 games left until rosters expand. The guy I brought up form AAA to replace him on the roster has pitched solidly, with a 3.18 ERA in 11 appearances as a Setup B. However, he has no options left which means if I were to send him back down he would have to clear waivers. I have placed him on revocable waivers and assume he will clear.

My question is this. Would you:
(A) send the callup back down and activate Newfield despite his stats? or
(B) Keep Newfied on the DL until rosters expand, and then see where everyone is when the playoffs roll around before choosing who to keep on the playoff roster? or
(C) something other idea?

Please note this is a legitimate discussion thread - if you want to post nonsense you can take that elsewhere.

Getting the 1st round bye is pretty huge, I don't even know why you would consider keeping a workhorse RP with a career 3.21 ERA on the DL for 19 games in favor of a AAAA guy.

It is a question of streaks - if my team striggled when he pitched and is red hot without him - would you wait 19 more games (not a huge length of time) just on the "luck" factor?

If you don't want any responses, why ask?

Posted by csherwood on 9/22/2010 3:26:00 PM (view original):
It is a question of streaks - if my team striggled when he pitched and is red hot without him - would you wait 19 more games (not a huge length of time) just on the "luck" factor?

Because you're more liable to get lucky with a good player on your roster than a bad one.

There's no "hot hand" in HBD, it's a pretty cut and dry computer simulation and your relief ace is miles better than the AAA guy.  The AAA guy might outperform him for short stretches, but you are decreasing your odds of a bye by keeping the worse guy on the roster.

I believe I would choose B. However, I would also see if there was a position player with options that was used very little, that way you could have your cake and eat it too.

Posted by MikeT23 on 9/22/2010 3:27:00 PM (view original):
If you don't want any responses, why ask?

Grow up, Mike. I want leigitmate responses, not your nonsense. We can play that game in another thread.

You can throw him in there with a higher pull rating.  It looks like he's walked a lot more per 9 this year than any other.  But 20% of the time he's given up 2 or more earned runs...that's bound to decrease.

And it's computer simulation, so there's likely to be some return to the mean.

Posted by moosep on 9/22/2010 3:34:00 PM (view original):
I believe I would choose B. However, I would also see if there was a position player with options that was used very little, that way you could have your cake and eat it too.

I considered this. It is another option - do I risk going with one less bench player (I am an NL team so need more pinch hitters) for those 19 games? My question really is, even if the game is numbers only and not about streaks, if you have a bad vibe when a certain player is on the roster, would you leave him off in this situation?

While I attempt to be as rational as deano, I am always tempted by situations like this, as it presents a bit of a loophole to avoid having to put anyone through waivers.

If the teams stays hot, choose (B).  If you lose 2-3 in a row before rosters expand, make the rational decision: (A).

Posted by csherwood on 9/22/2010 3:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moosep on 9/22/2010 3:34:00 PM (view original):
I believe I would choose B. However, I would also see if there was a position player with options that was used very little, that way you could have your cake and eat it too.

I considered this. It is another option - do I risk going with one less bench player (I am an NL team so need more pinch hitters) for those 19 games? My question really is, even if the game is numbers only and not about streaks, if you have a bad vibe when a certain player is on the roster, would you leave him off in this situation?

How much of a lead do you have? As far as the position player goes I usually keep 12 and 13pitchers. If you have a 1baseman, leftfielder type, they are a dime a dozen.

Posted by csherwood on 9/22/2010 3:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moosep on 9/22/2010 3:34:00 PM (view original):
I believe I would choose B. However, I would also see if there was a position player with options that was used very little, that way you could have your cake and eat it too.

I considered this. It is another option - do I risk going with one less bench player (I am an NL team so need more pinch hitters) for those 19 games? My question really is, even if the game is numbers only and not about streaks, if you have a bad vibe when a certain player is on the roster, would you leave him off in this situation?

This is a simulation game based purely on player ratings. If you are going to make your roster decisions based on anything other than the ratings, then you are being foolish. 

Posted by overeasy on 9/22/2010 3:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by csherwood on 9/22/2010 3:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moosep on 9/22/2010 3:34:00 PM (view original):
I believe I would choose B. However, I would also see if there was a position player with options that was used very little, that way you could have your cake and eat it too.

I considered this. It is another option - do I risk going with one less bench player (I am an NL team so need more pinch hitters) for those 19 games? My question really is, even if the game is numbers only and not about streaks, if you have a bad vibe when a certain player is on the roster, would you leave him off in this situation?

This is a simulation game based purely on player ratings. If you are going to make your roster decisions based on anything other than the ratings, then you are being foolish. 

I agree that it's a simulation game, and even said that there's likely to be a return to his career ERA, but at what point do you pull the plug?  Over the coarse of almost an entire season his ERA is over 6.00.  When do you make the leap from, "He should be producing better results based on his ratings." to "He's not producing...next man up."?

This is the guy.