Noticed stamina for Pitchers was low.

[Bobbyraz49]

First....I'm still looking to remove ghost runner in extra innings. Please help.
While looking through settings I noticed that default for pitcher stamina was set to low. I changed it to normal.
I rarely change anything from the default settings.
Is anyone else having issues with players disappearing?? It happens to me every game and at every position including the batter.
While it does not affect the game it is still annoying. When the pitcher is missing, the ball seems to float above the mound until it is thrown.

Many thanks !

[Hammercraft]

I think it's in the League Settings -> Rules -> 'Modified Extra Innings'

[atlbrave1]

While looking through settings I noticed that default for pitcher stamina was set to low. I changed it to normal.

This will increase the number of innings SP pitch as compared to current era. Expect a pretty significant change in IP's for starters (30-40 IP greater in my experience). Not sure if that is what you are going for, just letting you know.

[Bobbyraz49]

Originally Posted by atlbrave1

This will increase the number of innings SP pitch as compared to current era. Expect a pretty significant change in IP's for starters (30-40 IP greater in my experience). Not sure if that is what you are going for, just letting you know.

Was hoping for more realistic IP so I set it to "normal".

Thanks

[Charlie Hough]

To me, there is a fundamental difference between "stamina" and "usage," and this is what is leading to so many complaints and issues with pitcher stamina in OOTP, especially with usage tendencies over the past 15 years.

In a baseball sim context, pitchers are largely locked into their stamina rating, which is determined mostly by usage tendencies and not by their actual physical capabilities. They'll become fatigued and less effective based solely on how they were used and the resulting statistics.

In theory, any pitcher today could pitch as many innings as pitchers from any other era, albeit with all the attending risks. The pitcher might need some time to adjust to throwing more pitches, but with modern strength and conditioning, many pitchers are already in a state of fitness where they could start throwing significantly more pitches without a huge amount of additional training being needed. There is nothing physically preventing it. It's not as if they don't have the potential to throw a lot more pitches than they do, and it's not as if they would suddenly be totally ineffective if they did so.

This poses a problem for baseball sims because they're not designed to simulate the difference between stamina and usage. They combine both things into a single concept, and all we can do is adjust sliders one way or the other. But it would be nice to see a smarter and more nuanced way of simulating stamina vs. usage, although that gets into speculation, especially when player ratings are almost entirely based on stats.

[MathBandit]

Originally Posted by Bobbyraz49

Was hoping for more realistic IP so I set it to "normal".

Thanks

I think the point is that "Low" *is* the realistic setting if by realistic you mean post-2010.

[OutS|der]

I always thought the default settings was very low

[MathBandit]

Could be Very Low; I don't adjust it so haven't looked recently. I just know it's not set to Normal lol.

[Marinersfan51]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

To me, there is a fundamental difference between "stamina" and "usage," and this is what is leading to so many complaints and issues with pitcher stamina in OOTP, especially with usage tendencies over the past 15 years.

In a baseball sim context, pitchers are largely locked into their stamina rating, which is determined mostly by usage tendencies and not by their actual physical capabilities. They'll become fatigued and less effective based solely on how they were used and the resulting statistics.

In theory, any pitcher today could pitch as many innings as pitchers from any other era, albeit with all the attending risks. The pitcher might need some time to adjust to throwing more pitches, but with modern strength and conditioning, many pitchers are already in a state of fitness where they could start throwing significantly more pitches without a huge amount of additional training being needed. There is nothing physically preventing it. It's not as if they don't have the potential to throw a lot more pitches than they do, and it's not as if they would suddenly be totally ineffective if they did so.

This poses a problem for baseball sims because they're not designed to simulate the difference between stamina and usage. They combine both things into a single concept, and all we can do is adjust sliders one way or the other. But it would be nice to see a smarter and more nuanced way of simulating stamina vs. usage, although that gets into speculation, especially when player ratings are almost entirely based on stats.

This isn't entirely true, the way pitchers have been used over the last decade has led to a change in what we would consider "stamina." Yes, modern pitchers undoubtedly could throw hundreds more innings each year if they pitched in the style of 19th century pitchers rarely if ever throwing max effort and pacing themselves for hundreds of pitches a game, but they wouldn't resemble the pitchers we know them as.

The way modern pitchers approach the game throwing with max effort on every single pitch is a direct result of their current usage. We wouldn't have starters throwing 102 or having these incredible wipeout sliders if they were throwing 150+ pitches a start or expecting to throw more than 5 innings.

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by Marinersfan51

Yes, modern pitchers undoubtedly could throw hundreds more innings each year if they pitched in the style of 19th century pitchers rarely if ever throwing max effort and pacing themselves for hundreds of pitches a game, but they wouldn't resemble the pitchers we know them as.

We're not talking about the 19th century, though. We're talking about the difference between 2023 and 2003, 1993, 1983 or maybe 1953. If you've lived long enough to have seen baseball for at least four decades, then you know that pitchers in recent decades were pitching with the same effort as you see today. It's not as if they weren't throwing hard, not trying to put a lot of movement on the ball, or not trying to top out their fastballs throughout a game. You can go back and check radar gun readings, watch game footage, or even talk to former pitchers, hitters and scouts.

Yes, pitchers generally didn't throw quite as hard and didn't have as much velocity. The overall difference in velocity was only a few miles per hour in most cases, and much of it was due to the fact that, until the 1980s, pitchers weren't even weight training or focusing on diet and fitness like they do today. They didn't have the same maximum velocity or physical capabilities. But there were many who could consistently throw fastballs in the low- to mid-90s throughout a game, dating back to the 1950s and even earlier for some pitchers. They certainly changed speeds and paced themselves, but that was as much to fool hitters as anything else, and it's not as if pitchers don't do that today.

I would argue that everything has simply scaled a bit, and the superior fitness, training and diet of today's athletes can compensate for the slightly harder throwing. Physiologically, there is no reason a pitcher today can't throw 200+ innings, and the best could throw 250. It's not an issue of stamina. It's an issue of risk management and usage.

[PSUColonel]

I definitely think this setting needs to be on low. I am unsure why it was on normal by default. It would be great to get some feedback on this.

[italyprof]

Originally Posted by Charlie Hough

We're not talking about the 19th century, though. We're talking about the difference between 2023 and 2003, 1993, 1983 or maybe 1953. If you've lived long enough to have seen baseball for at least four decades, then you know that pitchers in recent decades were pitching with the same effort as you see today. It's not as if they weren't throwing hard, not trying to put a lot of movement on the ball, or not trying to top out their fastballs throughout a game. You can go back and check radar gun readings, watch game footage, or even talk to former pitchers, hitters and scouts.

Yes, pitchers generally didn't throw quite as hard and didn't have as much velocity. The overall difference in velocity was only a few miles per hour in most cases, and much of it was due to the fact that, until the 1980s, pitchers weren't even weight training or focusing on diet and fitness like they do today. They didn't have the same maximum velocity or physical capabilities. But there were many who could consistently throw fastballs in the low- to mid-90s throughout a game, dating back to the 1950s and even earlier for some pitchers. They certainly changed speeds and paced themselves, but that was as much to fool hitters as anything else, and it's not as if pitchers don't do that today.

I would argue that everything has simply scaled a bit, and the superior fitness, training and diet of today's athletes can compensate for the slightly harder throwing. Physiologically, there is no reason a pitcher today can't throw 200+ innings, and the best could throw 250. It's not an issue of stamina. It's an issue of risk management and usage.

Thanks for making this clear ot the young'uns here! That Nolan Ryan, what a slacker, lobbed the ball right in there, 200 plus innings per year for a quarter-century. Or Bob Gibson, definitely not putting the effort in, Seaver the same. These pitchers today, they REALLY rock it for a half-inning or as starters, some of them pitch more than 100 Innings a year! And all for only 100 times the pay the guys we grew up watching made.

[Matt Arnold]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I definitely think this setting needs to be on low. I am unsure why it was on normal by default. It would be great to get some feedback on this.

We've gone back and forth on this. When things are on low, sometimes it's too low (ie. guys get pulled at 70-80 pitches too much). But when things are on normal, sometimes it stretches too far. I think it depends a little on what your hook and other stamina settings are set up as which balance is right.

[Syd Thrift]

My experience with just changing that starter stamina rating from Low to Medium or Medium to High is that it also severely messed with how quickly starters bounce back from their last start. In my save, when I (briefly) bumped things up (in 1971 and in a version in which I changed standard rotation size to 4 man instead of 5 because unlike the game I can manually set rotations to be 5 men in size if need be), just moving one notch up caused guys who’d thrown 85 pitches 2 days ago to be ready to pitch again.

I’m sure that modern day baseball won’t be that dramatic but you probably would see guys available to pitch after 3 days, for example. My recommendation is that that slider has too-large differences in settings to tweak and if you’re experiencing what’s been reported statistically, which is that pitches and so on are around 20% too low for starters, adjust the LTMs for starter stamina by about 20% instead. Perhaps save that original number somewhere in case OOTPDev acknowledges that there is in fact an issue and moves to fix it. You’d think the stats presented would be enough but maybe they’re too busy with other things…

[Cactusguy21]

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

We've gone back and forth on this. When things are on low, sometimes it's too low (ie. guys get pulled at 70-80 pitches too much). But when things are on normal, sometimes it stretches too far. I think it depends a little on what your hook and other stamina settings are set up as which balance is right.

Presumably this is changing some numerical value, so maybe add a new option in between?


I think normal is definitely better than low though, on low almost no pitchers make it 5 IP, and rarely go more than 80 pitches.

[PSUColonel]

What about leagues other than MLB? This is NOT a global setting. This setting is individual to eery minor league also...or international and independent.

[PSUColonel]

the problem is these settings were very different in version 23...why not just keep it the same?

The MLB was very low in 23 and the hook was -5

[PSUColonel]

Normal may work if you put the hook at -4...I believe the default hook is -3 and relief pitchers are -5


t also may that an adjustment needs to be made to the League Total modifier for pitcher stamina. Both Starting and refill pitchers have a LTM of .875...perhaps it should be lowered to .850?

[Bobbyraz49]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I definitely think this setting needs to be on low. I am unsure why it was on normal by default. It would be great to get some feedback on this.

.

Well I am about 50 games into the 2023 season and no pitcher has a complete game in my MLB league. I have it set to normal and it doesn't seem to make a big difference. No pitcher has a stamina of 80/80.

In version 23 I started a league in 1969 and it was stunning to see a how many pitchers had a stamina of 80.

[Charlie Hough]

Originally Posted by Bobbyraz49

In version 23 I started a league in 1969 and it was stunning to see a how many pitchers had a stamina of 80.

Yes, that's exactly what their ratings should be in 1969. Nine pitchers threw 300 or more innings that year, a total of 24 threw 250+ innings, 59 threw 200+ innings, eight threw 20+ complete games, and a total of 38 had 10+ complete games. It was an entirely different world.

At least half of those pitchers had very long and successful careers and included names such as Bob Gibson, Juan Marichal, Gaylord Perry, Fergie Jenkins, Tom Seaver, Jerry Koosman, Mickey Lolich, Steve Carlton, Don Sutton, and Luis Tiant. Some of those guys were serious fireballers and had devastating curveballs, sliders or other pitches with movement. That's why the idea that pitchers can't throw 200+ innings today is ridiculous, and that's why I typically play historical games in OOTP. I'm not going to deal with pitchers who can't throw 70 or 80 pitches or having to adjust sliders to let them get to 100. No thanks.