Matrix Games Forums

Pure Sim is great, as is, but has some things that need attention. Can anyone find the problem here?





I'm not talking about the obvious problem that the Oakland bullpen stinks. Follow the stench and you'll find the problem, though.

How did Jones get the loss without giving up any runs?

Same question I had myself. Is there, perhaps, some Olympic boxing judging coded into the program somewhere?[;)]

Four days later, Oakland led Baltimore 6-1. Rick Dempsey hit a 2-run pinch homer off starter Matt Keough in the top of the 9th. Bypassing the usual gas-canners in the pen, I called upon Steve McCatty for the save. He allowed a single, then recorded the 3rd out for the........? No save was credited. Another small problem needing attention.

I will have to profess my ignorance here...at least some of it. What are the exact circumstances that qualify a pitcher to be credited with a save?

I have had that problem before, also.  I thought one of the patches had fixed it.  The problem I still have in one of my leagues is the unearned run situation.  Runs that are unearned being charged as earned.  It drives me nuts.

Per the Official Rules:

"10.19 SAVES FOR RELIEF PITCHERS
A save is a statistic credited to a relief pitcher, as set forth in this Rule 10.19.
The official scorer shall credit a pitcher with a save when such pitcher meets all four of the following conditions:

(a) He is the finishing pitcher in a game won by his team;
(b) He is not the winning pitcher;
(c) He is credited with at least 1/3 of an inning pitched; and
(d) He satisfies one of the following conditions:

(1) He enters the game with a lead of no more than three runs and pitches for at least one inning;
(2) He enters the game, regardless of the count, with the potential tying run either on base, or at bat or on deck (that is, the potential tying run is either already on base or is one of the first two batters he faces); or
(3) He pitches for at least three innings."

Thank you, KG![&o]

I did not know about the 3 inning part.  That explains some saves I had been credited with but did not think were deserved.
 
Thanks

Thank you, also, KG. In my case, McCatty did not satisfy any of (1), (2), or (3), as the tying run was still in the dugout.

Hey, guys, don't embarrass me. I just copied and pasted the rule from MLB. com. The official rules are available there. See http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/of ... reword.jsp

That being said, I think Shaun has the scoring rules down cold.

Anyway, you're welcome. [;)]

I don't mean to gripe too much, but there is still a problem with the unearned vs earned runs. Also, Jeff Jones in the first part of this thread is still scratching his head, wondering who he pi--ed off.

I've seen unearned runs being charged to pitchers in the in-game stats, but I was pretty sure it was corrected once the game was official. I might be wrong. The assignment of losses of thing I've definitely seen, though--I'm fairly certain that the pitcher who is responsible for the go-ahead run, even if he's out of the game by that point, should get the loss.

ORIGINAL: 33sherman

The assignment of losses of thing I've definitely seen, though--I'm fairly certain that the pitcher who is responsible for the go-ahead run, even if he's out of the game by that point, should get the loss.

Not true. Who is the pitcher of record when the go-ahead run scores? Even if the run might be earned by a previous pitcher, the pitcher who ALLOWS the run will suffer the loss. This makes it possible for a reliever to allow no earned runs yet lose the game. If you think about it, it makes sense.

Thanks for the link to the rules KG.

Here is what the rules say about assigning a loss:

10.17(d) A losing pitcher is a pitcher who is responsible for the run that gives the winning team a lead that the winning team does not relinquish.

Does responsible mean the pitcher who is charged with the run (this is what I always thought) or does responsible mean the pitcher on the mound when the run scored whether or not that pitcher allowed that base runner. Kind of confusing to me now.

Bill

Lacey came in with 2 outs in the 7th, and struck out the last batter of the inning. In the 8th, Lacey might have struck the first batter out, then gave up gave up 3 hits and a walk, which allowed a run to score and left the bases loaded (instead, he also might have given up the hits and walk, loading the bases, then struck out a batter), before giving way to Jones

Jones came in with the bases loaded, 1 out in the 8th inning. His first walk allowed a run (charged to Lacey), and kept the bases loaded. The second walk allowed another run to score (also charged to Lacey since he put them onbase in the first place). He then proceded to get the last two outs in the 8th inning, then pitch a perfect 9th inning, but Oakland couldnt gain the lead (or tie) in the bottom of the 9th, so Jones took the loss.

Thats the way the scenario looks to me

I didn't mean to start a debate of this magnitude, but it is not possible for a pitcher to be charged with zero runs allowed and still be held responsible for the loss. Even if Jones had balked the winning run home in the bottom of the 9th without throwing a pitch, the pitcher who allowed that runner to reach base would get the loss.

In this scenario, Jones allowed only his inherited runners to score. Those runs were charged, correctly, to Lacey. Think of the following scenario and you'll see why Pure Sim's assignment of the loss to Jones was incorrect:

Using two other pitchers' names:

Game tied 2-2. Top of the 9th. Smith on the mound. At that point, obviously, Smith is the pitcher of record. Smith allows a walk and two singles to load the bases. There are no outs.

Manager Stubby comes to the mound and signals for a new pitcher. We'll call him Schleprock. Schleprock induces the first batter to hit into a 6-4-3 double play. Run scores. The score is now 3-2 with 2 outs and a runner on 3rd. Schleprock strikes out the next batter and ends the top of the 9th. His team fails to score and loses 3-2. In the box score, Smith is charged with the run that scored, since he was the pitcher when that batter reached base. Schleprock would have one IP with no runs allowed. Smith would be charged with the loss. Can you penalize Schleprock with a loss for facing two batters and recording 3 outs? Not hardly.

This is parallel to what happened to Jeff Jones in the earlier example. While true that Jones didn't exactly blow the batters away, he was not responsible for their being on base in the first place. A stat was "invented" in the last few years to account for this situation. It gives a better indication of a reliever's effectiveness. It's called Inherited Runners. For Schleprock, he inherited 3 runners and allowed 1 to score. This is used only to compare Schleppy's effectiveness against other relievers and does not relate in any way to wins and losses (but surely weighs heavily in arbitration cases[;)]).

KG, while I agree with 99.3% of your posts, this one is definitely in the 0.7% category. And as the attorney representing Jeff Jones, I protest!!![:'(]

It took me a few tries to find one, but here's a game from 7/28/07. The D-backs beat the Braves in 10 innings. Paronto came on with a runner on base and allowed a hit to the only batter he faced. The previous pitcher (the one who allowed that runner to get on) was charged with the loss.

Thanks to retrosheet.org. They have great stuff.

As for Jeff Jones, he and I are discussing the amount of damages we will seek in the lawsuit.[:-]