Broken Bat - Suggestions: Starting pitcher taken out during shutout

Forum >> Suggestions >> Starting pitcher taken out during shutout

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date

#72218	03/23/2020 5:56:31 pm	Oct 24th, 2044
Gooples Joined: 08/16/2019 Posts: 4 Inactive	+1 This is a gripe I've had for a while and kept to myself. Plenty of times where my starter is pitching a shutout up 2-0 in the 9th and gets pulled. I understand having a short leash in the scenario, but not letting him try to finish the job is criminal in my opinion. I'd love an option to keep them in the game. I know some minutae of baseball is hard to program, but this option seems reasonable.

#72229	03/23/2020 8:23:40 pm	Oct 24th, 2044
El jefe Joined: 04/21/2017 Posts: 221 Urbana Cubs II.1	How about it Steve? Seems like there is some good support

#72231	03/23/2020 9:15:24 pm	Oct 24th, 2044
peacockpenguin Joined: 11/18/2014 Posts: 102 Inactive	Agreed. Highly unrealistic.

#72232	03/23/2020 9:22:09 pm	Oct 24th, 2044
peacockpenguin Joined: 11/18/2014 Posts: 102 Inactive	in 1972 Nolan Ryan pitched in 12 games where he completed every single inning even though there was a save opportunity for a closer. It's very common to see managers in real life leave their starters in to complete the game even though there's a save opportunity on the line. I would say more often than not if it's a shutout the starters are left in to finish the job.

#72241	03/24/2020 7:58:08 am	Oct 24th, 2044
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9592 Haverhill Halflings III.1	That's a bad move, and probably much more rare in today's sabermetric driven game. I absolutely wouldn't want it to be the default behavior for my flagging starter to be left in just to try and get a CG stat. Updated Tuesday, March 24 2020 @ 8:17:16 am PDT

#72244	03/24/2020 12:22:09 pm	Oct 24th, 2044
StretchDynamo Joined: 05/16/2016 Posts: 64 Inactive	Rock, I dont understand why you're so adamantly against this suggestion. You keep arguing against it because you wouldn't use it, but that's not the point anyone is making. If you want to use your closer no matter what that is your right as a manager. However, the option should be available to managers who would like the let their starters finish the job. The suggestion is not in favor of making it the default option for all managers, it is in favor of creating an option for managers. It's incomprehensible to be against more options for managers to utilize

#72245	03/24/2020 1:31:52 pm	Oct 24th, 2044
Ken_Kennilworth Joined: 11/26/2019 Posts: 400 Charleston Hawks II.1	i'm pretty much a pitch limit / load management guy...I don't care if the pitcher has a no-hitter going...he can get injured by going over his pitch limit, so he is coming out when the limit is reached

#72249	03/24/2020 4:29:17 pm	Oct 28th, 2044
peacockpenguin Joined: 11/18/2014 Posts: 102 Inactive	i'm pretty much a pitch limit / load management guy...I don't care if the pitcher has a no-hitter going...he can get injured by going over his pitch limit, so he is coming out when the limit is reached Pitch limit wasn't even close to being reached though.

#72254	03/24/2020 6:44:43 pm	Oct 28th, 2044
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9592 Haverhill Halflings III.1	I'm only adamantly against changing the default behavior away from normal behavior to please a few people. An option is fine, but it needs to be coded into the game (along with all the logic). Every option like this we add slows down execution. A big part of the reason we don't have a lot of options is execution time. And I think there are other far more important options to get correct (like defensive substitutions, or improving the Range calculation). This is a corner case, and there is a work around. Namely, take your Closer out of the game (just make him an RHS) if you have an ACE pitching. As the RHS (or LHS) he will still get pulled in late game if the Starter gets shelled, but the Closer override logic won't happen. If it were simply a check box to say "don't use a closer when this guy pitches", that would be one thing. But Mike's suggestion requires adding a bunch more logic that doesn't exist in the game. Is the guys getting shelled, is the starter still in the game, is the closer an option at this point? There is a reason Steve keeps the sims slim. Every bit of logic and check we add increases the execution time exponentially. To me, there are better things to spend that engine time on than trying to pad your CG stats. We don't have game time control of much in the game (pinch hitters, pinch runners, defensive subs, inning limits, etc.). The idea is, you give general guidance as the owner, and the AI manager is managing the game. So why would we make an exception for this one particular aspect where you don't agree with the manager's decision? Lots of fine tune controls would be great, but if Steve thinks there is engine capacity, I'd rather see it used elsewhere. If its just a checkbox to turn off the Closer logic completely (basically just a convenience button to auto pull your Closer), then I have no issue, but anything more where we are taking up more sim time with checks and logic I am against. I suspect this quickly becomes a slippery slope either way, because if Steve implements something, people will still complain that it isn't working the way they want it to. Updated Tuesday, March 24 2020 @ 6:54:01 pm PDT

#72255	03/24/2020 9:20:54 pm	Oct 28th, 2044
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive	You add a lot of stuff that was never said or requested. First off, I would agree the default should stay as it is now. Secondly, I never said to add all of those complicated things. My suggestion is super simple--have a setting that allows your starting pitcher to stay in until he reaches his pitch count no matter what. What is difficult about that? Also, as stated before, your workaround doesn't work. If you remove a closer for the better starters, you're obviously stuck without a closer if/when the SP comes out. If you keep the closer in that role, there's no way to keep him off the mound when you want your SP to stay. A simple checkbox for SP's easily solves this. I am with you that I'd prefer time spent on more fundamental issues that are lacking. Those are much more complex and would require serious time to fix. My guess is this would be a quick and easy change. If that isn't the case, I agree that the time investment isn't worth it. Updated Tuesday, March 24 2020 @ 9:34:12 pm PDT