2036.19 Who's Next?

[ae37jr]

Who's Next?
(BBA's most prolific bullpenning team looks for the next Jorge Perez)

Prior to the 2035 off season, the Brooklyn Robins had only used one "game changing" PP reward under the current regime. PP were used for solely for cash, a new stadium, and a rebranding the minor leagues. The lone exception was Ramon Vasquez (9/7/6 Ratings). He was converted to RP mostly for shits and giggles and as a trial. It was an ethical decision. While it is perfectly legal and encouraged to make some lame polls and write some corny long winded articles about how great your team is even though they suck. Err, kind of like this one. Then turn around and use those points to beef up the teams work ethic, intelligence, attributes and what not. The current Brooklyn GM has always been against the gamey-ness of this process.

"We should write because we want to. Not because we have to and certainly not to spam the boards with the sole intent of making our team better."

Yet, despite this philosophy, Brooklyn sold their sole to the devil last season by converting Jorge Perez (10/7/8 Ratings) from a meddling starter to a lights out stopper. It was kind of a surprise conversion. Perez had the stamina and pitch selection to excel as a starter. None of his vitals(stuff/mov/con) were really holding him back either. He was good. But definitely wasn't great.

It was a conversion you don't see that often. Perez could have been a useful innings eating mid rotation pitcher. If you are a fan of WAR, the decision probably made no sense at all. As a starter Perez could have logged a 3-ish WAR. As a non closing RP he will struggle to get half that. Just one more example of "advanced" stats only telling you what you want to hear. All you need to do is actually watch a game and you can see he is twice the star he once was. Would you rather have 120 awesome innings or 200 meh innings?

Wait a minute... I know what you are thinking. 120 innings for a relief pitcher? Surely that was a typo right? I mean my closer only pitches 60 innings a season. Nope. Perez right now is sitting at 90 innings pitched. There are still 2 weeks left in the season. He also missed nearly 3 months of the season due to injury. Through the course of a full season, he should get about 120 innings. That has been the plan all along. Not just Perez either. Ryosei Akiyama (10/5/7 Ratings)(4 Stamina) has thrown 90 innings while missing close to 7 weeks and Bernard Keller (10/5/7 Ratings)(3 stamina) has thrown 83 innings.

That means our "Power of Three" bullpen has logged 263 out of 1354 innings. 19.4% of our total innings. With nearly 5 months of the season missed. Without doing any research I'm willing to bet that is tops in the league in back end of the bullpen usage. This puts more value on the RP conversion then was already there. We figured out a way to lessen the loss of innings while creating the maximum gain in efficiency.

So the question becomes... Who's next? Let's take a look at the short list of Robins pitchers who could be RP converted this off season. Some of them are predictable, some more outside the box, while one is down right shocking. I've included a poll to get some feedback as well.

Kidanu Cherono (9/7/6 Ratings)- At 24, it's probably doubtful that his curve will get much better. He had been horrible as a starter during his time in Nashville. I acquired him to be a long reliever. He has been bad in a short sample there as well. I think a move to the pen will make him better. But I'm not so sure he will be a difference maker. Maybe he becomes 10/7/6 with pitch ratings of 10/8. Very Ramon Vasquez (9/7/6 Ratings) esq. meh

Takeo Aoki (9/6/5 Ratings)- This one has created some internal buzz. Aoki has dominated AAA and got lit up in the BBA. His 8/7/7/6 pitch ratings are probably part of that. Pitchers who do a lot of things well, but nothing great always seem to look better then they perfrom. His 10 stamina would mean it would be 3-ish after a convert. Meaning he could still pitch 100-120 innings a year under our system. A converted Aoki might be around 11/6/5 with 10 or 11 fastball and a 9 or 10 splitter. Not outstanding, but should be pretty darn good. The arguement against it is that he is just 20 years old and already throws 100 mph. He also used to have 6 control and 7 movement(post movement crash). He could bump back into 11/7/6 on his own and become a solid BBA starter.

Juan Jose Fuentes (9/7/6 Ratings)-Fuentes was the runner up in my RP convert decision last season. I was planning on converting him up until the midnight hour and changed my mind. He is another jack of all trades, master of none. He and Aoki are probably front runners right now. Both have struggled at the BBA level, so there is little to lose and potentially much to gain.

Ken Bates (10/6/7 Ratings)- I kind of want another lefty in the back end to even it out. Bates may be one to fit the bill. Generally pitchers with high fastball/velocity ratings get the biggest stuff bump. So I could see him being 12/6/7 with a 12 fastball and 10 curve. So he has the potential to be awesome. Could be a dark horse.

Manuel Romano (10/7/5 Ratings)- After years of worrying about his changeup developing, it's actually his control that is stuck. Romano is yet to reach his full potential after over 250 BBA innings and it's a bit worry some. Control is usually the last thing to fill in so I doubt I have it in me to convert him right now.

Jonathan Frank (9/7/7 Ratings)-I like the job rubber arm Frank has done as a middle RP and am afraid to change it. His 3 rated curve probably won't help his other pitches as much if converted anyway. But on paper he looks like a guy one might convert.

Mauro Flores (10/7/8 Ratings)-There may be a mutiny if I RP convert Mauro. The obvious question is why on earth would you do that to a potential hall of fame starter? But forget about all that for a second and live in a fantasy world. Imagine if it happened. Flores stuff would be maxed out at 250 no doubt. So you are looking at a pitcher VS RHB with Max(13+)/8/8, throws as hard as anyone in the game with a maxed out 13+ slider and a 12 splitter. The guy would be frigging unhittable. And like all of these other players, would still pitch 100-120 innings a season. Not to mention... this guy on your team in the playoffs?!

[usnspecialist]

converting flores would basically be like taking max Scherzer and turning him into Andrew miller.

[ae37jr]

converting flores would basically be like taking max Scherzer and turning him into Andrew miller.

Miller has never pitched more then 75 innings as a RP and most years is 60-65. It would be more like trading Scherzer for 2 Andrew Millers.

[Big_Al]

Lord I have zero pitching depth. Aoki is too young, give him some more time to develop. Seems like Cherono and Fuentes are the best candidates.

[RonCo]

Converting Flores probably halves his trade value, so a lot of that decision depends on whether you want to trade him.

[ae37jr]

Converting Flores probably halves his trade value, so a lot of that decision depends on whether you want to trade him.

That's actually a really good point. I was originally planning on blowing it up after next season. But after getting Alfredo Martinez(along with Cruz), I figure my offense might not be a complete wasteland when Balderas and Nightmare start to lump a little. So depending on how things go, I could stretch the window to 2038, maybe even 2039 if I'm lucky.

That's a decision I need to address now as Flores is the only key player who doesn't fit in that window. There is less then zero chance I can keep him beyond next season. It is very possible he gets traded this winter if I want to extend my current run(if you want to call it that) .

I was mostly trolling when I included his name in the poll anyway. Trying to create some conversation on a non sim day. He'd be the one of the all time greatest RP if he was converted, but still probably a really dumb move to make.

[7teen]

I agree with Ron...

You could probably trade Flores and get 2-3 REALLY GOOD RPs back from someone and then some.

[Ted]

Honestly if you were to try and convert Mauro Flores, I think Recte should not allow it. It's not so much a "It's a terrible waste argument (although it is, because his stuff can't legitimately get much higher. It would get capped. I'd bet half or more of the pitch points would go to waste.)" as it is that one owners utilization tendencies, however fun or well founded, shouldn't be allowed to impact a talent pool like this. It's all fine when we're messing around with marginal players or declining vets, but when you start major major alterations to some of the best players in the league, I think a little "Is this in the best interest of the Brewster" oversight should be applied.

[ae37jr]

Before I get myself in trouble. I'm not going to convert Flores. I used him to sensationalize the article. The thought passed through my head with him and a couple other elite pitchers who have a ton of good pitches. More of "wow, imagine if someone rp converted this guy?".

Never would love have thought it would be deemed unfair though. I mean would California had won the landis last year if you didn't move your right field fence in 100 feet through pp rewards? Would Yellow Springs be under the cap if they hadn't lowered McNeill, laloosh, and decastillos greed and maxed out their loyalty?

Participation points are the devil, I agree. I hate them and hate that teams use them to make their team better then they really are with gimmicky crap. But that standard has been set long before I half jokingly mentioned Flores.

[7teen]

Participation points are the devil

Momma said foosball was the devil.

Sorry. I downed a pitcher of beer in an hour. That sounded funny to me now. Perhaps it won’t be so funny later.

[RonCo]

First: Teams should be able to use their points however they want.

Second: I generally like the idea of a participation system, but I worry that I break the system a little. I've been thinking of cutting my own points. I've been doing these leagues for a long time and people who've been around me know that I am a high volume writer even when there's no reward. I write this stuff because it's fun.

Third: We've often debated the value of using points on personality traits. Of the guys you mentioned, De Castillo got the most work done, and through arbitration he's never agreed to a long term deal and never signed for less than his arbitration estimate...and now that he's in his final year he's asking for so much that barring some kind of come to Jesus moment, we can't afford to resign him. So I'm not sure how much that use of points really aided anything.

Fourth: I admit, though, I'm often surprised by just how little some people use the system...to the point that the league leaves about half its points unspent every year.

[Ted]

The difference between spending points to move a fence, or buy cash, or whatever, and altering players is a pretty clear one. Stadiums, while played in by all teams, are more or less unique to their team. Cash is a team specific commodity we use to compete with each other. Other teams abilities to acquire and use these commodities are more or less independent of mine.

Players are different. Players are a commodity shared by all of us. Should a GM try to alter a player in a way that is clearly detrimental to the player, I'm just not sure that's good for the league. Improving a player by changing their personality doesn't really hurt much, and frankly probably only makes a tiny, often unidentifiable difference.

I also get that it's a tricky topic. How do you decide if and when to intervene? How is it fair one time and not others? I don't know.

Frankly, if OOTP wasn't broken regarding pitcher generation, I'd do away with RP conversions and SP conversions entirely. But for whatever reasons, Markus thinks OOTP should continue to generate pitchers with "three" pitches, one of which is a 2 changeup and call them starters. The game continues to have change ups not develop for no reason. It continues to call half the players with two pitches "Starters" in the draft, altering the pool. The model for changing a pitcher from SP designation to RP designation is okay. It doesn't have a realistic model about learning new pitches or abandoning pitches during pitcher development. I get that this is all hard to simulate. But this is why RP and SP conversions were created and used by us. I'd rather they didn't exist though.

[RonCo]

I admit I’m not a huge fan of the reliever/starter conversions. I don’t think they are needed at all, and mostly just serve to add to the ratings bloat of the Stuff rating. They also damage pitchers at times. And they are unnecessary in context of the game itself—every pitcher in the league already improves when used as a reliever. Finally, there’s no balancing function to improve offensive players.

I agree it would be nice if the pitching model was better when it comes to change-ups, or at least able to be influenced by GMs. But I don’t really see that any of that drives a need for these conversions.

[RonCo]

Should a GM try to alter a player in a way that is clearly detrimental to the player...

To me (and without actually doing a study), I'd say that over half of conversions actually damage players.

[RonCo]

Right or wrong, it's very rare that I convert a pitcher.

[RonCo]

For example, after acquiring him, Brooklyn used Mauro Flores as a reliever this year as part of their cyclone. Overall numbers:

• As Starter: 3-15, 4.10 in 169.0 innings in 39 games started (between Valencia and Brooklyn)
• As Reliever: 3-0, 1.78 in 25.1 innings in 17 games (two saves)

These numbers were created, of course, without any conversion.

[Ted]

Should a GM try to alter a player in a way that is clearly detrimental to the player...

To me (and without actually doing a study), I'd say that over half of conversions actually damage players.

This would be really hard to measure, as most of the conversions are on bad players. I feel like I'd have some major success with RP conversions, but I limit my attempts almost exclusively to right handed 7 to 8/6/6 starters who have show either inconsistency or ineffectiveness, with 4+ pitches who then go to 10 or 11 stuff in an RP role. I'm also going to try to use it on 4 pitch "stuck change" guys in the 22-23 age range more.

[RonCo]

Yes, it would be hard to measure. That's one reason I haven't messed too much with it.

That said, I can make arguments that the issue with "stuck" change-ups is as much cosmetic as performative. At one point (a year ago or so), for example, I did a series of studies that suggested (but did not "prove") that the addition of a "stuck 1/1 changeup" still resulted in a net-positive for that pitcher. If that's true, removing it can actually hurt the pitcher ... though we help them then by artificially pushing velocity. Technically, this "breaks" the game model, but meh.

I can also argue that I've had (I think) three pitchers add 5-7 points to their changeups this year on top of those "1" changeups. So does removing them means there's no chance to get those bumps? Also, when we strip a pitcher with six pitches down to only two, we may well think we're helping them but some percentage were going to get pitch bumps to those pitches we removed, so there's a probability field there, too.

But we hate seeing those stuck changeups for good reason...they just don't feel right in the way we look at baseball pitchers. So they annoy us in the times that they just sit there.

----

My post here isn't to say anyone is wrong or right. But we don't really know a lot about the whole impact of stuck change-ups except that they don't feel good.

[RonCo]

There's also some chance that the changeup can come in fairly late in the development process. For example, of the 71 BBA pitchers who are 29 and older and have changeups, I think only 9 have a bigger gaps that "1" between potential and actual ratings.

Nine of those 71 pitchers have changeup potentials of "1" however.

If you take only pitchers 29 and older with Changeup potentials of 6 or more (38 pitchers by my count), 31 (82%) are developed up to within one of their potential--and some of those guys out in to their 30s are losing ratings because of age. So, it's messy, and I really should go dust off my old development scripts and do some real work, but there's every chance that changeups are candidates to develop up through age 29 or 30...or possibly even older on occasion. So stripping guys of that change may not be the boon everyone thinks it is.

I just honestly don't know.

[RonCo]

And finally, when I do a similar study with sliders (looking at gap between potentials and actuals by age for pitchers with sliders), I find some similar numbers--with the exception that the "floor potential" of the slider is a "3" whereas the "floor potential" of the changeup is a "1." So, mechanically there's no massively obvious difference in the concept of the two pitches--a slider seems to "stick" about as much as a changeup, but the slider starts at "3" and so maybe it just doesn't look as shitty as a "1" change up? Dunno.