[IBL] Another view on the BF-based rules

[Larry Merithew]

All:

Now that we're approaching the midway point of the year, I thought I'd throw out some feedback on the BF-based fatigue rules. 

Gameplay

One thing I ran into at first was remembering the difference between the limits for fatigue and rest. Once you use them regularly, they become easy to work with, just like everything else in the game. One advantage is that you know that your starter will go through the opposing lineup roughly 3 times, barring a major spanking or an injury. This will usually translate into easily 5 IP, and often 6. Better pitchers like the Kershaws of the world can probably be counted on to go at least 7, and frequently 8. 

There's less need to keep a starter in a game too far past his point of fatigue. That's because, by time he gets fatigued (in most cases), he'll be nearing or passing his BF limit. Despite the poor showing from my staff, I usually end up pulling a pitcher because of his BF limit. I think I've only had one or two games where I had to pull a starter for reaching the 6 ER point. Even then, they were only 3 or 4 batters away from the BF limit.

In the bullpen, it again becomes easier to figure out how long you can plan on using an arm. No more worrying about planning on 1.2 innings, only to have him waste a game played because he gave up 4 straight hits to start his appearance. A reliever that has a fantastic outing can actually return to action with less rest than under the current rules (a short reliever that faces the minimum 9 batters over 3 innings could come back on only 1 day rest, compared to the current 3).

On the other side of the coin, the BF-based rules make it unlikely that relievers will pitch more than 2 games in a row, given the effect of cumulative BF totals. Since most "long" relievers are also rated as starters, few will be eligible to pitch back-to-back games. The only way for a pitcher to go 3 consecutive games would be to use him to face only 2 or 3 batters in each of the first 2 games. 4 is theoretically possible, but you'd have to limit his usage so much before that, one would wonder, "why use him at all in those games?"

Another drawback applies to the owners that prefer to use their top starter(s) on short rest. Repeatedly losing a full trip through the opposing lineup is a noticeable penalty for the decision to "overuse" a starter. Now you'd be looking at only two times through the lineup, which would barely complete 5 innings on a good day. So, you'd have to dive into your bullpen sooner and longer than you would otherwise. Do it two days in a row, and your bullpen becomes a total mess. (From personal experience, a mess like that takes at least one full series to recover from.) The option still exists, but the costs are higher.

The end result is that a 9-man staff may be ok for the first week, and maybe (but doubtful) for the post-season and weeks 13 and 14 right around the league All-Star break. If you have enough good arms, you can survive most of the time with a 10 man staff. If you don't have the arms, expect to need 11 men (like Santa Fe), or even 12.

Season usage

This is probably going to need a minor tweak. Unless the almanac pages begin tracking actual BF, there will be a need to go with something like the idea Sean mentioned earlier. Track outs pitched + hit + walks. The almanac pages don't list things like HBP, DP, or reached on error, which affect BF count (slightly). Without that information, strict BF could become a challenge for planning usage, especially as the season winds down. At the same time, this tweak would add a minor level of math, possible creating complexity and confusion in an owner's MIS. "Use Felix for a total of 18 outs plus 10 hits+walks". Does that mean 6 IP (18 outs), then factor in any hits and walks on top of that? Or does it mean a total of 28 batters, regardless of how long it takes? And since a DP could follow a hit or walk, that produces a combined total of 3 (outs+hit/walk) in only 2 BF - does it change anything?

One answer (IMO) is to say "BF=outs+hits+BB". Assume that DP roughly balances HBP and errors in the long run. Easier than trying to decide "this runner was out at 2nd on a FC (or DP). Does he still count as a baserunner to determine fatigue?" (I mention it because I've played some owners that count him as a baserunner, while others don't.)

Of course, there's always the option of using BF for gameplay, and IP for usage. Then, MIS instructions would be something like, "use Fister for 7 IP, even if it means exceeding his BF limit." That would still leave us with pitchers giving up 20 runs because of pitching while fatigued, simply because they need to go 6 IP no matter what, just to make 75%.

Staff composition, etc.

As mentioned, 9-man staffs are not likely. As long as you have a couple of standout arms, you can probably make a decent showing with 10 men. Same thing if you have a large number of second-tier pitchers that get consistent results. 11 wouldn't be unusual for a number of teams. If your staff quality is such that you need 12 men to avoid repeatedly pitching while fatigued, you probably can forget the playoffs. There won't be much of a change in valuation of the top-tier starters and relievers. Bottom-of-the-barrel pitchers will be even more undesired. The biggest change will come with the mid-level-but-consistent arms, as well as fifth starters. Basically, minor tweaks to the way most owners determine their pitchers' values. Just a matter of looking at things from a different angle.

Conclusion

Once a simple way of monitoring season usage is figured out, the advantages of BF should become clear. Among other things, it would produce a more realistic usage of pitchers, although few owners currently go overboard on consecutive games or extended time pitching while fatigued. My guess is the biggest complaints will come from owners that prefer using starters on short rest as often as possible. That or they rely on mainly 1 or 2 relievers, with the rest of the bullpen serving as space savers and mops. Every spot on the pitching staff will have use and value, beyond just the top players. Depending on the effects of staff size, it could also have a ripple effect through the remaining roster.

But then, I'll admit my opinion is biased. As I may have mentioned before, virtually all my TT baseball games track fatigue and rest based on BF in some way. It's actually harder for me to go only by IP limitations.

So that's my take, FWIW.

Larry
SFP
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ibl.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20140617/873f1642/attachment.html>