What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

[JoseJoseph9119]

The sim engine treats starters, relievers, and closers as three different positions, with RP/CP as a "secondary" position. It views each "position" as rigid and holds to strict guidelines for filling the roster as well as use in-game.

What would happen if all pitchers were grouped together?
Which spot would you group them in?
Would this crash the game or make it unplayable?
How would the CPU handle their roster/pitching staff?

My theory is that it might make the game look more "futuristic" in a sense, with the progression of openers and multi-inning arms taken to another level. If the CPU and/or user is not hamstrung to the standard pitching staff practices they will use their staff more fully, alleviating bullpen issues and lack of roster movement.

It could also be a complete waste of time and proof I spend way too much time thinking about this game.

I plan on testing this out myself, but I'm too deep into my franchise right now and I probably need to being playing that less too tbh 😅

I'm posting this here as I think it is a topic centered on roster building/editing, so please deep dive into your thoughts on this

[CrimsonLeal]

Re: What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

I like this idea, specifically for franchise.

Over the years it’s gotten really annoying seeing Top prospect CP in my organization. As far as I know just about everybody who gets drafted as a pitcher is probably starting games for their college or hs.... mid relief and closing pitchers usually aren’t prospects. they kinda just emerge once in the mlb.

My only question is how do you plan on testing this?

[jrnlgrn]

Re: What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

One possible drawback is all-star voting. I have a starter pitcher as my long reliever he has an 9-2 record. If I switch his position to relief pitcher he becomes first place in voting as an reliever. With his position as starter he has no votes. All star voting only seems to recognize the main position

Edit: Outside of the all-star issue. I like this is good idea. I don't manage the rotation of my minor league club and they seem to fill in the positions okay with whatever pitcher is available. Are they good choices for the role I'm not sure but they do manage to not leave holes.

Sent from my moto g(8) plus using Operation Sports mobile app

[Qb]

Re: What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

I think the other issue with eliminating a pitching position is the CPU will then seek to fill the gap it sees on its roster. So if we make all CPs into RPs, the CPU will prioritize acquiring closers through trades, FA, and the draft. I like the underlying idea, but fairly certain it won't jive with franchise unless you're willing to do a lot of 30-team management.

[JoseJoseph9119]

Re: What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

I like this idea, specifically for franchise.

Over the years it’s gotten really annoying seeing Top prospect CP in my organization. As far as I know just about everybody who gets drafted as a pitcher is probably starting games for their college or hs.... mid relief and closing pitchers usually aren’t prospects. they kinda just emerge once in the mlb.

My only question is how do you plan on testing this?

I would have to edit every single pitcher individually through the entire roster. Question is would it be better to make them all SPs, RPs, or CPs?

[JoseJoseph9119]

Re: What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

I think the other issue with eliminating a pitching position is the CPU will then seek to fill the gap it sees on its roster. So if we make all CPs into RPs, the CPU will prioritize acquiring closers through trades, FA, and the draft. I like the underlying idea, but fairly certain it won't jive with franchise unless you're willing to do a lot of 30-team management.

This is definitely a 30 team control endeavor, but the CPU shouldn't prioritize CPs if there are no CPs. If every pitcher is made a SP then there won't be any RPs/CPs for them to sign. I have no idea how the CPU would respond to this logic

[ninertravel]

Re: What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

you can do this. I make all the Closers RP I don't see the point of it

[JoseJoseph9119]

Re: What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

you can do this. I make all the Closers RP I don't see the point of it

How has this played out for you? Are the former closers/best RP being used to close? How's bullpen management overall?

[Qb]

Re: What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

This is definitely a 30 team control endeavor, but the CPU shouldn't prioritize CPs if there are no CPs. If every pitcher is made a SP then there won't be any RPs/CPs for them to sign. I have no idea how the CPU would respond to this logic

I understand what you're saying, but unless you edit them prior to the draft (can we?) they will be high picks. Regardless, you'll need to keep up with editing for the life of the franchise for all generated players or I'm pretty sure it will mess with the CPU roster logic.

[JoseJoseph9119]

Re: What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

I understand what you're saying, but unless you edit them prior to the draft (can we?) they will be high picks. Regardless, you'll need to keep up with editing for the life of the franchise for all generated players or I'm pretty sure it will mess with the CPU roster logic.

We can't edit before the draft so they will get picked as is, they would just have to be edited immediately. As you said, it would be a full-time project. The CPU overdrafts relievers anyway, so unless they would pick nothing but relievers the entire first 2 rounds then it should be ok on that front.

[bacon96]

Re: What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

I actually tested this when I was beginning my fictional roster along with making every player a catcher, shortstop or centerfielder.

The main issue is that your "best" pitchers are always your starting 5. Like if you have a lights out "closer" from before you moved them all to SPs or RPs, that pitcher will be used as a starter no matter how high his stamina is. Therefore, your best reliever would always be your 6th best pitcher and it just jumbles up everything because they're at different levels of stamina.

To answer the "if teams will look to fill out the roster through draft/free agency question," drafted players are the positions of players that retire. So if the roster you start with has no closing pitchers, there will be no closing pitchers who declare for the draft - you could still scout them but I don't believe they are draftable.

Hope this helps and I'm definitely open to testing it again as well.

[JoseJoseph9119]

Re: What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

I actually tested this when I was beginning my fictional roster along with making every player a catcher, shortstop or centerfielder.

The main issue is that your "best" pitchers are always your starting 5. Like if you have a lights out "closer" from before you moved them all to SPs or RPs, that pitcher will be used as a starter no matter how high his stamina is. Therefore, your best reliever would always be your 6th best pitcher and it just jumbles up everything because they're at different levels of stamina.

To answer the "if teams will look to fill out the roster through draft/free agency question," drafted players are the positions of players that retire. So if the roster you start with has no closing pitchers, there will be no closing pitchers who declare for the draft - you could still scout them but I don't believe they are draftable.

Hope this helps and I'm definitely open to testing it again as well.

So the game still treated it like a regular pitching staff? Did the closer-turned-starter work like an opener or did the CPU try to throw him 5+ innings?

Your comment about the draft coming from retired players opens a whole new can of worms in my mind now. I had a feeling something like that was going on with all the attribute "changes" on the draft signee screen. The 1 attribute that stays more static than most though is potential, which might explain why draft classes get progressively worse with less and less A potential players retiring. Do you have any more knowledge on the draft and game engine in general?

Btw, I have both Scott Sterling and Michael Mayfield in my starting lineup. To hell with defense lol

[Jr.]

Re: What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

This would be a great change to the coding of the game. I imagine it's probably easier to tell the game to put specific pitchers in specific positions, but the game is so restrictive with how it handles positions and versatility.

I doubt we ever get there, though. You see how much the game struggles with letting us use a pitcher as a hitter.

[bacon96]

Re: What if we made all pitchers one "position"?

So the game still treated it like a regular pitching staff? Did the closer-turned-starter work like an opener or did the CPU try to throw him 5+ innings?

Your comment about the draft coming from retired players opens a whole new can of worms in my mind now. I had a feeling something like that was going on with all the attribute "changes" on the draft signee screen. The 1 attribute that stays more static than most though is potential, which might explain why draft classes get progressively worse with less and less A potential players retiring. Do you have any more knowledge on the draft and game engine in general?

Btw, I have both Scott Sterling and Michael Mayfield in my starting lineup. To hell with defense lol

This was before the opener so I just dismissed it as an option for me...didn't go far enough into how the games were being played, just saw that roster management wasn't how I wanted it to be.