Round 2 - Sounding Board Topic

In the main SLB forum I bumped up the thread on pitch allocation that has the master formula on how many pitches each pitcher gets. I think everything we are seeing is a consequence of that formula.
12/8/2011 7:58 AM
several comments. I don't believe everything is in that formula, it's just a guideline to point us in the right direction.
don't forget that drafting the minimum number of innings is a risky strategy. enjoy the benefits when it works but don't complain too much when you get caught off guard. Live by the sword, die by the sword.
theme league restrictions often have unforeseen consequences. I rarely seem to get as much stamina from lower IP pitchers as I do from regular starters. and having no mopups removes some of our cushion against fatigue.
12/8/2011 10:05 AM
Right, not everything is in the formula - that was a dumb thing to say. But I do think it is a big part of it. You get more pitches from high K pitched. Of course, they also use more pitches. But I don't think the two cancel out, so I still think you need more dead ball IP than live ball IP to get through a season.
12/8/2011 10:50 AM
So here's how I got my rule-of-thumb from above. Start with elbirdo's formula for how many pitches you get per pitcher-inning

3.406*BFIP + 3.762*BBIP + 1.964*KIP

Where BFIP (batters faced by pitcher) is WHIP+3, and BBIP is BB/9 divided by 9, KIP is K/9 divided by 9.

Let's take a typical deadball pitcher, with about 1.00 WHIP, 4 K/9 and 2 BB/9. (Compare 02 McGinity, who is used a lot in the 80M league, as an example of about this.) Such a pitcher would be allocated 3.406*4 + 3.762 * 2/9 + 1.964 * 4/9 = about 15.33 SIM pitches for every IP/162. So for every 162 SIM pitches we want thrown, we need 162/15.33 = 10.57 IP/162 from such pitchers.

So if everyone on the staff was like that, and we were cutting it super fine, we would want our staff IP/162 to be 10.57 times the number of pitches per game we expected to throw. But that wouldn't allow any slack for recent use fatigue, or getting through a game after a 16-inning slogfest, or anything else. So to be safe, I typically round up and work with about 11.

Though note how different the formula looks if we have live ball pitching. Take a good live ball pitcher, of the kind you might use in a $90M or so league. Let's say they have 1.00 WHIP, 9 K/9 and 2 BB/9. That pitcher gets 16.42 SIM pitches for every IP/162. If the staff is like that, then you only need 9.87 IP/162 for every pitch per game. And then the rule I suggested above, draft 11 IP/162 for every NP/G, seems very cautious.

Still, I think one of the biggest differences between the $80M and $90M leagues is that although people drafted similar numbers of IP/162 in the two leagues, they drafted very different number of total SIM pitches, because there were so many more strikeout pitchers being used in the $90M league. (Note that the average team has 2.5 times as many Ks in the 90M league as the 80M league.) And that's why there is so much less fatigue in the 90M league.

One thing I don't quite know though, is why the pitch counts are so low in the 90M league. It could be that we've just all been lucky, and fatigue is about to set in. But I think what's really happening is that the SIM doesn't add on as many pitches for a K as it 'should', given the formula it uses to allocate pitches to pitchers. If that's right, some of us (well, me at least) have been undervaluing high-K pitchers. That's a plausible conclusion; I almost never draft high K pitchers except in very high caps, but maybe I should have been.
12/8/2011 3:27 PM
1931 Earl Webb @60m:.209/.280/.301

1931 Earl Webb @110m: .321/.370/.459

Huh.
       
12/8/2011 6:34 PM
I've gone 8-16 since the standings were posted. I hope this wasn't a turning point.
12/11/2011 3:59 PM
A new type of cycle?

In today's pm session, I lost games 5-4, 4-3, 3-2 and 2-1. 

Sadly, it's not a complete cycle, since I won the other two games (both by 7 runs of course).
12/11/2011 4:25 PM
It's remarkable just how many 3-3 updates I've had.
12/12/2011 6:25 PM
Here's something I don't see very often...  Of my six teams, three teams have a 30-23 record and three teams have a 25-28 record...  At least we're over .500 in total. 
12/14/2011 1:45 PM
0-6 AM - Going for some more coffee...
12/16/2011 8:34 AM
My $80m team that started 2-11 has made it over .500. So that's something.
12/16/2011 1:45 PM
13-5 today 4, 4, 5 wins - needed that
12/17/2011 7:27 PM
Posted by tjefferson on 12/16/2011 1:45:00 PM (view original):
My $80m team that started 2-11 has made it over .500. So that's something.
My $90M team started out 4-18.  Since then they have gone 30-14.  Hope the it keeps up.  Maybe we could get an update on standings some point soon?
12/19/2011 12:15 AM
I just posted the standings on Saturday.
12/19/2011 6:51 AM
Guess I missed that.  Thanks schwarze!
12/19/2011 9:07 AM
◂ Prev 12345 Next ▸
Round 2 - Sounding Board Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2025 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.