• Registration is disabled due to constant spammers. Email [email protected] and we will temporarily re-enable registration for you.

Openers / Followers Poll

Should ze Furhers turn on Openers/Followers?


  • Total voters
    15

jdlikewhoa

Well-Known Member
Being that it's a slow week and we've not reached our requisite number of new OOTP threads for the month on this dead NCAA Football vidya game site, the cOmissioners have requested we take a vote on whether to allow additional pitching roles.


Some background for those new to the game, particularly our friend(s) across the pond:

For over 200 years across the MLB, UBL, and WBL, teams adopted starting rotations consisting of various numbers of starters with all other pitchers on the active roster serving as relief pitchers in various roles (i.e. Long Relief, Middle Relief, Setup, Closers, and the ever controversial Stopper or Fireman). Traditionally, a starter has been expected to start games and throw the majority of the innings before giving way to various combinations of relievers.

However, teams have occasionally experimented with more nontraditional gimmick pitching staffs. For instance, in Game 7 of the 1924 World Series, the Washington Senators had their starting pitcher, Curly Ogden, pitch to only two batters and then brought in a left-handed pitcher, with the intent of locking the opposing team into their right-handed lineup. Similarly, in the 1990 National League Championship Series, the Pittsburgh Pirates decided to open the game with right-handed relief pitcher Ted Power before installing the announced starting pitcher, left-hander Zane Smith, in an attempt to get the Cincinnati Reds to change their batting lineup. In 1993, the Oakland Athletics had a poor starting rotation, and manager Tony La Russa and pitching coach Dave Duncan split their pitchers into platoons, with a core of dedicated relief pitchers. Though the experiment lasted for only six games before the Athletics returned to a traditional starting rotation, Ron Darling, a member of the 1993 Athletics, called it "a precursor to all the things that you see today".

In the 21st century, baseball writers advanced the idea that starting pitchers are less effective against the opposing team's hitters the more times in a game they face them. Dave Fleming, a writer for Bill James Online, wrote in 2009 about a proposed "3-3-3 rotation" where pitchers would be limited to throwing three innings in a game. Bryan Grosnick, writing for SB Nation's Beyond the Box Score, suggested using an opening pitcher for an inning or two before giving way to a more traditional starting pitcher in a 2013 article. In his 2016 book, Ahead of the Curve, Brian Kenny suggested the possible use of an opening pitcher, noting that the highest scoring inning is typically the first inning, so a team should use a relief pitcher to shut down the top of the opposing team's batting order.

Some more historical examples of the utilization of the regular use of the opener/follower role are the 2018-2032 Tampa Bay Devil Rays who began experimenting with these roles in May and June of the 2018 MLB season. During this stretch, the Devil Rays deployed Sergio Romo, Ryne Stanek, Diego Castillo, and Hunter Wood as openers before turning the game over to a "follower," or a pitcher who would've otherwise been a traditional starter.

During the 2019 season, the New York Yankees experienced a suspicious number of starting pitcher injuries, similar to the suspected cOmmissioner WOOLYING fragility scandal that rocked the 2080-2081 False Bay Flying Whites. To cope with the injuries to their starters, the Yankees used reliever Chad Green as an opener. Green would pitch the first inning or two and then hand over the game to a long reliever. The False Bay Flying Whites, however, were unable to adequately address the devastation to their pitching staff due to the limitations INDY developers placed on the WBL.


So, what now?

Because of the modern day emphasis on analytics, INDY developers have taken notice and added the option to implement the non-traditional opener/follower role. OOTP 20 allows relief pitchers to be set as openers. These pitchers are used to start the first innings of a WBL game. They are utilized in no particular order (like a middle reliever in a traditional WBL staff) with no ability to choose which will start each game. The followers are slotted into the starting rotation section of the game and are brought in to pitch multiple middle innings. These pitchers are cycled through in order just like a traditional starting rotation. For example:

Game 1: Random opener / followed by Rotation Follower 1
Game 2: Random opener / followed by Rotation Follower 2
Game 3: Random opener / followed by Rotation Follower 3... and so on.

It has been mentioned that there is some concern over what effect these roles will have over WBL gameplay. As this is new to the OOTP franchise, there is only a small sample of literature on other OOTP sites. Nothing I've read has brought up borcked gameplay, but it's entirely possible that I've missed something. Please voice all concerns below and vote in the poll.
 

Karl Hungus

Here to fix the cable
Just to be clear, the fragility scandal was caused by diverting already-wrecked pitchers from the glue factory and showering them with cash & the AI violating the rights of mildly-injured simulation baseball players. That said, I'm interested to see how this works out.
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
I think it will be annoying if AI considers the opener the starter to base the lineup on. Also if followers start having RP contract demands instead of SP money .
 
  • Like
Reactions: doh

hayvis

Will-Gnome Member
I think it will be annoying if AI considers the opener the starter to base the lineup on. Also if followers start having RP contract demands instead of SP money .

Isn't opener like a closer, so nothings based on him, he just has that role? And your followers just sit in the starting rotation.
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
You are correct that is how it is set up, but do you know that nothing is based off the openers? Can you share where you found that info?
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
I think it will be annoying if AI considers the opener the starter to base the lineup on. Also if followers start having RP contract demands instead of SP money .
This...you could totally fuck with the AI if you just my your opener RHP followed by a LHP or vice versa.
 

Yankee151

Hot Girl Summer
Could we ban opposite hand followers? Forfeit a draft pick if caught doing so?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
Could we ban opposite hand followers? Forfeit a draft pick if caught doing so?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
You can’t piggyback them, so that’s not really fair. I also don’t see it as a problem strategy, it’s just annoying if AI sets lineup based off whoever starts the game.
 

Mr. Radpants

Trog Five Standing By
I’m voting for Keith but there is no way lineup and sub AI can handle this, at least from what I’ve seen on the livesim. Not voting no just saying
 

hayvis

Will-Gnome Member
You are correct that is how it is set up, but do you know that nothing is based off the openers? Can you share where you found that info?

Can't remember where I found it out. Off one of the ootp forums I think. The AI picks your opener (if we limit everyone to one then no probs here), then your followers are just by order of pitching rotation. For example you can have 3 regular SPs and then 4 and 5 can be followers. When it's 4s turn, ur opener is put in for an inning or two or whatever it is then he pitches. Likewise with 5, then it's back to 1.
 

hayvis

Will-Gnome Member
This from Matt Arnold, OOTP indy dev -
1. You don't necessarily need 3 openers for 3 followers, since openers act like bullpen arms and tend to be more rested. You can probably get by with 2 guys who will more or less alternate, and if they both happen to be tired, the game will either pitch the guy you wanted as a follower simply as a starter, or it will find another bullpen arm to act as an opener. It also won't really be like a 2-man rotation - it will act like a regular 5-man rotation, just when those guys' spot come up, you may sub in an opener.

2. Opener stats are still counted as SP stats.

3. This is certainly an interesting point. We'll certainly monitor things, and may adjust things as we go forward. A lot of the salary structure is based on innings, so an opener pitching 70 innings will simply have less stats to build an arbitration case for. However, in many cases, it doesn't matter as much - Openers will often not spend a long time in that role, neither would followers. And in either case, generally speaking they're not top arms being used in that fashion, so it's not like we're tending to sub out 30M Ace salaries for a 3M long relief salary for a follower.

https://forums.ootpdevelopments.com/showthread.php?t=300868

The only problem I can see here, is that the AI will keep picking other relievers to open if you only have one opener and set a load of followers. I say limit the amount of followers.
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
Can't remember where I found it out. Off one of the ootp forums I think. The AI picks your opener (if we limit everyone to one then no probs here), then your followers are just by order of pitching rotation. For example you can have 3 regular SPs and then 4 and 5 can be followers. When it's 4s turn, ur opener is put in for an inning or two or whatever it is then he pitches. Likewise with 5, then it's back to 1.
Right. I understand how this part works. I just don’t know how it affects the other team. For the example I gave I could have just the one RHP opener and only set my LHSP as followers to get them more favorable matchups for innings 2-7 if AI sets lineups based on who starts the game. Also limiting to one opener is problematic for anyone who would want to use openers for their entire rotation.
 

hayvis

Will-Gnome Member
Right. I understand how this part works. I just don’t know how it affects the other team. For the example I gave I could have just the one RHP opener and only set my LHSP as followers to get them more favorable matchups for innings 2-7 if AI sets lineups based on who starts the game. Also limiting to one opener is problematic for anyone who would want to use openers for their entire rotation.

Yeah. I get you, which is why I've come round to thinking we should probably set a limit on the amount of followers until we have some sample data of what goes on. It'd probably be the most sensible way to test the water.
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
Yeah. I get you, which is why I've come round to thinking we should probably set a limit on the amount of followers until we have some sample data of what goes on. It'd probably be the most sensible way to test the water.
I don’t see how limits make a difference. Someone doing it for a lineup gimmick can do it either way while a limit would hurt a small budget team trying to squeak out some extra wins.


For the record I’m not against openers and followers, just stating my concerns.
 

hayvis

Will-Gnome Member
I don’t see how limits make a difference. Someone doing it for a lineup gimmick can do it either way while a limit would hurt a small budget team trying to squeak out some extra wins.


For the record I’m not against openers and followers, just stating my concerns.

Not that my opinion is important, but in that case (I'm just a bit confused now), I would just go for it and sweep up the mess later. It will at least be fun to see what happens.

Could you do a really dumbed down post of all of your concerns in bullet points, so I have some chance of understanding it? I would like to know the exploits if others already have a rough idea.
 

Yankee151

Hot Girl Summer
This thread makes me think I'm going to have to test things and that makes me a sad, no voting panda

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
Not that my opinion is important, but in that case (I'm just a bit confused now), I would just go for it and sweep up the mess later. It will at least be fun to see what happens.

Could you do a really dumbed down post of all of your concerns in bullet points, so I have some chance of understanding it? I would like to know the exploits if others already have a rough idea.
Followers (sp) asking for less money

AI setting the lineup to the opener vs the follower
 

hayvis

Will-Gnome Member
This thread makes me think I'm going to have to test things and that makes me a sad, no voting panda

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I don't see why we all can't test it 4 realz. None of the potential problems seem that bad or irreversible.
 

jdlikewhoa

Well-Known Member
But seriously I didn’t set a close time. I just assumed once most of the active owners voted we could tally it up then
 

Travis7401

Douglass Tagg
Community Liaison
The great OSICK FROM BEYOND informed me that you can choose how ur lineups handle openers/followers (ie you can choose to base ur lineup on either the opener or the follower).

I'm going to have an opener and put my followers on a pitch count of 12 just to watch my poor long relievers get blasted for like 5 innings :laughing:
 

Wolfman21

Well-Known Member
jokes on you fucks...i'm gonna have opener and follower LINEUPS. Get ready for your pitching staff to get fuuuuuucked
 

jdlikewhoa

Well-Known Member
This OP has great composition, btw -- we could use you on the WBL SEMI-ANNUAL WINTER MEETINGS COMMITTEE @doh
:laughing: yeah the first post is really why I voted yes

Thanks. It exhausted me, so I haven’t posted much else in here. I significantly exhausted my 2 minutes a day posting limit. I’m used to gifs and drive by sarcasm/passive aggression.

It’s the slow season right now though, so thank the DC taxpayers.
 
Top