Topic: Playoff starters rule clarification 07-08-03 12:55 PM Shark Can I get clarification on this playoff rule? 14.9 Any starting pitcher (defined as a pitcher who started at least half of his appearances in reality) that failed to accumulate at least 100 IP during the prior Major League season may not pitch more than five innings in any round of the playoffs. 14.10 Any relief pitcher (defined as a pitcher who did not start at least half of his appearances in reality) that failed to accumulate at least 25 IP during the prior Major League season may not pitch more than three innings in any round of the playoffs. 14.11 Any starting pitcher (defined above) that accumulated less than 30 innings pitched during the prior Major League season is not eligible for the playoffs. 14.13 Any relief pitcher (defined above) that accumulated less than 20 innings during the prior Major League season is not eligible for the playoffs. Though a starter and a reliever are defined clearly in the rulebook, if you are a reliever you can start a playoff game? Take the following players that are "defined" as relievers but have a durability rating as a starter. Name, Innings Pitched, Starter Durability Rating, OPS, Starts/Total Appearances, Closet Legit Starter Mark Hendrickson, 36.2, Fr, .553, 4/16 (Pedro Martinez) Scott Shields, 49.0, Pr, .562, 1/29 (Pedro Martinez) Clay Condrey, 26.2, Av, .581 3/9 (Derek Lowe, Odalis Perez) Mike Crudale, 52.2, Pr, .615, 1/49 (Curt Schilling, Randy Johnson) Mike Timlin, 96.2, Pr, .632, 1/49 (Roy Halladay, Matt Clement) Zach Day, 37.1, Pr, .637, 2/19 (Roy Halladay, Matt Clement) I will use my teams example of Danny Graves Danny Graves, 98.2, Pr, .676, 4/68 (Roy Oswalt, Mark Prior) I am not even listing the pure RPs with no starter durability. The rule never says you can't start ANYONE as long as they have the proper amount of innings. The rule actually hurts legit "defined" SPs with over 30 & 100 IPs. If you are "defined" as an RP (ie. Condrey) and have over 20 IPs you can pitch as many innings as you want as a starter. I see this as a HUGE problem. Would any of you get upset if I started, say, Scott Shields or Clay Condrey in the playoffs against you? How about a pure RP? The rule doesn't say I can't do that? hell, I can start Mariano Rivera if I want correct? In the spirit of the game we should only start pitchers "defines" as a starter, unfortunately that isn't in the rules. Should we do something about this? 07-08-03 01:09 PM STMZoots Not for anything there big guy, but considering your 7 game lead over Salem is now a measly 3 games, you might want to focus a little more attention on winning some games and GETTING to the playoffs versus what you or others are going to DO in the playoffs. [sorry, couldn't resist] The answers to your questions are: Yes, this loophole does exist. You could start Danny Graves in the playoffs. He has both a SP and RP rating and because the majority of his appearances are as a RP, he only has to hit the RP threshhold re: usage. In fact, he would have unlimited usage. Yes, it probably should be changed to stop this from happening -- though it has not really caused a problem before as far as I know and you would have to be careful about excluding a guy like Kim (2003 MLB version) from being hurt by the rule because he SHOULD be able to be used as both a starter and a reliever -- he clearly has been both this MLB season. Accordingly, I don't see why we would make a rule to prevent him from doing either. The tougher guys are the ones who made one start and now have a starter rating...but the issue, as always, is where do you draw the line? I'm not sure, but its worth thinking about. Yes, it is WAY too late to do something about it this year, but its a great idea for 2004. 07-08-03 01:10 PM STMZoots P.S. I believe the game does in fact has something built in that makes relievers who don't have a starting rating pitch worse that normal (and vice versa). So, I wouldn't worry too much about Bear Country starting Dotel or me starting Kim. 07-08-03 01:16 PM Ridgebacks Paul, I don't think that's what he's worried about. Those rumblings in the East are growing louder. BWAAA! HAAAA!! HAAAAAAAA!!!!!! 07-08-03 01:18 PM novamustangs No need to worry about those rumblings. That's just Tom's intestines after he had too many burritos for lunch today. 07-08-03 01:23 PM R˙che quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would any of you get upset if I started, say, Scott Shields or Clay Condrey in the playoffs against you? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yeah, I'd be pretty upset. I'd be wondering how in the hell Shields ended up moving from my pen to your rotation right before we played! 07-08-03 01:23 PM BDBLcommish Actually, I don't think DMB has anything built in that would affect a pitcher's performance depending on how he is used. Of course, if you start a reliever with a durability rating of "Pr", he'd probably be toast by the fifth inning, so if that's what you mean, you are correct. Sharky, this is a rule that was brought to my attention earlier this year. (Actually, the League Counsel and I discussed it a year or two ago, and I thought I had corrected it since then until it was brought back to my attention recently.) This rule needs to be fixed. Mr. Marazita is right that we cannot fix it this year. It is something that will be fixed before next year, I promise. I'm not even sure that we'll vote on it, as it's something that must be corrected for the good of the league. In the meantime, if someone wants to start Mark Hendrickson three times in a seven game playoff series, they are legally allowed to do so. Like many of these things that blur the line between realism and fantasy, however, just because something is legal doesn't mean it is "right" or "ethical" or "sportsmanlike." I know I get into trouble when I use words like these, so I'll stop right there. Let's put it this way: if you start Hendrickson three times in a seven game series, and you win the BDBL trophy because of it, would you feel proud about your accomplishment? Personally, I would view it as a tainted victory. But that's just me. 07-08-03 01:29 PM Undertakers I'm not quite sure why it's too late to fix this rule. We all know what the rule is intended for. We've never had a violation of this rule before. Has anyone made a move with this rule specifically in mind? I would venture to say no, otherwise a guy like Hendrickson would be long gone. Is anyone planning on bending this rule? I would assume the answer is again no. If the answer is no, then this rule change really affects no one. 07-08-03 01:42 PM BDBLcommish I wouldn't assume that the answer is no. Someone may have acquired a player specifically for that purpose. Hell, maybe that's why DJ wanted Scott Shields from me. I just don't like changing rules mid-season unless there's a compelling reason to do so. If we all agree that it's a "bush league" move to start a reliever with 20 innings three times in a seven game playoff series, then there's no compelling reason to change the rule at this point. 07-08-03 01:48 PM R˙che If I'm fortunate enough to make the playoffs, Baseball Gods willing and all, Scott Shields will not be making any starts. 07-08-03 01:53 PM Ridgebacks DJ has been very wary of the Baseball Gods recently. Hey DJ, have you started carrying a chicken around with you? 07-08-03 02:00 PM R˙che Nope, no chickens or anything. Just giving Them the respect they deserve. 07-08-03 02:28 PM STMZoots Question: If a team started a guy in the playoffs with 29 real-life appearances (8 of which were starts), 5 times total in three series (out of a total of 19 playoff games) theoretically, would that be problematic/"bush league" or is that OK? I get so confused about these discussions. I just want to make sure I understand just in case I make the playoffs and am faced with a similar situation. Does anyone have an opinion about the above scenario? 07-08-03 02:29 PM STMZoots Actually Mike, what I meant is that if you use Roger Clemens as your closer all year and he doesn't have a relief rating, doesn't that get factored in by DMB... i.e., his performance is adversely affected? 07-08-03 02:35 PM BDBLcommish Paulie, you're not trying to pick another fight, are you? I'm not sure how I'll rewrite the rule. I think that's why I didn't rewrite it the last time we talked about it, because the line between who is and isn't a true, legitimate starter is a bit blurry. I'd say that any guy that throws 75 innings, mostly in relief, is a full-time type of pitcher who would be considered a legitimate starting candidate in a short series. What concerns me is the guys like Hendrickson who throw only 20-30 innings, with maybe one start, that start two or three times in a seven game series. Right now, there's no rule to prevent that, and I think there should be. Can we agree to that, at least? (I'm pretty sure we already have in the past.) To answer your question, if a pitcher (like Clemens) isn't rated to be a reliever, then DMB probably does penalize him. But if a guy is rated, there is no penalty that I know of. 07-08-03 02:43 PM STMZoots No, I was not looking for a fight...I would have used NAMES if I was looking for a fight. The funny thing is though, I bet someone reads the facts that I set forth and would argue that that was "wrong" (whatever that means) in their opinion. I personally don't have any major problem with it, but someone might. Which leads me to the main point: It is awfully hard to define what is a "real" starter. Hendrickson had 16 appearances. 4 of them were starts. He pitched 36.2 innings? Is it the number of total innings -- even if 95% of them were in relief? Is it the number of starts versus relife appearances? Is it a certain number of total appearances? I guess at some point you just draw the line somewhere...I just think it is going to be hard to pick the line....and if memory serves, we DO in fact agree on that. 07-08-03 02:53 PM BDBLcommish It's the total number of innings that bother me. The reason we set the 100 IP limit for starters is so that guys like Hendrickson wouldn't be able to start three times in a seven game series. I think just changing the words of that one rule to read, "ANY pitcher with fewer than 100 innings cannot start more than one game during any playoff series." In regard to Arrojo, he pitched more than ONE HUNDRED INNINGS that year, and made NINE starts. If that's not a legitimate starting pitcher, then I think we need to seriously overhaul the rulebook. 07-08-03 02:59 PM Undertakers You said you changed the rule. What was the rule before you changed it the first time? 07-08-03 03:00 PM STMZoots I actually have Arrojo at 81.1 and 8 starts (out of 29 appearances) based on the stats in Baseball Reference (I think). If he pitched 100 innings, he would be fine under the NORMAL rule. Regardless, I think that is closer to this imaginary "line" of respectability than you might want to admit because you took advantage of this part of the rule. [not in a bad way, you played completely fair] I personally think the fact that he made 5 starts out of 19 total (in the playoffs) when he had only 8 starts in real life is more of a concern than an imaginary guy who let's say had 17 total appearances, 8 of which were starts, and pitched 50 total innings. But, like I said, it is VERY difficult to draw the line and reasonable minds could certainly differ. 07-08-03 03:09 PM BDBLcommish You're looking at 2002. Arrojo had 103.3 IP in 2001, and 9 starts. Again, I think that if a pitcher has 100 IP, he's a legitimate, full-time pitcher, and that's why we set the limit at 100. If 100 innings isn't enough, then we'll need to change that rule as well. 07-08-03 03:18 PM BDBLcommish Sorry, Jeff - I forgot to answer your question. I meant to change the rule when Paulie and I talked about this last year, but I never got around to it, apparently. I think the reason is that we couldn't agree where the line should be drawn. As I said earlier, all I really want to prevent is having extreme low-usage guys (whether they are pitchers or hitters) determine who wins the championship. If a guy hardly ever played in reality, he shouldn't be carried off the field on the shoulders of his teammates. I realize that these types of players (such as Brian Doyle and Francisco Rodriguez) have sometimes done just that in real life. The HUGE difference is that their managers had no idea they'd play such big roles on those championship clubs before they even wrote their names on the lineup cards. We do. The team that wins the championship should look exactly the same as the team that got to the playoffs in the first place. Whatever rules we can create to guarantee that is fine with me.