Get rid of the SP* for 2018 and later sets

Moderator: Palmtana

  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Palmtana

  • Posts: 6250
  • Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 7:47 pm
  • Location: SoCal

Re: Get rid of the SP* for 20XX

PostFri Mar 02, 2018 10:15 pm

ScumbyJr wrote:The 4 man rotation is dead and buried, Time to eliminate the SP^ and price accordingly,


When I saw Scumby's post the issue of usage didn't occur to me. What I thought of was the current state of pitching in real life baseball in which mangers are happy to get 5-6 innings from their SP and then turn it over to the uber-bullpen. The demise of the SP* in our game started a couple of seasons ago:

2013 - 44 SP*
2014 - 44
2015 - 32
2016 - 26
2017 - 17

With 6-man rotation entering the conversation how many SP*s will there be in the years to come. Single digits? Traditionally a SP needs around 32 starts and 200 IP to qualify for the *.
SOM will have to lower those numbers in the future if they want to retain the 3 day rest SP as part of the game.
Offline

ScumbyJr

  • Posts: 1939
  • Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:55 am

Re: Get rid of the SP* for 20XX

PostSat Mar 03, 2018 4:59 pm

Jerlins wrote:Eliminate the SP* because it's dead and buried? Ok, then you would also be for:

Innings and AB's no more than 5% over their past year's totals, after all, RP's don't pitch 150 innings either, which is less likely to happen than a SP pitching on 3 days rest. I don't understand the outrage over SP*, yet none about RP usage, which is more of a fantasy. SP*s are priced accordingly and you pay a premium for that opportunity. This is a fantasy game, if you wish to play it to match real life baseball, then you really need the 5% rule to be in effect as well. Should Olson be limited to 180 AB's, or are you happy that he could hit 60 plus HR's given the right circumstances? If he was THAT good, he'd have a full time job in MLB. Hazelbaker? Alfaro? Where do you draw the line?


No. I really don't care about the "overuse" issue. It is about the SOM online game and not real life.baseball. My comment about being dead and buried is that putting together a usable 4 man rotation is difficult, Without 4 SP* you have to waste payroll on either a sixth starter or lack of starts for a SP*. Simply give them a higher fatigue ratio instead.
Offline

ScumbyJr

  • Posts: 1939
  • Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:55 am

Re: Get rid of the SP* for 20XX

PostSat Mar 03, 2018 5:05 pm

Palmtana wrote:
ScumbyJr wrote:The 4 man rotation is dead and buried, Time to eliminate the SP^ and price accordingly,


When I saw Scumby's post the issue of usage didn't occur to me. What I thought of was the current state of pitching in real life baseball in which mangers are happy to get 5-6 innings from their SP and then turn it over to the uber-bullpen. The demise of the SP* in our game started a couple of seasons ago:

2013 - 44 SP*
2014 - 44
2015 - 32
2016 - 26
2017 - 17

With 6-man rotation entering the conversation how many SP*s will there be in the years to come. Single digits? Traditionally a SP needs around 32 starts and 200 IP to qualify for the *.
SOM will have to lower those numbers in the future if they want to retain the 3 day rest SP as part of the game.


Instead of SP* make them SP and increase their fatigue rating. Thanks for the numbers. That is exactly what I meant. SP* is only viable if there is enough of them to build 4 man rotations. Mixing SP and SP* is becoming hard to avoid if you want to use SP*
Offline

Radagast Brown

  • Posts: 2916
  • Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2013 7:25 pm

Re: Get rid of the SP* for 20XX

PostSun Mar 04, 2018 12:06 am

I think we should be forced to carry at least 26 players. We probably should be forced to carry six starting pitchers..

But like someone else mentioned the SP* that can go on three days rest are disappearing anyway...

It doesn't bother me either way... In real life they want to protect the players' arms, but if these guys wanted to, they could start 35 games or more a year no problem.
Offline

TomSiebert

  • Posts: 868
  • Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 10:10 pm

Re: Get rid of the SP* for 20XX

PostSun Mar 04, 2018 11:11 am

I agree on the 6 SP rule, because as SP* numbers fall, it also means there will be more injuries to SP that cause rotations to have a gap that will be filled by RPs (who are often total studs). There needs to be a backup SP for those cases.
Offline

twonewb

  • Posts: 79
  • Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 11:35 pm

Re: Get rid of the SP* for 20XX

PostSun Mar 04, 2018 3:01 pm

Mute point in the discussion. There are only two SP* (Porcello and Richard) in the 2017 player set. Please take both and pitch them every fourth game.
Offline

STEVE F

  • Posts: 4235
  • Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:08 pm

Re: Get rid of the SP* for 20XX

PostSun Mar 04, 2018 4:21 pm

TomSiebert wrote:I agree on the 6 SP rule, because as SP* numbers fall, it also means there will be more injuries to SP that cause rotations to have a gap that will be filled by RPs (who are often total studs). There needs to be a backup SP for those cases.

I want to see how many starts I can get out of Kenley :shock:
Offline

tcochran

  • Posts: 15691
  • Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 4:23 pm

Re: Get rid of the SP* for 20XX

PostSun Mar 04, 2018 9:37 pm

twonewb wrote:Mute point in the discussion. There are only two SP* (Porcello and Richard) in the 2017 player set. Please take both and pitch them every fourth game.


Yes, only two, other than Scherzer, Sale, Greinke, Gonzalez, Degrom, Santana, Verlander, Carrasco, Stroman, Martinez, Cole, Samardzija, Davies, Archer, and Gausman.

Somebody else had posted that there were 17 -- and a surprising number of them are at the bottom of the salary list!
Offline

joethejet

  • Posts: 5059
  • Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 6:04 pm
  • Location: SF Bay Area

Re: Get rid of the SP* for 20XX

PostMon Mar 05, 2018 2:29 am

I also think it would be wise to do away with the * starters in SOMO. With only 17 (and fewer than that any good) it is hard to include the SP* due to the pricing model being used.
Offline

ScumbyJr

  • Posts: 1939
  • Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 11:55 am

Re: Get rid of the SP* for 20XX

PostMon Mar 05, 2018 1:38 pm

joethejet wrote:I also think it would be wise to do away with the * starters in SOMO. With only 17 (and fewer than that any good) it is hard to include the SP* due to the pricing model being used.


Thanks for getting the point
PreviousNext

Return to Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365 20xx

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests