|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Apr 29, 2017 17:23:08 GMT -5
I've noticed a lot over the past few seasons that some teams will set a pitchers position as a RP, but use them as a SP.
I understand that in some cases you're forced to use a guy for a spot start, but I'm curious as to the thought process of why people leave guys that they've moved into full time SP roles but leave their position as RP?
|
|
|
Post by craigWhiteSox on Apr 29, 2017 17:53:38 GMT -5
Some weird thing with the game. I'm not sure exactly how the game works it but if a pitcher has 3 pitches and one of them is 1-3 if he's set as a RP then he will throw his two best pitches more and if they're SP then they use all pitches.
Also their actual ratings particularly "stuff" will usually increase as a RP and again with how the game's engine works, their "actual" ratings would be better and theoretically a better pitcher.
As you know nothing on this game is 100% just seems to work out that way more
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Apr 29, 2017 18:57:22 GMT -5
I would say it's purely to see the better ratings and overall.
This might be a good question to ask in the OOTP forum. I would think (hope) that the move it purely cosmetic and that the player would "perform" with the ratings you would see if they were indeed set to SP as an SP instead of an RP?
Plus, they look better as trade bait with the higher stuff and Ovr/Pot (if that does change).
I also believe (purely anecdotal, no great research) players in past versions negotiated less money when set as an RP, even if they were effectively an SP. Don't think that's a loophole anymore?
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Apr 29, 2017 21:20:51 GMT -5
I would say it's purely to see the better ratings and overall. This might be a good question to ask in the OOTP forum. I would think (hope) that the move it purely cosmetic and that the player would "perform" with the ratings you would see if they were indeed set to SP as an SP instead of an RP? Plus, they look better as trade bait with the higher stuff and Ovr/Pot (if that does change). I also believe (purely anecdotal, no great research) players in past versions negotiated less money when set as an RP, even if they were effectively an SP. Don't think that's a loophole anymore? I hope so too. It'd be pretty shitty if it actually boosted their in game ratings.
|
|
|
Post by Texas Rangers on Apr 29, 2017 21:38:46 GMT -5
No, it actually does boost stuff for some relievers. The key is if they have 3 or more pitches, but only 2 of them are passable.
It makes sense for relievers' stuff to go up because they're only throwing their best pitches, and because in real life there is a direct correlation between k rate and whether one is starting or relieving.
As to why someone would set someone as a starter and then use them as a reliever...no clue
|
|
|
Post by Texas Rangers on Apr 29, 2017 21:41:36 GMT -5
I've noticed a lot over the past few seasons that some teams will set a pitchers position as a RP, but use them as a SP. I understand that in some cases you're forced to use a guy for a spot start, but I'm curious as to the thought process of why people leave guys that they've moved into full time SP roles but leave their position as RP? I'd say this is purely for one of two reasons--you only want that guy throwing his two best pitches (which will come back to bite you the second and third time through the lineup) or, most likely, because people often make trades based on star ratings so players look more appealing. It doesn't up the k rate of a starter to move him to reliever, I'm near certain. I've played around with this in the minors.
|
|