Quote: Originally Posted By hardcorerobo on 12/11/2009I think, why don't teams in real life do it? There must be a reason, and if the consequences that prevent it from happening in RL aren't in HBD, it is up to the devs to add it.

Aside from that, im all for players pushing the boundaries of the game and trying new strategies. Even if only to illustrate the shortcomings of the sim and help WIS improve it

Because there are far too many people in power in MLB who don't believe in thinking outside of the box. They stick to the notion that if it hasn't been done before, then it can't be done.

It's easier to think out of the box when your job is not on the line.

They do this to an extent in MLB. Tony La Russa told the media that Darryl Kile was going to start the first game of the 2000 NLDS to protect Rick Ankiel from their scrutiny and questions and then started Ankiel in that game 1.

zbrent is crafty and wins at all levels. He puts 10 year minor league vets in rookie- stuff like that. I dont think its cheating and his staff is a good idea.

I always have a couple of relievers at 100 innings. I hadn't considered his idea, but something similar. These are fake ballplayers and their ratings aren't necessarily unrealistic, just misunderstood. Just as easy to use a 10-70 dur/stam guy at closer as it is to use a 70-10 etc.

After awhile experienced owners know how to use different guys. I myself like to keep my minors moving and have all rookies in rookie unless I run into injury problems. I dont like people who put multi year vets in rookie to win playoffs. Is it cheating? no. (The vets in rookie may or may not be 10 year vets, but I've spotted maxed ones on numerous occasions w/ Zbrent when I played against him)

I know the minor league vet/rookie thing has nothing to do with this thread but I had to throw it out there. It sort of parallels the unethical part though and people perception of it.

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 12/13/2009I think it could be argued that giving Manning the ball on your 30 is not the correct call.

It could be argued, most would agree with saying it is not correct.

And most people would be wrong.

Per who? Who would decide that they're wrong?

I think it's brilliant! He is uses his players in a unique way... and winning! It's not cheating. It's not unethical. It is unorthodox and effective.

Quote: Originally Posted By knucklebones on 12/13/2009
zbrent is crafty and wins at all levels. He puts 10 year minor league vets in rookie- stuff like that. I dont think its cheating and his staff is a good idea.

I always have a couple of relievers at 100 innings. I hadn't considered his idea, but something similar. These are fake ballplayers and their ratings aren't necessarily unrealistic, just misunderstood. Just as easy to use a 10-70 dur/stam guy at closer as it is to use a 70-10 etc.

After awhile experienced owners know how to use different guys. I myself like to keep my minors moving and have all rookies in rookie unless I run into injury problems. I dont like people who put multi year vets in rookie to win playoffs. Is it cheating? no. (The vets in rookie may or may not be 10 year vets, but I've spotted maxed ones on numerous occasions w/ Zbrent when I played against him)

This was my thinking when I did it in Clemens. A 70 DUR 30 STA guy should be able to give me the same number of innings in a season as a 30 DUR 70 STA guy. The only difference being the first guy needs to pitch every day or every other day while the second pitches once every 5 days or so. So if I replace the five 30/70 starters I would normally have with five 70/30 relievers, and then fill out a bullpen with five more short relief guys and a couple long relievers, I should get the same number of innings and do it with better pitchers than I could possibly get in a conventional pitching staff (due to the team I was dealt being heavy on ML relief talent).

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 12/13/2009I think it could be argued that giving Manning the ball on your 30 is not the correct call

I think it could be argued that that is OFF TOPIC in an HBD discussion.

Quote: Originally Posted By schuyler101 on 12/13/2009

Quote: Originally posted by ttnorm on 12/12/2009
Let me play devil's advocate here. It is unethical! Same reason that you never see it done in MLB except for a few short term bizarre exceptions. No Manager makes this move to hide a bunch of LHPs behind a RHSP who pitches to one batter.

Thoughts as to why this strategy is not used in MLB?

Baseball (and sports in general) is not conducive to change. The media and fan pressure are the root of this. Thats why we're using most of the same stats we did 100 years ago, anyone with half a brain knows OBP is far superior to Batting Average and people have known this for decades (well before Moneyball) but it is only just now that we're seeing OBP listed in a batters line on television.

I think the reason we don't see a less traditional staff is the same reason we don't see NFL coaches go for it more on 4th down (economists have shown that it makes sense to go for it far more on 4th down). Too much scrutiny, too little job security. Even Belichick who has more job security than any NFL coach was skewered for going for it when statistically it was the correct call

Couldn't disagree more. The majority of teams have hired guys who are big into statistical analysis. If there was an advantage to doing this, it would be done. We've seen 4 outfielder alignments, pitchers hitting 8th, use of the intentional walk putting the tying and go ahead runs on base. It is not about convention and conventional wisdom. The answer must be elsewhere.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

I think that, as long as guys like Dusty Baker have jobs in MLB dugouts, that we can all pretty much agree that ML baseball is not a "perfect model of efficiency".

As mentioned earlier, if he was winning 42 games it might be different but he's winning. If you're stuck with an abundance of LR, options are limited. Learn to beat him, switch your lineups up against him.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.