6 man rotation?

[mdbdotcom]

11 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I'd like to hear some discussion on the point I was trying to make.   If Cobb and Bundy both pitch better with 5 days rest,  wouldn't it be smart to try to have them pitch every 6th day as much as possible?

What makes you think they will pay Bundy $5+ million?

[DrungoHazewood]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Welcome aboard.

I really just want someone to implement The Winner, who only comes in following the opener when the team is tied or ahead.  Because some pitcher will go 44-9.

[wildcard]

5 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

What makes you think they will pay Bundy $5+ million?

The 4.825m they paid Villar last season.

[DrungoHazewood]

19 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I'd like to hear some discussion on the point I was trying to make.   If Cobb and Bundy both pitch better with 5 days rest,  wouldn't it be smart to try to have them pitch every 6th day as much as possible?

Doesn't that depend on how much better they are with five days rest, and who would take the starts they would now miss by pitching less frequently?  If Cobb and Bundy were 0.20 runs/game better, but that means you give 20 starts to a guy with a 6.24 ERA you're probably better off with a 5-man.

[wildcard]

15 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Doesn't that depend on how much better they are with five days rest, and who would take the starts they would now miss by pitching less frequently?  If Cobb and Bundy were 0.20 runs/game better, but that means you give 20 starts to a guy with a 6.24 ERA you're probably better off with a 5-man.

Considering that there are 6 starters at AAA anyone of which could be in the majors sometime next season, I don't think any starter that has a 6.24 ERA will get 20 starts

Also, the OP stats suggest that the difference by going to 5 days rest could be .5 to 3 runs per 9 innings for Cobb or Bundy.

[Luke-OH]

17 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

What makes you think they will pay Bundy $5+ million?

The fact that he'd probably get 3/30 on the open market. So if they don't want him, he has trade value. 

[mdbdotcom]

10 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

The fact that he'd probably get 3/30 on the open market. So if they don't want him, he has trade value. 

But he wouldn't be on the team if they traded him, so they wouldn't be paying him.

[DrungoHazewood]

23 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Also, the OP stats suggest that the difference by going to 5 days rest could be .5 to 3 runs per 9 innings.

Does it?  Bundy in his career has pitched worse on five days rest than on four.  We'll see if or how much Cobb pitches this year, and he's not the pitcher he was earlier in his career.  Means has eight starts on four days rest in his MLB career, and Wojo just 10.

Last year all MLB starters on four days rest had a 4.46 ERA.  On five days it was 4.52.  In general, although it may vary by individual, there isn't a whole lot of difference in performance by days rest with modern use patterns.

[wildcard]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Does it?  Bundy in his career has pitched worse on five days rest than on four.  We'll see if or how much Cobb pitches this year, and he's not the pitcher he was earlier in his career.  Means has eight starts on four days rest in his MLB career, and Wojo even less.

Last year all MLB starters on four days rest had a 4.46 ERA.  On five days it was 4.52.  In general, although it may vary by individual, there isn't a whole lot of difference in performance by days rest with modern use patterns.

I am talk about two individuals here.  Not was the league did  or will do.

[Redskins Rick]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

The four-man rotation was only the standard for everyone from the early 60s into the 70s.  Prior to 1960 there were more rainouts, more train travel, many more doubleheaders, and teams readjusted the rotation on the fly all the time.  Prior to WWII you had different ideas about pitching staffs, like Carl Hubbell would start 33 games, relieve in another 12, and lead the league in wins, ERA, saves, and innings.  In the 20s and 30s it was common for even a good team to have one or two guys make 30+ starts, and all of the relievers would start sometimes.

Firpo Marberry is sometimes thought of as the first real, kind of modern reliever, and he had multiple years where he led the league in saves and started 15-20 games.

Pick out a Yanks team from the 1950s... say, the 1954 team that won 103 games.  Whitey Ford led the team with 28 starts.  Eddie Lopat was 2nd with 23.  They had 13 pitchers make starts.  154 divided by four is 38.5, so in a strict four-man you'd expect regular starters to get 35-40 starts.  From 1946-1960 there were only 16 teams, or about one per year, that had as many as two pitchers make 35+ starts.  From 1961-75 there were 115 such teams.  From 1976-90 that was down to 66, and from '91-2005 it was back down below the 1950's level to 17 (with many more teams).

Thanks for the baseball history lessons.

Anything before 1960 is not something I will have any memory of.

I know the 5 man was first created in the 1920s, but never really used until the Dodgers pushed it out in the early 70s.

Quote

By the early 1980s, only the
Baltimore Orioles had not been successfully converted to the cause."It is easier to find four starting pitchers than five."
– Earl Weaver’s Seventh Law. (From
Weaver on Strategy,
1984)

 

[DrungoHazewood]

20 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

Thanks for the baseball history lessons.

Anything before 1960 is not something I will have any memory of.

I know the 5 man was first created in the 1920s, but never really used until the Dodgers pushed it out in the early 70s.

 

When I read that as a much younger man I thought that Earl's Seventh Law made a lot of sense.  But then thinking through it I'm no longer sure it is easier to find four pitchers who can start every four days in a modern context than it is five.  In a four-man rotation you'd be asking someone to throw an extra 800 pitches a year, give or take.  How many pitchers can seamlessly give you 25% more pitches and starts a year?

Edit: As I mentioned before the whole concept of a regular rotation, and of regular work being a big benefit, wasn't really a thing until at least the 1950s.  Robin Roberts debuted in 1948 and in his career he started three games on days he'd pitched the previous day, sixteen games on one day rest, 46 games on two days, 219 on three, 192 on four 71 on five, and 62 on 6+.  He pretty much pitched whenever he was asked to, and it was something other than three days rest most of the time and often it was four.

But as for spreading around the work... as early as 1906 the Giants had five different pitchers start 25+ games.  The '22-23 Yanks each had five pitchers start at least 25.  

[Redskins Rick]

8 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

When I read that as a much younger man I thought that Earl's Seventh Law made a lot of sense.  But then thinking through it I'm no longer sure it is easier to find four pitchers who can start every four days in a modern context than it is five.  In a four-man rotation you'd be asking someone to throw an extra 800 pitches a year, give or take.  How many pitchers can seamlessly give you 25% more pitches and starts a year?

Well, if you ask the MASN ex pitcher from that ERA, sorry, name alludes me. He claims the biggest problem with pitchers, is that the teams sit them down or DL them for the slightest handnail or itty bitty bo bo.

I am not saying he is right, but I do wonder, if sometimes, the pitcher just needs to work through their "dead" arm and it bounces back. But, with the amount of money on the line, and 18 month window for TJ recovery, you also need to be smart about it too.

 

[DrungoHazewood]

27 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I am talk about two individuals here.  Not was the league did  or will do.

Bundy and Cobb?  Bundy who pitches worse over his career on longer rest, and Cobb who is part android now?

[weams]

51 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

The fact that he'd probably get 3/30 on the open market. So if they don't want him, he has trade value. 

Don't you think they will trade him though?

[DrungoHazewood]

Just now, Redskins Rick said:

Well, if you ask the MASN ex pitcher from that ERA, sorry, name alludes me. He claims the biggest problem with pitchers, is that the teams sit them down or DL them for the slightest handnail or itty bitty bo bo.

I am not saying he is right, but I do wonder, if sometimes, the pitcher just needs to work through their "dead" arm and it bounces back. But, with the amount of money on the line, and 18 month window for TJ recovery, you also need to be smart about it too.

 

I'm totally astonished that an old ballplayer can't believe how soft today's guys are.  

I could trace back through the last 140 years of baseball with quotes like that, and then come to the conclusion that in 1860 every pitcher was 11 feet tall, and could throw max effort for 772 innings a year to no ill effect.