Would anybody be willing to share their rating benchmarks for ML pitchers?

You're going to get a million answers because they work in conjunction with one another. As soon as someone says "Never use a pitcher with less than 60 control", someone will post a Cy Young winner with 52.

I've had success with 45 control, low 50s splits, and pitches in the 60s. But I've never had success with a pitcher who had all those ratings.

The other answer you're certain to get a lot of (because it's a good answer) is to look at the staffs of teams that do well in your World, because some Worlds are ptching-heavy, others pitching-light, etc. At some level, good pitching = better than the other guys in the World have.

you may find it more useful and a more answerable question to ask for coaches to rank the ratings from most important to least from what they look for - e.g. vRHP is probably very near the top of the list for most where velocity may be very low

Higher numbers are better...

I mean, seriously, why worry about benchmarks or anything, just accumulate the highest rated-players you can get. The only benchmarks I would say is that I have never seen a good ML pitcher with control under 40 (and only a couple with control under 55) or with either split under 50. I don't recall seeing a good ML pitcher without a pitch over 70, but I'm sure some exist.

a rule of thumb for me is that i like to have control, vsL and vsR and 2 pitches all over 65....

but as other posters have stressed, exceptions abound...

I like to have splits in the 90's with control above 80 as well as the first pitch 90+ and second and third pitch above 75. But thats just me.

What about velocity?

Some people don't care, others do. Higher velocity = more strikeouts. More strikeouts usually = more pitches. More pitches = less innings.

Just about any pitcher can have a great season. For example, Carlton Wolf would seem to suck, yet he posted ~140 innings of 3.8 ERA for his OKC team. Will he do it again? Unlikely...but his minor league track record suggests he might be one of those guys who out-perform his ratings and he does have a great GB/FB and he pitches mostly in OKC, which is a great ballpark....

Meanwhile, this guy in S11, Dean Bukvich posted the worst season of his entire career (even his decline years) in a decent home park with a decent defense behind him. Why? Players with outstanding ratings occasionally have terrible seasons.

This is the best non-training bug pitcher I've seen: Yamil Pulido

1) Control and splits are the most important pitching ratings.

2) 70 is a below average but playable major league rating. Pitchers that have some ratings well below that will have to have other ratings well above to compensate. So when MikeT23 says he's had success with pitchers with splits in the low 50s, it's highly likely they have very high control (at least >85), and when he says he has had success with pitchers with 45 control they probably have very high splits (~80).

I tend to "group" pitchers, and it seems that most here are saying the same thing. Obviously, a pitcher with 90 control, 85/85 splits, 3 70 plus rated pitches and high groundball/velocity, is going to be a CY young / Fireman award candidate, but assuming you're looking to see what kind of pitcher can be "salvaged", or at least made to work when you dont have an ace, this is generally my thought process.

First thing I look at is control - If you have low control (below 50), thats a red flag. Typically if their splits arent above 75, this is going to be a bad pitcher. The lower the control, the higher the splits need to be for me. Pitchers with low control and high splits tend to be either really good or really bad, and can vary from season to season, and definitely from game to game.

Next, I look at splits, vsR and then vsL. - usually, a vsR under 60 isnt going to be effective, though, Ive had a CY Young winner with 58. He did have a control in the 90s a strong y split, and he generally got lucky as hell that season. Mediocre splits with good control, tend to be reliably mediocre (instead of wildly up and down game to game/ season to season like low control, high split)

Next I look at pitch quality - This is something Im looking at more lately, Ive never really examined a pitcher with both mediocre control and splits, but had high pitch quality, though it seems to me, that 1-2 really good pitches tend to make the average pitcher good, good pitchers better, and better pitchers dominant.

For me this is a rough "rating benchmark"

below 50 - Poor

50-60 - mediocre

60-70 - average to solid

70-80 - good

80 and up - Great

1) They better have some "acceptable" pitches or control/splits won't matter.

2) 70 is an unrealistic number to expect to build a staff around. The low 50s split guys had good control/pitches. The low control guys had good splits/pitches.

As I said before, the ratings work in conjunction with one another. I don't dismiss a pitcher because he has 42 control nor do I dismiss pitchers with 51 VR or 71 as their best pitch. You have to look at the entire package he brings.

Quote: Originally Posted By drarcher on 2/05/2010I like to have splits in the 90's with control above 80 as well as the first pitch 90+ and second and third pitch above 75. But thats just me

So, everyone on your staff is a Cy Young candidate.