Is there a per game cold streak for pitchers

[Brad K]

It's been stated that each PA is an independent event with the outcome determined by the ratings of the players with randomness applied. It's also been stated then when the cold icon is displayed next to a player's name his rating is somewhat reduced to help give his slump a realistic length.

For a pitcher who doesn't have the cold icon, if he hits a rough spot in game is there a routine that extends the poor performance? When a pitcher starts getting shelled or gives up a critical home run, the computer manager often removes him even if he isn't fatigued. This is how MLB works.

Is OOTP emulating MLB without an in game reason to do so? If each PA is ratings and randomness, there's no reason in the to removed a non fatigues pitcher. It would make sense if there was a per game cold streak feature when a pitcher is being hit, otherwise a human manager could exploit this for advantage by leaving his pitcher in the game when a computer manager would remove him.

I realize this is a sample of one, but I recently had a game where Mickey Lolich gave up seven runs in the first two innings. I figured it was unlikely the offense could come back from that deficit. Lolich had thrown only about 40 pitches so I left him in. No blue icon at this point.

In the third he gave up another six runs (five earned) and during that inning the blue icon showed up. I left him in because he wasn't retired and even reduced is still a good pitcher. He gave up another three in the fourth. I finally pulled him with one out in the sixth after he got tired with 130 pitches.

His totals for the game were 5.1 IP, 17 H, 17 R, 16 ER, 3 BB. 4 K, 5 HR, 130-82 Pitches-Strikes, and 37 batters faced.

So based on what computer managers do and seasoned by this experience, I have an expectation in game cold streaks for pitchers exist. Is it true?

[Brad K]

So no one knows. Well, what do you think? Do you manage your team as if there's an in game cold streak for pitchers?

[Bobfather]

I have seen it happen. But I manage by performance. I have had pitchers in cold streaks still able to go 6 innings but with alot of baserunners. My ace who never gives uo homers gave up at least2 in 4 consecutive starts, but had 3 QS's. I used to think the dip in ratings was permanent.

[Brad K]

I figure when the game pulls a pitcher who isn't tired and doesn't have the cold streak icon there must be a reason beyond "this is how MLB does it."

[Sweed]

Per my usual response on under the hood math, I don't need to know, nor do I need the developers to say. If they came out and said there is no dip then yes, there is no reason to remove the P. Knowing this is what would allow the human player an advantage over the AI, along with complaints the AI should not remove any P that is not tired. The AI only taking out tired P's would lead to unrealistic games, and more complaints.

This leads me to agreeing with the following quote, ie my best guess is that there is an in game affect similar to hot/cold. I'd go as far as saying my experience playing out games leads me to thinking my best guess is right. Of course that could be placebo.

Originally Posted by Brad K

I figure when the game pulls a pitcher who isn't tired and doesn't have the cold streak icon there must be a reason beyond "this is how MLB does it."

If the developer chose to confirm there is a dip then removing the P would be automatic for the human, I think? Unless there was a chance the P could regain his normal rating by doing x, y, or z (say K'ing the side or getting the big DP). Thus creating another under the hood question (can the P recover his normal skills during the current game?) for the developer, that if answered with "there's no recovering during the game", and creating another human advantage while taking away the illusion of real life and making the game a math problem to solve. IMHO

Having said that if the developer said, like hot/cold streaks, under the hood ratings can fluctuate "in-game" to P's, and can also recover, again like hot/cold streaks, if a few outcomes go the P's way, that would be fine. The human is not gaining or losing anything. Even if this is so I don't think anything needs to be revealed unless the developer wants to. IOW I won't take the developer not commenting to mean there is no up/down "in game".
Others can take a lack of comment any way they want. So, why wouldn't the developer comment? My thought is many times they have answered questions and then been told by users "that can't be because my experience is ....". It's almost a no win situation for them. Affects of mound visits comes to mind, are they only for time or do they settle the P? Oh, now you got me thinking, settle down what? Their fluctuating ratings?

From past experience I don't see us agreeing on this, and that's fine. But you did ask "Well, what do you think?"

As for me I manage as if it's real life. If my bullpen is tired the P may have to eat innings to relieve the pressure on the pen. If the pen is fresh an early trip to the showers is probablay going to happen.

[Brad K]

Why would we disagree? We both lean toward the idea an in game slump is possible.

BTW, I buried Lolich so deep in his slump with that bad game that 26 IPs later he still has the blue icon.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Why would we disagree? We both lean toward the idea an in game slump is possible.

BTW, I buried Lolich so deep in his slump with that bad game that 26 IPs later he still has the blue icon.

Not meant as a negative. I think I read more into your post than was there.

[Brad K]

I'm different when I know I know something than when I know I don't.


(Space below reserved for "You never know anything" etc.) LOL
Begin space









End space

[Brad K]

After the 16 earned run outing Lolich's ERA was 4.48. 32.2 IPs later it's 4.45 and the blue icon is active.

It looks like letting a pitcher stay in the game when getting hammered has significant long term effects. So even if there isn't an in game slump, getting him out of the game is a good idea.

This is a sample of one. Accounts of similar or dissimilar events are encournaged.

[robc]

I haven't played recent versions but in the past I've had plenty of times where a pitcher got shelled early and I left him in, and he threw productive innings. So, maybe there is some probability his ratings take a hit, but if I had to guess I'd guess they don't and sometimes they throw well after that and sometimes they don't.

I was always under the assumption that hot and cold streaks didn't affect future performance and they just denoted recent past performance. I could very well be wrong though!

[Brad K]

Matt posted to the Wiki that when the cold or hot streak icon is present player ratings are affected if morale is turned on. Markus previously posted that the game acts to prolong the streak without the qualification that morale must be on.

I initially thought it could not be true due to the stated commitment to randomness however there are exceptions to that commitment. That is one of the reasons (beyond anecdotal observations of game results) that I think it's possible there are in game slumps for pitchers.

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by Sweed

Per my usual response on under the hood math, I don't need to know,

Today Lolich gave up 5 runs in 1 1/3. I do think I need to know if this is an in game trend.

[mytreds]

Originally Posted by Brad K

Well, what do you think? Do you manage your team as if there's an in game cold streak for pitchers?

Perseonally, I don’t manage streaks. If a pitcher is doing poorly, I’ll only keep him around if he has high ratings, as I hope he turns it around. If he doesn’t, I demote or trade, as obviously his ratings are wrong.

On the other hand, currently I’m keeping an injury riddled Syndegaard in my bullpe because I feel sorry for him and am letting him finish his contract.

[eauhomme]

This fits in with my post today, in which I ask about a game where 11 straight batters reached base off three pitchers, 6 singles, a double, a walk, and 3 HBP.

Is this just winning the crap lottery, or is there a setting in the game that puts in place a full team collapse?

[Brad K]

Originally Posted by eauhomme

This fits in with my post today, in which I ask about a game where 11 straight batters reached base off three pitchers, 6 singles, a double, a walk, and 3 HBP.

Is this just winning the crap lottery, or is there a setting in the game that puts in place a full team collapse?

Well, you're not shy about pulling pitchers!

Someone once posted that mere randomness in OOTP would not create streaks like in MLB and so OOTP encourages streaks.

[OutS|der]

Originally Posted by eauhomme

This fits in with my post today, in which I ask about a game where 11 straight batters reached base off three pitchers, 6 singles, a double, a walk, and 3 HBP.

Is this just winning the crap lottery, or is there a setting in the game that puts in place a full team collapse?

From simming games I feel it's partly winning the crap lottery and partly the game tweaking things to get in line with the league totals.

[Brad K]

It's September, I allow three call ups, and I called up two pitchers. I'm in a tight pennant race with a couple cold SPs and I'm not taking chances about this.

Lolich gave up three runs in 1 1/3 and I pulled him. A few days later Palmer gave up a run but had the bases loaded after 1 1/3 so I pulled him.

Couldn't do that before Sept call ups though. It would be really nice to know for sure if there are in game slumps. As I posted earlier, the computer manager acts as though there are. if there aren't then the computer manager has a disadvantage versus a human who thinks there aren't and manages accordingly. I'm not in favor of any handicaps for the computer manager. It needs help, not hinderance.