Relatively new at this game, and so far my biggest problem has been identifying pitchers who can actually get people out.

I think my fielders are OK (as per another thread that was recently posted), so I think it is that I don't have a good handle on how to weigh pitching traits properly.  After looking at the statistics and ratings for various pitchers in the two leagues I'm in, it looks like the ratings in order of importance are:

1. vR
2. vL
3. Control
4. A tie between P1 and velocity

It doesn't look like GB rating or P2-P5 have real big impacts, but I am working with a relatively small sample.  Also I should point out that I've only been looking at pitchers who are in neutral or close-to-neutral parks to try to control for the ballpark factor.

Do more experienced owners agree with my rankings of the ratings I've given here?  Do you have any floors (like "control must be at least 60" that you almost never go under when assembling a pitching staff?  Any tips you can offer will be greatly appreciated!

I don't have any absolutes, but one thing I definitely think is that pitchers are a combination of all their attributes.  Obviously more control and more ground balls are better, but some pitchers can be effective with other factors which compensate for those.

Over time, when I've looked at pitchers who I thought might succeed but didn't, it looks to me like poor pitches can nullify good splits.  For that reason I now favor pitchers with good pitch values when I can.  I look for not just a good P1 but a good combination of P1-P2, and the more good pitches the better.

 

Just my opinion but but VsR is above and beyond the most important stat. I'm in the same camp Damag is, a combination of all of the stats is important.

A pitcher with control 60, VsR 70 and P1 80 P2 72 can be good.
A pitcher with control 90, VsR 78 and P1 62 P2 63 can be good.

It'll take time but I've had guys with gb 0 and velocity 10 be effective.

Pitching is complicated and possibly the hardest part of the game to understand.

For me, if VR isn't 70, I don't consider him a BL pitcher.   But, if he has P1 of 90+, that theory is garbage.

I don't mind crap control pitchers(low 40s) but most people avoid them like herpes.

If VL isn't 60+, I think he's crap.  Unless he's not because of VR and P1.   Or maybe even control.

It's just hard to have absolutes.

Agreed with Mike.  There are no absolutes.

Some rules of thumb:

1)  An outstanding set of pitches can compensate for mediocre (but not poor) splits.
2)  An outstanding set of splits can compensate for mediocre (but not especially poor) control.
3)  Nothing compensates for mediocre control, splits AND pitches.
4)  Velocity and GB/FB ratings are secondary ratings . . . use them as tiebreakers when evaluating two or more pitchers with similar control, splits and pitches.
5)  The more pitches a pitcher has, the better.  Unless a particular pitch rating falls below 30 or so.  Then, it becomes a detriment.

The only absolute I have is no control under 50. I haven't seen a pitcher yet that can overcome the under-50 control rating. And if there are examples, they are FAR and FEW between.

There are examples.   I could give one right now.

Player Profile: Humberto Rivas - Hardball Dynasty Baseball | WhatIfSports is doing a fine job on my Coop team.

Going back to point #4, I would value P1 over Velocity. I haven't heard many good things about Velocity.

Posted by sjpoker on 2/15/2016 5:43:00 AM (view original):
The only absolute I have is no control under 50. I haven't seen a pitcher yet that can overcome the under-50 control rating. And if there are examples, they are FAR and FEW between.

Once you start assigning absolute thresholds, you're starting to shoot yourself in the foot.  There is no tangible difference between a control of 50 (acceptable to you) and 49 (unacceptable to you).

Yuniesky Martin was a nice minor league reliever on my Riley team.  I left him off my 40 because I figured I'd "never" bring him up to the majors, and that "everyone" would pass over his poor control.  Obviously my competing owner has managed him properly to get good major league innings out of him.  He's my biggest Rule 5 mistake.

 

Seems like the low-control pitcher is the pitching version of the high power+high eye but low everything else batter (subject of a current thread right now). Unreliable production, but can be worth a shot in the right circumstances and management style - don't count on him, but don't count him out either..

Meh.  I'm not giving Rivas 57m for production I can't rely on.   I expect 800+ quality innings before I decide on the final 19m season.

Actually - just saying this for the sake of conversation, so if I'm wrong let me know - I just realized I kind of do have one absolute.  Just looking at a pitcher on the WW and I've never seen a pitcher with a P1 under 70 I'll take a shot on.  I bring this up because usually I've seen old pitchers who still have good splits but their pitch ratings die before their splits.  Once a guy's P1 drops below 70 - unless he's a HOF stud - I think he's kinda done.

I've run guys with P1 in the mid- to high 60s and they've been league average.  Very high control (mid-90s at least) has been the ticket.

I don't think you can be anything but a marginal ML pitcher with either split under 50.  I've run guys with VsL or even VsR in the high 40s and gotten some non-horrible innings out of them but never particularly close to league average.  If I have an absolute that's it-- I won't give important innings to a guy with a split under 50.