i'd start the ace in game 7 if he were at, say, 95% or better.  i'd also put everyone in the bullpen-- forget the next series until you're there.

I'm with zbrent - 100% gives me a better mathematical chance for a good start than 90% does, unless the difference in each of the key categories (CON, L/R, P1) is more than 15-20 points. In the playoffs, I'm only using my best 3 SP anyway, so the difference between 1 and 3 is rarely titanic. 

I also think pull rating is essential in these cases. SIMMY has pretty observable patterns whether he's set to 3 or 1. I might go with a 90% guy if I absolutely had to, but he'd be paired up with a T3B and both of them would have short leashes in a playoff game. 

The one thing that never, ever gets asked about in the forums is pitcher settings; I think many vets consider them a 'trade secret' and most new players don't know enough (or are too overwhelmed with everything else) to watch what SIMMY does when the settings get tweaked. One of the prime reasons I was ****** about the 40 pitch minimum for SP is that I used to set them to "none" under TPC and just designated a max-pitch count and a pull rating. That was one way to ensure SIMMY couldn't screw up the plan - win or lose, it would have been my plan we lost by, not SIMMY's vague decision making protocol.

Here http://www.whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/Boxscore.aspx?gid=29844582 is the boxscore from game 5.  In retrospect, I should have bumped Gaurdados pitch count higher then 40 and tried to get through the 6th with my combo.  Regardless, Rakers, Almonte and Tatis did not lose the game for me, since I would have lost 3-2 instead of 12-2..

The thing that really hurt me in this series was having Ducey and Brooks pitch in game 7 of the ALCS, which caused Brooks to not be ready for game 2 of the world series.  Regardless, I would do it again because I HAD to win game 7 to get to the WS.

While it's clear some will disagree with me: Win today.  Worry about tomorrow.... tomorrow.

Posted by iain on 7/27/2010 5:07:00 PM (view original):
I guess my reaction here was a bit of a spillover from a discussion we had in one of my worlds earlier this week.

One owner held his ace back in Game 7 of the ALCS so that he'd have him to go 1-4-7 in the WS.

I ran my ace out in Game 7 of the NLCS at about 93%... maybe 96%, whatever..... less than 100, and certainly not available to start the next series.

We both lost, so there's no advantage of hindsight.

I was admant that I'd rather go down guns blazing, whereas he also said he'd do it again, since he lost 3-1 and blames his hitting, anyway.

My question to you, z: Which would you have done?

Not the same... apples and oranges to the discussion above... I know. But I'm just curious..... I typically like how you think, and I'm surprised that we differ in the discussion above.

In your situation, assuming your ace is significantly better than the alternative, I'd likely have gone with the ace as well in game 7.

While to me, a World Series loss is a World Series loss (whether it be 4-games-to-2 or 4-games-to-1), I do certainly prefer making the World Series as opposed to missing it entirely. Once I am in the World Series, there are only two series outcomes - a WS win or a WS loss - but I do not generally treat the entire season that way. I feel more satisfied (though perhaps not entirely satisfied) making the playoffs than missing them; more satisfied making the LCS than missing it; more satisfied making the WS when missing it - that feeling just doesn't usually extend to within a series itself, and that's why I don't care what the individual series W/L ends up, just whether I am on the winning or losing side. I've also been involved in enough postseasons to know that the "better" team doesn't always win, so I know that if I make it to the WS, even with my ace only being rested enough for 2 starts (at most), there's always a chance to pull out the win. If you drop that game 7, you don't move on, so don't even have the chance to get "lucky" in the next series.

When it comes to the playoffs, I generally take it one *series* at a time. Because - in your game 7 example - the series is on the line in that one game, I'd do what gave me the best chance to win the series. If that means a guy at 90%, so be it. Likewise though - in the game 5 example - I'd do what gave me the best chance to win the series, which in that case means having both SP go at 100%.

Bottom line: don't manage by treating the games that you might never play be more important than the ones you need to win to get there.

I see your logic, z. I can't say I agree 100%, but it makes sense, so I won't argue with your philosophy.... this time. :)

First, does anyone really know the difference between the effectiveness of a 90% pitcher and a 100% pitcher?   I'm sure it doesn't mean an 89 becomes 80.1.  If it does, a lot of people are screwing up by playing 90% position players.

Second, I'm surprised at how many people manage game 6 before they know they'll have a game 6.   I certainly set my staff before the series to get the starters I want.   But, as soon as I fall behind in the series(and I will), I make adjustments.   If my ace gets blasted in game 1 and only pitches 1.2 innings, he'll probably start game 3 instead of game 4.  And that usually means SP3 is now pitching game 4 and SP2 will still start game 5.

The reason for this is the stupid rule of locking in your pitchers the game before.  If you didnt have to do this and could make your starting pitcher a game time decision you would have more flexibility game to game and better be able to manage that day for the win

Isn't that what the ##(##) feature is for?  Pitcher recovery is pretty predictable.

OM, some owners play the match-up game.  Some owners can't check in 12 times a day.   Allowing their opponent to swap pitchers moments before a game, or even 4 hours before a game, begs for abuse.

As it stands, everyone can set their line-up for the 11 AM game before the normal work day begins.    East Coasters can avoid missing any game cycles by doing that.   It's a little tougher for West coasters as the 7 PM cycle is the 4 PM cycle for them.   

More east coast bias.

I get both points, my only problem is in the playoffs.  For example, if I am 2-2 in a series and I loose game 5 and am facing elimination in game 6 I might want a different starter in then if I win game 5 and am not facing elimination in game 6.   It has nothing to do with whether I think a player will be at 100 or not, but rather that I would be more willing to push my best pitcher who isnt 100 to pitch in the elimination game then if I was up in the series

I've already agreed, with an off day, that you should be able to change your SP before the off cycles plays.   The other team can't even see who the next pitcher is in the "next game" box.