Better yet, look at Bruce Bennett's appearances and innings pitched between the one season I used him as a closer (S17) and the subsequent seasons he played for me as a Setup A.

FYI . . . S17 was the last season I used a closer in HBD, after I had "seen the light".

Another example: Zach Reddick

23

NY1

ML

52

0

0

6

4

31

33

50.2

33

9

9

0

16

51

.183

.253

.206

0.97

1.60

That's a pretty sexy stat line right there for Reddick, you didn't lose much with him out there

Burnsy, for the sake of comparison can you post who you were using as a closer or whatever in seasons 27-28 and also could you post which player you were using as setup in season 23?

Thanks-

Same question for MikeT re: Simpson pls and ty

I don't use closers.    I had three SuA.  12 pitchers got a save.

Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Rafael Arias  66 appearances
Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Frank Jones  40 appearances

In this game (which is vastly different from real life MLB; if you need me to explain how people behave differently from 0's and 1's, you have other issues), you're better off WITHOUT a closer.  As has been mentioned many times, HBD players have a set number of pitches that they can throw through the year while remaining effective and not fatiguing.  Why limit your "best" pitchers to situations that may NEVER arise (aka, "save" situations)?

[In this game (which is vastly different from real life MLB]

That statement right there kind of takes the wind out of my sails, because this game is fun and addicting but it's...not realistic.

[Why limit your "best" pitchers to situations that may NEVER arise (aka, "save" situations)?]

Indeed, your 5 "best" pitchers should be your starters, you want them to go the whole game, so why limit your 6th pitcher, your "best" remaining pitcher on any given day, to a situation that may never arise aka his appearance in the 7th. Your statement proves my point, doesn't it? If the starter isn't tired yet and is still effective, don't take him out. If that starter does happen to get into a key jam near his fatigue point, you want a fireman to bail him out for the .1 or .2 at the end of that inning + whatever the fireman was already intended to give you after that. So hence the post title of the 1.1 inning save, the .1 is the jam in the previous inning and the 1.0 is what he was scheduled to give you anyways. Similarly for setups, you want to plan for them to pitch the 7th and 8th or whatever but you also would want the ability to have him get that key .1 BEFORE that- at the end of the 6th. For relievers only, the algoritmic logic for this SIM needs to be re-designed to work backwards not forwards. That makes sense, right?  Are there any developers still around?

^^ thx Mike.

Posted by pjfoster13 on 1/24/2014 1:20:00 PM (view original):

23

NY1

ML

52

0

0

6

4

31

33

50.2

33

9

9

0

16

51

.183

.253

.206

0.97

1.60

That's a pretty sexy stat line right there for Reddick, you didn't lose much with him out there

Burnsy, for the sake of comparison can you post who you were using as a closer or whatever in seasons 27-28 and also could you post which player you were using as setup in season 23?

Thanks-

I'm Cincinnati - I'm the one who got 100 innings out of him and didn't waste innings designating him as "closer."

If you have a really good relief pitcher (much better than his brethren), set him to SETUP A and make him available from the 7th inning on.  Make all your other relievers SETUP B with a pull rating of 4 or 5.  You'll get the most high leverage situations with those settings.  Of course, your ****** relievers might pitch some late innings due to fatigue, but that's the risk.

[ and didn't waste innings ]

^^ it can be proven mathematically that innings within the subset of 100 that he got were wasted. I need you to think about this harder. Even if his outings all began as jams in 1-run leads, you extended your leads a definable (or at least estimatable) percentage of the time, and in all of those instances where that actually happened, the outs in subsequent innings became more meaningless and therefore his "innings pitched" statistic becomes as useless as how you view the "save" statistic. Again, why is that the case? "Math." You're killing me burnsy, I shouldn't have to beat this point to death. You say my concept of saves is useless and I say your concept of innings pitched is useless and in a sense we're each right and we're each wrong, so it's like whatever, let's all just try to learn. You teach me about HBD and I'll teach you about MLB and we can all agree to complain about our favorite real-life-team's manager because they are all basically dumber than us, regardless.

Ok hold on a second, I like this -

If you have a really good relief pitcher (much better than his brethren), set him to SETUP A and make him available from the 7th inning on. Make all your other relievers SETUP B with a pull rating of 4 or 5. You'll get the most high leverage situations with those settings. Of course, your ****** relievers might pitch some late innings due to fatigue, but that's the risk.

I think we're onto something here... I think we could re-write the logic for the programmers right here and now. Give me a few minutes to type this up...

Basing upon the idea that "bullpen logic needs to work backwards", there is an inherent flaw in the "A" vs "B" logic. 

On HBD, the "A" pitchers are starting the innings that we set them available for, and the "B" pitchers are also starting the innings we set them for but in less "crucial" situations. 

What actually needs to happen is that the "A"s need to be used to pitch out of jams at the end of innings we set them for (or 1 inning before we set them), and the "B"'s need to begin the innings we set them for.

The reason for this is that a B pitcher should always be sent out when the bases are empty, even if the game is 1-run.  The reason for this logic is because the only risk, in the moment, is a solo home run. the B pitcher may indeed have a higher risk of the solo home run but it's not much higher than the A and if it happens, it happens. 

Any out the B pitcher gets with 0 men on base is a free out that your fireman/closer does not have to get.  The B bases-empty outs are "free money" that saves the better relievers.

However, if the B pitcher starts allowing baserunners, he needs to get yanked at the right time. My logic would be - 1 run lead: 1 baserunner (call bullpen 5). 2 run game: 2 baserunners (call bullpen 4), 3 run game: 2 baserunners (call bullpen 4), 3 run game: 3 baserunners (call bullpen 5), 4 run lead, 3 baserunners (call bullpen 4), etc. The number of outs in that inning could also be factored in.  1-run lead+1-baserunner+0-outs would be judged differently than 1-run lead+1-baserunner+2-outs, in the latter logic you could probably still leave the B pitcher in for 1 more batter and see what happens.

The B pitchers can get people out, not as effectively of course but often enough where the risk is still appropriately low.

The A pitchers should be re-defined to fit fireman purposes where they always come in to pitch out of jams instead of starting with the bases empty, and the "setupA" could also double as the de facto "CloserB", and the actual closer B designation should be eliminated completely as an option. That way you could still use your setupA to get those pesky 3-run-lead saves that you didn't necessarily need to use the closer on because they're kind of hokey. You would use your setupA as the 7th/8th inning fireman and you would use the CloserA in the same fashion as setupA, but as an 8th/9th inning guy.

Also, you could make a "call bullpen- 6" instance like leadoff triple, intentional walk in a 1-run or tie game and you need a strikeout and a double play... so where it skips right from setup B to closer even if it was non-9th inning

Under that configuration you could use your best reliever as a closer like you're supposed to according to maths and use your 2nd best reliever as a fireman... kind of a compromise regarding our conversation in the thread.

That page would simply be assigning the names of the players' roles rather than setting (...guessing) their optimal pitch counts and yank settings.