MLB Off-Topic

[CMH]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

This is just my mind rambling, but I want to know what you think. This is regarding starting rotation order:

Instead of starting off the season with 1-2-3-4-5, how do you think a team would fare out if on Opening Day their rotation was 4-5-1-2-3?

If the schedules played out perfectly, this would match up your #4 with their #1 always, your #1 with their #3 always, etc. What I'm really looking at is turning the mentality from "Give yourself a chance to win every game" to "Win three of every five games." In a perfect world, that is really the kind of scenario you are playing towards.

The only real downfall that I see is if they each pitch every five games, then your #4 and #5 start games 161 and 162 (on top of starting off the season 0-2). But to put yourself in the position of taking more wins than less every five games, you're looking at a 90+ win season (if this all panned out perfectly, it would be 96 wins).

Do games really work like this? Of course not. I'm just just thinking out loud how the idea sounds and wonder if a team would ever consider putting that idea into practice. I might sim this in The Show (turning off injuries and trades) multiple times against the standard control group for some team and see what happens.

If you can punch holes through this idea, by all means please do so. It just came to me is all and I thought I'd get it out in a post.

I honestly think about this in OOTP when I'm up against a legit ace in game 1.

I'm losing anyway (yes I know baseball is a random game but let's play the percentages) so who cares if we lose 8-0 throwing my fifth starter. My number one on the mound against their number 3 is more likely to be a win for us instead of a 1 vs 1.

And it's probably easier to get your number 1 in a game 7 if you plan it right. It hardly works out if you go 4 man rotation in a video game. Usually your number one pitches game 5 and you're down to your #3 to pitch game 7.

So real world, I don't know. I never considered it an option. More variables. More real emotions. More arguments for momentum and starting off things right. A computer game doesn't care about those things.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

[SPTO]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

The Rays take their sweet time pitching


No wonder I hate watching the Rays.

[Blzer]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

I honestly think about this in OOTP when I'm up against a legit ace in game 1.

I'm losing anyway (yes I know baseball is a random game but let's play the percentages) so who cares if we lose 8-0 throwing my fifth starter. My number one on the mound against their number 3 is more likely to be a win for us instead of a 1 vs 1.

And it's probably easier to get your number 1 in a game 7 if you plan it right. It hardly works out if you go 4 man rotation in a video game. Usually your number one pitches game 5 and you're down to your #3 to pitch game 7.

So real world, I don't know. I never considered it an option. More variables. More real emotions. More arguments for momentum and starting off things right. A computer game doesn't care about those things.

That's absolutely true. You can't simulate those kinds of things.

Be that as it may, in this world of sabermetrics, I'm just surprised I haven't heard of the notion before, even in a shot down kind of way. It only "makes sense" on paper if what you're actually going for is a playoff spot, rather than that of, say, 162 wins.

In other words, this best case scenario is about equal to its worst case scenario, but its worst is "good enough" to keep you in contention. I think most teams would bid for that.

On a side note, I think it would help someone like Madison Bumgarner. One thing people don't account for is he pretty much only bats against ace pitchers. I'd like to see him bat more against a team's #3; maybe he'd be better off that way. That's only one specific pitcher, but still.

[Majingir]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Mlb needs a pitch clock. Nothing to impact the gameplay itself, but enough to reduce things like that. I've said it before, if MLB cut average time between pitches by even a second, that adds up to several minutes a game saved!

[Jr.]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Mlb needs a pitch clock. Nothing to impact the gameplay itself, but enough to reduce things like that. I've said it before, if MLB cut average time between pitches by even a second, that adds up to several minutes a game saved!

There isn't a clock, but there is a rule about how much time is allowed between pitches; it's just not enforced by umpires.

[My993C2]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Do I like it when a pitcher takes so long to throw the ball that it causes the batters to call time out? No, it slows everything down. But it's part of the game and there are so many variables in baseball the effect the length of the games. A low scoring game with minimal pitches thrown and minimal pitcher changes can be played in 2+ hours whereas a high scoring game with a lot of pitches thrown, a lot of hits, a lot of walks and a lot of pitcher changes can be a 4 hour game. You just never know what you are going to get. Historically I am not a hardcore baseball person. In fact it was the MLB The Show baseball game that turned me into a fan of the game. But I say leave the game as it's been played for 100+ years. If someone does not have the time to watch the game, nobody is forcing them to watch it. The last thing I want to see is this extra innings gimmick where base runners are put on 1st and 2nd base to start the inning. Play the game the way it's been played for over 100+ years.

[SPTO]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Not sure where to put this so i'll just leave it here as something to look out for but according to Jon Paul Morosi the Tigers will become sellers if the team is under .500 at the end of June.

[Nulap]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Do I like it when a pitcher takes so long to throw the ball that it causes the batters to call time out? No, it slows everything down. But it's part of the game and there are so many variables in baseball the effect the length of the games. A low scoring game with minimal pitches thrown and minimal pitcher changes can be played in 2+ hours whereas a high scoring game with a lot of pitches thrown, a lot of hits, a lot of walks and a lot of pitcher changes can be a 4 hour game. You just never know what you are going to get. Historically I am not a hardcore baseball person. In fact it was the MLB The Show baseball game that turned me into a fan of the game. But I say leave the game as it's been played for 100+ years. If someone does not have the time to watch the game, nobody is forcing them to watch it. The last thing I want to see is this extra innings gimmick where base runners are put on 1st and 2nd base to start the inning. Play the game the way it's been played for over 100+ years.

That is a loaded argument as the game has constantly changed through the years. Hit, catch, throw remains the same. But I'm pretty sure that your favorite pitcher likes pitch counts more than he would throwing every 3rd day and maybe both ends of a double header. The DH has added longevity to numerous players who may not have even had a career had the rule not been implemented. Expansion, integration, outlawing the spitball, amphetamines, free agency, night games, equipment improvements, stadium taxes, team migration, training staffs, relief pitchers, speciality pitchers, steroids, televised games, commercial breaks, etc. All these and more have impacted and changed the game, for good and bad, over the decades. Hell, I'm not even that old and I remember the Cubs first night game at Wrigley. Sorry for the rant, I never see the benefit of the "the way it's always been" argument.

[TripleCrown9]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Hall of Famer Jim Bunning has passed away at the age of 85.

Threw both a Perfect Game and a no-hitter, one of 5 pitchers to throw a no-hitter in both leagues.

[SPTO]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Hall of Famer Jim Bunning has passed away at the age of 85.

Threw both a Perfect Game and a no-hitter, one of 5 pitchers to throw a no-hitter in both leagues.

R.I.P. A great pitcher indeed. He's also one of the few sports stars who've had a distinguished career in politics.

[l3ulvl]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Not sure where to put this so i'll just leave it here as something to look out for but according to Jon Paul Morosi the Tigers will become sellers if the team is under .500 at the end of June.

Avila has been announcing to the world that he'll sell anything

this guy...

[LowerWolf]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

Braves announcers asked this on the broadcast tonight. I thought it was interesting.

Leadoff batter hits a foul pop-up behind the plate. The catcher drops the pop-up and is charged with an error. The pitcher retires the batter and the next 26 in order. Is it a perfect game?

The answer:

Spoiler

According to the Elias Sports Bureau, it would be considered a perfect game, despite the error, since no batter reached base.

[l3ulvl]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

man I'm ignorant to the rules, I thought a dropped foul ball was just a strike

[Jr.]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

man I'm ignorant to the rules, I thought a dropped foul ball was just a strike

If it can be assumed that the catch can be made without extraordinary effort, it's an error.

I used to think it was only counted as an error if the batter got on base, but at some point I learned that wasn't right.

[Redacted01]

Re: MLB Off-Topic

It makes sense to me that it's still a perfect game. So your catcher costs you a few extra pitches. You still got the out. There is no limit on the number of pitches to still call it perfect.