Regular Season Batting Stats

Date	Opponent	%	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	BB	SO	SF	SH	HBP	SB/SBA	AVG	OBP	SLG	Box
12/24 pm	Say When	87	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0/0	.312	.347	.419	view
12/24 pm2	Managing Chaos	88	5	1	2	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0/0	.316	.350	.418	view
12/25 am	@Managing Chaos	85	5	1	1	0	0	0	1	0	1	0	0	0	0/0	.311	.343	.408	view
12/25 pm	@Heroes & Zeros	81	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0/0	.299	.330	.393	view
12/25 pm2	@Heroes & Zeros	79	4	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0/0	.297	.328	.387	view
12/26 am	@Heroes & Zeros	77	4	0	2	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0/0	.304	.333	.400	view
12/26 pm	@Scrub a dub dub	75	4	2	4	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0/0	.328	.360	.429	view
12/27 am	@Scrub a dub dub	75	4	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0/0	.317	.349	.415	view
12/27 pm	@AAA Plus One	73	5	1	1	1	0	0	1	0	1	0	0	0	0/0	.313	.343	.414	view
12/27 pm2	@AAA Plus One	70	5	4	5	0	0	3	5	1	0	0	0	0	1/1	.338	.371	.504	view
Last 10 Games		--	41	9	16	3	0	3	8	2	4	0	0	0	1/1	.390	.419	.683	--
Season Totals		--	133	22	45	5	1	5	20	7	16	0	0	0	2/3	.338	.371	.504	--

2021 Frank Schwindel

It’s a cumulative effect and given how small the numbers we’re working with are, it’s hard to see an effect in small samples, especially when you aren’t seeing the pitcher quality, pitcher fatigue, and ballpark factors alongside the hitter performance, which can each negate any impact of hitter fatigue down to the 70-80% range (or more for pitcher fatigue). Assuming a league average pitcher and ballpark his .342 AVG comes down to .274 at 80% fatigue (his average fatigue was around 78% eyeballing it). It’s not uncommon or unlikely for a .274 hitter to hit .390 over 10 games or 41 AB.

Then if it was a +1B ballpark that would bring him back to a .286, and a +2 would bring him back to a .299, a +3 to a .311, and a +4 to a .324. Then if it were a below AVG pitcher or a fatigued pitcher he might even have a better baseline than he started with despite the fatigue.

Too many factors to gauge fatigue from a 41 AB sample to be sure.

I have ‘22 Ruth in a $40m league and figured even at 70% fatigue he’d still be better than most other options at that cap. It’s also clear the fatigue hampered him even against subpar pitching. Especially in terms of HRs.

He’s still worth it at that fatigue given the league context: $40m cap, Mile High Stadium (+3 hit and +1 HR), but the fatigue clearly impacted him significantly despite/within the context.

Regular Season Batting Stats

Date	Opponent	%	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	BB	SO	SF	SH	HBP	SB/SBA	AVG	OBP	SLG	Box
12/25 am	Grand Canyon Railroaders	89	4	2	3	0	0	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0/0	.324	.408	.425	view
12/25 pm	WILL SEE!!!	88	3	2	0	0	0	0	1	3	1	0	0	1	0/0	.319	.413	.418	view
12/26 am	Hairy Wiener Dogs	89	4	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0/0	.317	.410	.414	view
12/26 pm	Hairy Wiener Dogs	88	4	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0/0	.316	.407	.411	view
12/27 am	@Humility	90	5	1	1	1	0	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0/0	.313	.403	.410	view
12/27 pm	@Humility	89	4	0	2	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0/0	.317	.404	.417	view
12/28 am	Dingers at the Dome	90	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	0/0	.312	.404	.411	view
12/28 pm	Dingers at the Dome	89	3	1	2	1	1	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	0/0	.317	.413	.429	view
12/28 pm2	Dingers at the Dome	88	4	1	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0/0	.321	.414	.431	view
12/29 pm	@Petco Slow Learners	89	5	1	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0/0	.327	.418	.435	view
Last 10 Games		--	39	9	15	3	1	0	2	8	1	0	0	1	0/0	.385	.500	.513	--
Season Totals		--	214	37	70	11	3	2	26	33	9	1	0	1	0/0	.327	.418	.435	--

1937 Gabby Hartnett

I’m in agreement that it means virtually nothing, I just don’t like the increased errors and decreased range that comes with fatigue under 95%.

yeah I would especially not recommend playing a shortstop below 95%, if you played a shortstop under 90% all year it would be a debacle

Or when I pay up for A+ range and they start making the occasional - play at 96% or lower

I'm of the mindset that fatigue in general is overblown. It *can* have a huge negative effect. But it can also be used to your advantage.

In the case of Bonds, my guess is Bonds at 80-90% is still better than any replacement that could have been used to keep bonds at 100%. There's also such a small sample size of Bonds at 100%, it's hard to know how much of the drop was due to fatigue and how much was due to other factors.

Here's a 10 game window (with full season stats as well) of a 2011 Roy Halladay who I have pitching 70-90%. 7 of these 10 starts are at home (Hilltop) and he still performs very well. I drafted my team knowing this woul happen though And planned for the fatugue

Regular Season Pitching Stats

Date	Opponent	%	IP	BFP	PC	W	L	SV	R	ER	H	HR	SO	BB	WP	ERA	OAV	WHIP	Box
12/20 pm	Bad Moon Rising	91	6.0	26	82	1	0	0	3	3	9	0	1	1	0	2.78	.263	1.19	view
12/21 pm	714	90	7.0	27	83	0	0	0	2	2	6	0	1	0	0	2.77	.261	1.18	view
12/22 pm	Toronto Orioles	90	7.0	29	89	1	0	0	2	2	7	0	3	0	0	2.76	.261	1.17	view
12/23 pm2	Fen Again 2	90	5.2	27	90	0	0	0	4	4	7	0	2	3	0	2.87	.262	1.19	view
12/24 pm2	Attaway, Gazaway	89	6.0	27	91	0	1	0	4	4	8	0	3	3	0	2.98	.264	1.21	view
12/25 pm2	@Vivity Vampires	88	5.0	25	89	1	0	0	4	4	10	0	2	1	0	3.09	.269	1.24	view
12/27 am	26999	89	7.0	29	91	1	0	0	2	1	8	0	2	0	0	3.03	.269	1.24	view
12/28 am	@WTF19	87	5.0	24	86	1	0	0	1	0	8	0	4	1	0	2.95	.272	1.25	view
12/29 am	Panama City Aardvarks	86	7.0	26	79	1	0	0	1	1	8	0	3	0	0	2.89	.273	1.25	view
12/30 pm	@Bad Moon Rising	88	7.0	23	84	1	0	0	1	1	3	0	3	0	0	2.84	.269	1.22	view
Last 10 Games		--	62.2	263	864	7	1	0	24	22	74	0	24	9	0	3.16	.291	1.32	--
Season Totals		--	212.1	887	2899	21	7	0	77	67	225	7	109	34	0	2.84	.269	1.22	--

Posted by contrarian23 on 12/30/2021 4:00:00 PM (view original):
”In the case of Bonds, my guess is Bonds at 80-90% is still better than any replacement that could have been used to keep bonds at 100%”

There’s no question this is true, which is why I played him so much. But it’s also very clear that the drop in performance from 90s to 80s is substantial. To suggest that it has NO impact, especially with 10 game samples that do not control for ANY other variables, as the OP implies, is ludicrous

Because of small sample sizes, idk if there's a way to truly test this.

RL 2003 Bonds: .341/.529/.749
Bonds at 100 fatigue: .393/.638/.536
Bonds in the 90s: .355/.553/.741
Bonds in the 80s: .340/.516/.650

Bonds at 80% still performed relatively equal to the RL version of Bonds, with small drops across the slash, but I can see why someone could make the argument that there's no major impact in overall performance (though we are also only looking at one side, and as GSP and drock mention, there's a defensive side to this as well that may have far more dire consequences

Any small sample size is capable of giving any kind of information, be it good, bad or indifferent. Over the long run players can hold up reasonably well at or below 90%, but you will see dropoffs in their effectiveness. 10 games is way too small to come away with any useful information.

RedRaiderLaw, no one personally attacked you or called you a name. Two people offered the opinion your conclusions were baseless, not that you personally were stupid.

My understanding of hitter fatigue is like so. If you play a .300 hitter at 80%, he's going to become a .240 hitter (or something close to it), and you will see a similar impact on home run rate, walk rate, etc. This is a difference that will take a long time to reveal itself, as that's only a difference of six hits in 100 at bats with all else equal. There's the famous Bull Durham monologue about how one hit a week over the course of a season is the difference between a .250 hitter and a .300 hitter.

It wouldn't be that strange an occurrence for a .240 hitter to outperform a .300 hitter over 100 at bats. Just looking at a team I have now, through 34 games, .390 RL AVG 1897 Fred Clarke is hitting .210, while .371 RL AVG 1885 Roger Connor is hitting .376.

As others have said though, the big problem with playing hitters fatigued is fielding. There's a similar percent multiplier applied to fielding percentage, except instead of a six percent decrease from .300 to .240, you're looking at a nearly 20 percent decrease from, say, ,98 to 0.784. Range is impacted similarly.

I could be wrong about the exact multipliers at play, in fact I think it's likely more complicated than simply a factor, as 0% players do occasionally still get hits, but I am quite confident in saying that hitter fatigue does not mean nothing. But if you believe it does mean nothing, I would suggest entering a team with 4000 PAs and no AAA backup and let us know how it goes.