Just how little do we expect from our starting pitchers nowadays?
by Zeke on Feb 25, 2009 6:24 AM CST
Email
Print''You can't [finish games] with two pitchers anymore,'' Piniella said. ''You really need four.''
Can you believe that pitching has "Devolved" to this level? Can you imagine the look on Bob Gibson's or Fergie Jenkins' faces when they hear this quote?
Good Grief Charlie Brown!
Sorry to sound like a grumpy old man, but I still remember seeing those two pitchers hook up on Opening Day in 1971 and see BOTH pitchers go the distance in one hour and fifty minutes... IN A TEN INNING GAME!
Geez Louise.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
94 comments
|
6 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
37 years old
And today’s player is far superior to yesteryear’s player.
Randy Johnson would strike out any three of the 1927 Yankees, in order, on no fewer than 11 pitches. The 1975 Reds? He might take 16 pitches.
Ted Williams couldn’t hit .285 against today’s heat. Rod Carew? Maybe .300, in a good year.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
Bob Feller threw 100 MPH.
Sandy Koufax threw in the upper 90’s.
You’re telling me those guys couldn’t strike out today’s hitters? Damn right they could, and would.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Today's hitters
Can time a bullet.
Sure, they would get some, but guess what, even Kyle Farnsworth struck out a few.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
Today's players
are in absurdly better shape than 60 years ago. They train constantly. Their diets are fine-tuned to enhance performance (licitly and illicitly). A team of today’s average players would probably beat an All Star squad from yesteryear. I know it’s not fun to think, but it’s true.
Only if you take the upper most echelon and even then its a stretch
Dilution of talent hurts today’s game.
You have got to be kidding about the splendid splinter. If you’re not kidding, you are horribly misguided.
Oh by the way, velocity isn’t the only pitching attribute. Major leaguers (lot’s of guys in the minors that can’t ever make it to the majors and stay) can time the heater. It’s the location and ability to mix in off-speed stuff that makes a pitcher effective.
Sweet Lou for Mayor in '11.
I agree
The only thing holding baseball back at this point is the refusal to include the technical balk.
by dr stabbingworth on Feb 25, 2009 9:12 AM CST up reply actions
Hm, well, this is an interesting case.
The content of this post is entirely original so, in that sense, it does qualify as a Fanpost IMHO. Of course, it’s also rather short and contains egregious uses of “Good Grief Charlie Brown!” and “Geez Louise” to bolster what little word count it brings to begin with. I think the author came up with a legit topic but could’ve spent a little more time fleshing it out.
Happy ST Opening Day, everyone!
Agreed on all counts.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
I'll do better next time, I promise...
This is not a criticism of you Al, or of they way BCB is managed. I think you do a heck of a job and BCB is daily reading for me.
I appreciate the support of my original post- even if it does come off as a bit of “Crankshaft.”
It was a quick post done at work- you know, when I should be actually doing work. Yes, I could have put more thought into it and written it better. Perhaps next time when I’m on my own time and not the company’s.
But I guess the moral of this story is “when in doubt” either post a “Fanshot” or keep my friggin’ opinions to myself…
Seems kind of counter to the whole social media concept, but hey, I can adapt…
PS- I do note though, that one more “rec” to this FanPost and it gets a “greenie”! ;)
Go Green! Go White! GO STATE! (Now #12,966 on the Cubs season ticket waiting list- UP from 13,031...WHOO HOO!)
Not a greenie, that's reserved for individual comments
but I did rec this post, which should give you 4 and push it to the “Recommended FanPosts.”
I enjoyed this topic. I am old school. I loved watching Bob Gibson throw high and tight. That’s the way the game was played and respected. Nowadays, it’s about protecting million dollar investments.
"Every team will win 60 games, every team will lose 60 games, it's what the team does in the other 42 games that decides the season."
I don't think that's the moral of the story.
The moral of the story is simply this:
- A Fanpost is YOUR content,
- A Fanshot is SOMEONE ELSE’S content.
As mentioned, you came up with some original content that certainly warrants a discussion and, therefore, a Fanpost.
My sig line is out for jury duty.
Keep in mind that....
… you CAN put someone else’s content in a FanPost — as long as you add your own thoughts or opinions to it.
Here’s a good example of such a FanPost.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
No, the moral of the story
Is that some people are more concerned with arbitrary rules than with content.
You did nothing wrong. Pay the idiots no mind.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
I keep learning new things everyday at BCB
I guess you CAN teach an old dog new tricks. Arf.
Go Green! Go White! GO STATE! (Now #12,966 on the Cubs season ticket waiting list- UP from 13,031...WHOO HOO!)
The rules (if you want to use that word) aren't arbitrary.
They’re designed to make the site as efficient and informative as possible – and that has everything to do with its content.
My sig line is out for jury duty.
Agreed to a point.
Make a fan poll, ask specific questions on thoughts, but as it is it’s badly worded and not inviting conversation, only one man’s opinion. I mean is it really asking us anything?
But, hey, whatever.
Nobody cares about your fantasy baseball team
by carmen_fanzone on Feb 25, 2009 2:55 PM CST up reply actions
Cue Michael Jackson
“Because I’m fanshot material, I’m fanshot material. I’m really, really, fanshot material.”
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! --Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Feb 26, 2009 11:09 AM CST up reply actions
I'm here to tell you honey...
That I’m fanshot to the bone!
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
Times we live in
This post or fanshot or whatever should of been dated in 1990
"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"
OK, let's talk about this seriously.
First of all, this IS a good topic for a FanPost. Let’s not criticize every one of these, OK?
Second, I think Lou is wrong. There’s no need for four pitchers for EVERY game. What is he saying? That no starter should ever go more than six innings?
Sometimes, when a pitcher is on a roll, even if his pitch count might be a little high, why not let him stay to throw another inning?
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
+1
In the 1980’s, you wanted your starter to go 7 innings and have your closer come in to pitch both the eighth and ninth. Of course, if the starter was going well, you wanted him to go the whole way. That was the old-fashioned “two-pitcher” system. You didn’t need to have as many pitchers back then. I liked that system.
Now, the starter goes six. Then, you’ve got the 7th inning man, the 8th inning man, and the 9th inning closer. That’s the modern “four-pitcher” system. Because teams use more pitchers now, they have fewer position players on the bench. That’s why we’re seeing pitchers being used as pinch hitters more these days than we did back in the 1980’s. The “third catcher” on teams has become an endangered species.
"The big possum walks late." - Harry Caray
Baseball like other sports continue to specialize
The only thing that has not changed are the roster limits. To me I like the more complication the game has evolved. Now to answer some the things that have caused starting pitchers to pitch less innings.
The biggest one are the lack of easy outs in the lineup. Power numbers have increased (one can say this is a consequence of steriods and off season strength conditioning) plus the input of intelligence and scouting, where pitchers are zero’d in by the 3rd pass through the lineup.
The other component is simply expansion where there has been a diluting of the talent in MLB. On top of this is the fact that lowering the mound has had on the increasing the run production.
So pitching has had to adjust. My father used to say football had 2-way players, or basketball teams didn’t have a power forward or perimeter center or swing small forward/guard or 3 point specialist.
Now this is why carrying 12 pitchers through much of the year is now a standard. Ideally if you are going to win 6/10 games you need possibly 2 closers or end of the game pitchers—-one to hold a lead and another to hold the game to be won. Then if that is the case you might have a late inning setup pitcher to hold the lead and another to hold the game that could be won. Those are four end of the game pitchers.
That then leaves a middle reliever I call a fireman—-someone to come in and put out middle inning rallies plus a LOOGY or Left-handed One Out Guy for situations.
The wild card is the 7th pitcher—-now called a swing but also a long reliever who could also be another middle reliever.
The difference in the game as it is managed now is how teams don’t let games get away from them in the middle innings or try to come back in one-run games late.
Piniella: "This is a tougher job than I thought it would be, I'm going to be honest with you."
by Ivy Walls on Feb 25, 2009 8:49 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I thought of this in an earlier thread on Marshall
What if Lou was a little creative in how he approached using Harden? What if he assigned either Marshall or the Shark to be Harden’s companion pitcher, where they would alway come in after Harden was done and finish up the game. Unless the companion pitcher imploded, he would be expected to pitch the rest of the game and the bullpen not be used. A few advantages to this strategy:
The bullpen could expect an off day every five games
Harden would have less pressure to extend himself—even if he only went 4 innings, it wouldn’t be much to have Marshall or the Shark pitch the remaining 5
It would allow the companion pitcher to stay in the majors and still get work on stretching out innings
If/When Harden goes down, the companion pitcher would be used to pitching long innings on the days that he would then be starting in Harden’s absence
While this strategy is unusual, I think the Cubs’ starting pitching depth allows them to try it. What do you think?
by TC Cubby on Feb 25, 2009 8:58 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
That's an interesting idea
Sounds like strategy that gets used a lot in college, where you backup on pitcher with another. I wouldn’t be opposed to it – say if Harden went 6 and Gaudin/Heilman 3.
The trick to it, IMO, is to back up Harden, or whomever starts, with a pitcher who varies the look to batters – so another hard-throwing pitcher might not be the best solution – I prefer to vary the speeds, looks, etc., to mess with batters’ timing.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
The problem is...
… Lou seems to have blinders when it comes to long relievers. He had someone who was perfect for that role last year — Jon Lieber — and refused to use him that way.
Gaudin and/or Heilman would seem suited for a role like that, too. If Lou would use them like that, it’d keep a lot of stress off Marmol’s arm, for example.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
I think Lou had little confidence in Lieber
If Heilman/Gaudin do well in the role, then I think we will see it used more. With the exception of Fukudome, Lou played the players that produced the best, regardless of who was best suited for the task. Thus, the overuse of Marmol.
by dr stabbingworth on Feb 25, 2009 9:13 AM CST up reply actions
Hopefully that would be another benefit
if this system was adopted from the onset, it would be a back door to having a long releiver in at least every 5 games (when Harden starts).
FWIW, I would stick to having the companion pitcher be someone who is on track to become a starter, who is considered the 6th pitcher ready to come in when/if Harden goes down. It wouldn’t be a regular bullpen guy, and under my plan relieiving Harden would be the only pitching that the companion pitcher did. If Harden went deeper in any one game, the companion pitcher could get some extra work on the side to keep sharp.
It'd be nice if Marmol got some rest
Maybe let Gregg clean up a game or two in which the Cubs have a 3-run lead entering the 9th.
I agree, Lou does seem to have a reluctance to using his long man in this way, which is odd since he played in an era in which this occurred. Maybe it’s his “Nasty Boys” strategy that has him set on roles for the 7th-8th-9th inning relievers.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
and it would help
to have a decent start to the season and a working margin in the division
Neat idea.
+1 for thinkin outside of the box!
Evey Hammond: Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici. V: By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.
I think that's a great idea.
At this point, I’d like to see Marshall get the last rotation spot and Gaudin be Harden’s backup. I think that’s partly why Chad was thrown into the Harden deal in the first place. Git ’er done, Jimbo! Do it, Lou!
Happy ST Opening Day, everyone!
An interesting thought, but
The problem is, you effectively reduce the roster by 1 spot, since you’d now have two players that go every 5th day.
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! --Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Feb 25, 2009 1:59 PM CST up reply actions
sure
but based on Lou’s history in the last years, using a pitcher in this way would actually get that pitcher more use than if he was designated the long reliever.
You know, that's an extremely valid point
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! --Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Feb 26, 2009 11:09 AM CST up reply actions
As to the "Expansion has Resulted in Dilution of pitching Strength" argument:
1. Why is this argument never advanced to show that hitting strength is “diluted”? It seems to me that MLB expansion should affect hitting and pitching equally.
2. In 1960 there were 16 MLB teams, now 30. The US Population has increased in close to that same ratio in that time. Plus, MLB now draws from all over the world for its players, including pitchers. Carlos Marmol, Carlos ZAmbrano, etc., would not have been on an MLB roster in 1960. So how is pitching “diluted” when now major league teams draw from all over the world for talent?
and for you fact checkers out there
US Pop. 1960: 179 Million (1960 Census data)
Est 2008 U.S. Pop. 303 Million
So I was fairly close to the mark—-
And you're right about the rest of the world...
… the population base from which MLB draws players is probably at least 5 times as large as it was in 1960, maybe more.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
One major factor though
In 1960 — hell, even 1970 or 1980 — if you walked into just about any high school in this country and asked the principal or AD who the best athlete was, you were almost always pointed in the direction of the top starting pitcher.
Now, you’re just as likely to be shown a running back, point guard or soccer forward.
Other sports have diluted baseball as well. In 1960, you couldn’t make nearly as much money playing football or basketball. Now, you can, and you don’t have to fart around in the minor leagues to do it.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
Actually, generally the best athletes on HS baseball teams are the shortstops.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
I meant best all-around athlete
The starting pitchers of 1960 are more likely to be quarterbacks now.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
Thank Al.
I was feeling a little like “what the heck?”. It was just a question posed for open discussion. I thought that’s part of what makes BCB the great site that it is…
…and for the record, I’m 53…that’s only 371 in dog years or 13 in leap years…
Go Green! Go White! GO STATE! (Now #12,966 on the Cubs season ticket waiting list- UP from 13,031...WHOO HOO!)
It is an odd development in some respects
Hitters are more physically fit now than they were a few decades ago, so wouldnt it stand to reason pitchers are in better shape as well?
Part of it might be strategic. Its harder for the hitters to face multiple pitchers in one game, they dont get the luxury of 3 or even 4 at bats vs one pitcher, nor do they get to face a fatigued starter in the 7th or 8th. So I think its just as much a head game by the managers as it is modern pitchers inability to go the distance.
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
It's all about the strategy
If a pitcher is on a roll as Al says then yes you would probably keep him in depending on health issues and jeez I guess gut feelings.
But and this is a big but if the pitcher is having some issues then you turn to the specialist’s and these days it seems that from the 6th on there is a specialist for every conceivable situation.
Oh yeah, I know, TWSS
If the world didn't suck we would all fall off.
Guys back in the day...
…didn’t play 162 games a year, plus another 2 months of spring training, plus WBC, plus winter ball. They didn’t have to face dudes that were jacked on roids, built like Howard, Thome, Thomas, or Dunn, or have to travel across the country for 7 pm west coast games then 120 home day games. You take your old pitchers, I’ll take Johan Santana, Tim Licecum, and Cole Hamels. Let’s see who wins 2/3 of those games – the old guys throwing 8 innings, or the new guys with faster fast balls and larger repertoires of pitches.
Evey Hammond: Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici. V: By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.
I'm not sure I understand your challenge...
154 games plus a month of spring training and some barnstorming is still quite a few games, so it’s not like the old timers had a significantly reduced workload relative to modern guys. The biggest change was off-season conditioning, which the old timers had much less (or often none) of and would actually hurt their ability to go longer in games relative to newer guys.
Also, if your guys are only going 6 innings, who relieves them to make up the balance? Replacement level relievers? Is your argument that if you swapped Johan Santana & Steve Carlton (for example) that the roided modern hitters would make Santana’s Twins/Mets worse teams with Carlton while the 70’s & early-80’s would improve with Santana’s better repertoire of pitches in spite of increased bullpen usage on some fairly lackluster teams? Or are you arguing something else?
I believe the modern system makes your middle-to-bottom of the rotation pitchers significantly better than their peers from the past. It also reduces injury risks significantly, as pitching with a tired arms raises the chances of problems occurring according to everything I’ve read. I’m not sure you can really say that the best pitchers in different generations are significantly worse than modern ones. There’s just no way to prove it I can see…
true, but remember...back in the day
…they traveled by train, slept on cots, ate bad meals etc etc. That takes its toll compared to todays player who flys on a chartered plane, stays in a suite at the Four Seasons, eat perfectly prepareed meals and has someone who takes care of every single aspect of his life for him (clothes, luggage, meals, family arrangments etc)
New sig currently under construction
Curious
How did the prevelance of doubleheaders back in the day affect pitcher use? Doubleheaders are a strain on a bullpen. If a schedule had many more doubleheaders, it would be the wise team strategy for a starter to pace himself to get more innings in. Now, with few doubleheaders, that incentive is gone and it might be the better team strategy to have a starters go “all out” even though lesser innings result.
Other possible factors:
Starting pitchers are worth more, thus less disposable as an asset, and more protected
DH has strengthened lineups
Many new parks have less foul territory, extending at-bats and innings for modern pitchers
Koufax
is an example. I’m no baseball historian, and much to young to remember him playing, but I’ve heard the stories of Koufax pitching even though his arm was debilitating to the point of numbness and even poor circulation. Today, a team physician would be all over that condition, and he would have been set down for the season. Back then, he keeps pitching, likely shortening his career.
Likely
No doubt it shorten his career. He was to baseball what Gale Sayers was to football, a thing of beauty.
"You can't take life to seriously, you don't get out of it alive"
Further...
… had modern arthroscopic surgery been available at that time, Koufax almost certainly would have had his elbow scoped — or maybe even had Tommy John surgery, lengthening his career.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Another point
to be made, is how much younger today’s pitchers start to monkey around with pitches. It seems that many pitchers today have numerous arm troubles. I am not saying back in the day they didn’t, but some of the better ones seem to suffer.
I have seen it as well as many others, young boys start to use the curve or whatever well before their bodys are developed. This will give them the edge in the short run, but down the road the potential for breakdown is greater.
Today there are more types of pitches thrown, as opposed to earlier times. Maybe the old school pitchers would throw mostly fastballs and change ups. This way they can rear back and keep a going. Anyhow, just one man’s thoughts.
"You can't take life to seriously, you don't get out of it alive"
Beyond that...
…. pitchers are trained now, from the time they come into pro ball, to be on pitch limits and inning limits. There’s no mentality any more that “I have to complete this game”; pitchers expect to come out even when they’re doing well, and pace themselves in that way.
You can argue whether that’s right or wrong, but that’s the way professional baseball is now played.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
It is
neither “right or wrong” but to me a disappointment. I know I am showing my age, but as stated in the diary, nothing like a Gibson, Jenkins match up.
"You can't take life to seriously, you don't get out of it alive"
Yeah, I know.
The game is different now. Enjoyable in different ways.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Remember when we drank water from the garden hose and not from a bottle?
We survived.
We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on.
Remember when we played outside?
Oh….sorry….I digress.
Hey….spring training games start today!
Everything’s changed….
"Every team will win 60 games, every team will lose 60 games, it's what the team does in the other 42 games that decides the season."
Wait a minute - are you saying tap water is safe?!
The horror!
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
I remember when they put fluoride in tap water
I wonder if there’s any rise in cavities since people don’t drink tap water much anymore.
"Every team will win 60 games, every team will lose 60 games, it's what the team does in the other 42 games that decides the season."
It drives me crazy
and I’m 26. I don’t know exactly how the bottled water conglomerates got it in people’s heads that tap water is bad, but they’ve succeeded.
Here’s a story citing a rise in childrens’ cavities due to a lack of tap water, so it’s definitely happening.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
Funny story
My wife and I were in San Francisco in ’03. While just being seated at a table in an eatery, the waiter came up to take our order. The waiter asked what kind of water would we like. “Would it be fresh spring water, mountain water”, and than his voice changes to a more disparaging tone, “or tap water”.
"You can't take life to seriously, you don't get out of it alive"
Hmmmm....why is it that water that has been flowing through mountains for years
gets an expiration date the minute it gets put in a bottle.
Makes you go hmmmm.
BTW, spring water or mountain water is often just a label and is taken directly from municipal sources. Hmmmm….again.
"Every team will win 60 games, every team will lose 60 games, it's what the team does in the other 42 games that decides the season."
Way before pro-ball
All the little leagues have pinch count limits. It is obviously due to concern over straining or injuring a pitcher but it did not go down
well with Maddux who is of course is old school. He said something like “They got my kid on a F)*&^ ing pitch count and he is 10 years old”
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Feb 25, 2009 1:33 PM CST up reply actions
It makes sense with 10 year olds.
But as you get older, you should be able to increase your endurance.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Well Madog objected
I think the key though is to teach pitchers how to throw consistently WITHOUT injuring their arm. Valuing mechanics & control over velocity from an early age would dramatically cut down on injuries.
"I daydream just like everybody else, I just do it with my body facing the field, so everybody thinks I'm paying attention."- Greg Maddux
by Doggie Stalker on Feb 25, 2009 1:44 PM CST up reply actions
It would, but...
… it’s still a good idea not to overdo it for young arms, especially that young.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
One Word
MONEY
If there’s a hint a guy can blow his next contract by running any abnormal risk, he will get it shut down.
Because today there are guaranteed multi-year contracts where-as in the time frame the other great names mentioned above played YEAR to YEAR, they HAD to go out there and PLAY when banged up. They were PLAYING for next season’s contract; short term and of course significantly less money.
As for the topic itself, IT IS worth a FAN POST.
Sweet Lou for Mayor in '11.
Thank you...
“As for the topic itself, IT IS worth a FAN POST.”
Thank you…
Go Green! Go White! GO STATE! (Now #12,966 on the Cubs season ticket waiting list- UP from 13,031...WHOO HOO!)
You didn't hear of LOOGY in the "old days"
Well, not often. They were rare.
LOOGYs are specialists in today’s game.
LOOGY = (L)eft-handed (O)ne (O)ut (G)u(Y)
Although these articles are dated (2005), they are interesting reads about the history of LOOGY.
No, La Russa didn’t invent the LOOGY.
A History of the LOOGY: Part One
A History of the LOOGY: Part Two
"Every team will win 60 games, every team will lose 60 games, it's what the team does in the other 42 games that decides the season."
Good articles, thanks flach.
I think both the term “LOOGY” and the idea of carrying a guy to get one or two outs every other game are ridiculous.
Evey Hammond: Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici. V: By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.
Thanks for the definition
I’ve figured out what it meant by context, but had never seen what it actually stood for before.
by chitownhawkeye on Feb 26, 2009 6:08 PM CST up reply actions
I grew up watching starting pitchers throw 225 to 275 innings routine
Unfortunately, those days are long gone. And funny thing is the days of 4 man rotations and heavy workloads resulted in probably less starting pitchers going down with major injuries.
Steve Carlton, Tom Seaver, Rick Reuschel, Don Sutton, Burt Hooten, Catfish Hunter, Vida Blue, the list goes on and on.
The difference is that
All the guys who would have been injured had already blown out their arms in the minors by the workloads that were expected of pitchers at the time. At some point someone wised up and realized that, say, 180 innings of an electrically good pitcher + relievers > 275 innings of a average guy who could pitch without his shoulder falling off.
Some people have 3 layers, like pie. Blog Blog Blog
Sorry, been gone all day
First, let’s set a rule:
- Let’s let Al be the one arbiter of whether something should be a FanPost of a FanShot. If you are irritated with a FanPost, well, just go have a drink or something. The fact that 5 posts were dedicated to whether this is a worthy topic is embarrassing.
- And the next time someone breaks the rule, then the original poster gets to slap him in the nuts with a dead trout. 2nd offense, the trout is still alive.
Second, I once read Bob Gibson say that the problem with today’s pitchers is that they nibble around too much. He said they should just “go after” hitters.
Bob Gibson would be watching a lot of balls fly over the fence if he tried that stunt today.
Today’s hitter is better than yesteryear’s. Training, both legit and illegit, are better. We know more about nutrition. The magic of DVD and taping at-bats means they have a far better idea what is coming.
Finally, Gibson would have been suspended twice a season if he tried to pitch like he did in today’s environment.
He probably would have adjusted, but it would have taken more pitches.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
No, the problem is a refusal to pitch inside
Did you ever watch Bob Gibson pitch? Any player who is in the batter’s box and goes diving after an outside pitch is going to get the next one in his ear. If he whines about it, he’ll probably get another pitch up and in.
These days, if a pitcher even comes close to pitching inside, you almost get a bench clearing brawl. You think that Ted Williams would wear the body armor that Barry Bonds wore? Bob Gibson or Sandy Koufax would have been successful in any era.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. -- George Santayana (1863-1952)
There were brawls in the 60's, too.
Remember this one?
Full article on the Marichal/Roseboro brouhaha
List of the “best Dodger brawls of all time”
Just for a couple of examples.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Right... which proves my point
Bob Gibson once said hitters today nibble too much. You CAN’T pitch today like he did.
So, he would have to do more nibbling and run up his pitch count and probably be out of games earlier, which is rebuttal to the original poster’s idea that things were so much better in the olden days.
I personally am not interested in watching pitchers attempt to commit murder. The game IS better for making sure pitchers can’t headhunt.
There is no such thing as an ugly female breast
Pitching inside
and attempting to commit murder (ie headhunting) are two completely different things. All successful pitchers have to pitch inside (save Tom Glavine circa 1991-1996). While some policing may be necessary, MLB has gone way overboard in recent years.
I also disagree with your logic, which seems to be that because every change in the game has favored the hitter (eg. lower mound, body armor, policing inside pitching, tighter balls, smaller parks, etc.), thus increasing offense, then the game is clearly better than yesteryear. Put simply, baseball is more than offense.
I know you’ll disagree, but new is not always improved.
That just seems mean
to the trout. :-)
by chitownhawkeye on Feb 26, 2009 6:10 PM CST up reply actions
this fanpost
was incredibly entertaining and furthermore a very good read. I gave it a rec’d
I dont care who the new owner is as long as he/she/them come equipped with a Jake Peavy and a Joe Beimel!!!
Wusses!!!
In the 1905 Worlds Series, the winning Giants only used three pitchers in the entire fracking series! And one only pitched one inning! Christy Mathewson threw three complete game shutouts in six days! Tom Seaver and Jim Palmer simply can’t throw the kinds of innings that REAL MEN threw. Put a bunch of pantyhose on them and they can hang out with Joe Namath!
Heck, Joe McGinninity threw complete games in BOTH GAMES of DOUBLEHEADERS three times in one month! HE WAS A REAL MAN, unlike wusses like Sandy Koufax who can’t throw more than one game in a day.
Wusses!!!
In the 1905 Worlds Series, the winning Giants only used three pitchers in the entire fracking series! And one only pitched one inning! Christy Mathewson threw three complete game shutouts in six days! Tom Seaver and Jim Palmer simply can’t throw the kinds of innings that REAL MEN threw. Put a bunch of pantyhose on them and they can hang out with Joe Namath!
Heck, Joe McGinninity threw complete games in BOTH GAMES of DOUBLEHEADERS three times in one month! HE WAS A REAL MAN, unlike wusses like Sandy Koufax who can’t throw more than one game in a day.
Wow, you must really mean that.
:-)
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
How much of it is steroids?
Personally, I believe most MLB players are on steroids, yes, even most of our beloved Cubs. I wonder how much of it is due to that. These guys’ tendons and ligaments seem so weak, relatively speaking. I wonder….
Four man rotation
I would like to see an organization start getting ready for a four-man rotation. With the lack of double-headers these days, I think if you start strengthening their arms early in the system, you could get a four-man rotation going in a few years. Kind of surprised no one has tried it.
I think you would see pitchers actually go deeper into games, and you could have a long relief guy and still have an opening for another position player. It would pave the way for an M-Hoff to be mostly a pinch-hitter spot starter (spell D-Lee), and not even have to worry about finding a place he can fill in in the field.
While I agree with the concept
It’s going to be a tough sell. I think that’s what got Fergie Jenkins fired as pitching coach — that was the way that he wanted to go.
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! --Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Mar 4, 2009 11:44 AM CST up reply actions
The concept does seem feasible...
…especially in the beginning of the season (as Al has pointed out). But I think teams are too risk averse to put four guys making big money on the line like that. Having said that, maybe the Rangers could be the test case. I seem to recall Nolan Ryan wanting to go all old school and do away with pitch counts anyway.
My sig line is out for jury duty.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Recap/Game Thread
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
- Shane Victorino lands role on ‘Hawaii Five-0′
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
