- This topic has 9 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 2 months, 4 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
It seems to be obvious that our relief corp is not quite up to par, and that’s maybe giving them more credit than is deserved. We do have a couple or three of them that are holding their own, so it’s not like the whole bullpen needs to be flushed, but you could replace about 50% of them out there with other names and not be any worse off. But I also hear the same complaint on interviews and podcasts of personel or sportscasters from other teams. The sickness is apparently rampant.
Bullpens in general, are like a land of the lost, so it’s not like we’re alone with the problem. Everybody wants good relief pitching and agrees it’s a must thing to have, but they can’t seem to find it. Occasionally somebody gets a group together that achieves relief, keeping a bad game in check, measured on the whole of course. But it never seems to last long.Whoever first coined the term “relief pitcher”–I’m not sure how they meant that, so what is the exact definition?
Does relieving the starting pitcher mean he’s being fired on the spot and must be replaced? Like you and I would be “relieved” of our jobs if we exhibited poor performance?Are you relieving a starter or other pitcher who has allowed a bunch of runs from prolonged ERA agony by replacement with a “relief pitcher”? This would suggest the quality of the replacement guy is not highly important, he is only out there to be a replacement arm to try and let the game run it’s course.
Are your intentions to bring in another pitcher who has shown a high rate of success at stopping the situation from getting worse or the present baserunners he inherits from scoring? If this is the case, these elite pitchers should be some of the highest paid athletes on the team because their performance has a direct effect on whether a game can be won or not.
Are you quietly throwing in the towel and putting another guy out there to take the hit to save the rest of the staff from potential harm, thus giving -them- the “relief”?
Does a manager make a move just for the sake of saving face or make the move to appease somebody else, thus bringing -himself- some relief? (from the fans, other teammates, the front office?)
I’d like to see what the stats say about a relief pitcher being brought into the game with or without runners on and and how many times the first batter he faces gets a hit or reaches base through a walk or HBP. Got to be near 75%.
I do not call that “relief”.The definition/role of relief pitchers evolves along with the game. IMO, pitcher use has spiraled totally out of control. Last night the Cardinals used 8 pitchers in a 9 inning game. That is not how baseball should be played. The ever decreasing IP by starters, matchup derangement syndrome, tunnel vision focus on velocity at the expense of control, whatever the reasons, it is out of control.
Yes, more alarming than the belief starting pitchers can’t throw more than 5 innings is the belief that relief pitchers can’t throw more than one inning.
FWIW, in the minors, the Cardinals have been having many relievers pitch multiple innings. It is needed because starters are being limited, with the explanation of protecting them. With so many pitching injuries, I can understand that, but we are seeing the cost later on.
Organizations will need to look not only at how impressive a potential prospect’s stuff is, but also how much wear/damage the arm has already taken on to arrive at that stuff. The technology and understanding to do that is emerging. Elsewhere I linked an excellent article by a qualified person which sheds light on the subject. As an example:
“Back in 2008, I published a research study that looked at the range of motion of professional baseball pitchers and noted that their throwing shoulders had 137 degrees of external rotation. When we measure players now, it’s not uncommon to have 140-155 degrees of external rotation.
We know that external rotation in the throwing shoulder is due to boney adaptations from throwing while the growth plates are open. Youth baseball players are throwing so much, that the volume of throwing is likely leading to more boney changes, and more layback.
So that lat will need to produce tension to eccentrically control the arm into layback and switch to concentric acceleration from a more biomechanically disadvantageous position. The lat is needing to produce more force at further amounts of end range of motion.”So that is something resulting from usage as a youth that puts unusual stress on a structure that affects shoulder function and can be measured. Just as an example of what I mean. Here is the link to the article.
The gist of the above is that due to structural changes in the shoulder caused by throwing as a youth while the bone growth plates are open, the lat has to do its job from a “biomechanically disadvantageous position”. Further, the extent to which this this exists in a player can be measured.
This is just an example of what I mean. But when evaluating a potential draftee or signee, orgs will have to pay more attention to this, or what is happening with pitcher attrition will just keep happening.
It doesn’t matter how good somebody’s stuff is if they destroyed or significantly damaged their arm to achieve that stuff. The evaluation needs to factor that in.
Here’s how I look at it, Pinball. The difference between a starter going 5 1/3 innings and 6 innings is only 2/3 of an inning. However, that extra 2/3 of an inning of relief means you will use four relievers in the game instead of three.
Like you said, some of our relievers are better than others. And by the time you trot four of them out there, one of them is likely to cough up some runs.
Also, as the season progresses, some of these relievers will be getting overworked and will lose effectiveness.
Yes, more alarming than the belief starting pitchers can’t throw more than 5 innings is the belief that relief pitchers can’t throw more than one inning.
I certainly agree, and if this continues, baseball might evolve into using two ‘starters’ per day, we’ll call them pitchers who can go 5 innings comfortably, and rotate them through every fourth day. There would be no true need for a 5th starter in a rotation. You’d only need about five or six pitchers who you’d call relievers out in your bullpen, and their use would mainly be for games that are statistically beyond hope, ones that go into extra innings, or to get things back on track because of rainouts/scheduling issues. Same amount of pitchers on the 26 man roster as now, just different roles.
It used to be that pitchers would pace themselves and ease up at times to hitters they were likely to get out without having to throw 90+. Today with that gun clocking every pitch, guys have to be throwing hard all the time. Also you had the pitcher batting two or three times a game and that helped.
One role that has gone by the wayside is the old spot starter. There was a time when clubs often had a guy who would start maybe 10-12 games, and relieve in 30 others. Guys like Stan Williams and Al McBean. Don’t see that anymore, although Liberatore sort of did that for us a couple years ago. But usually if an extra starter is needed clubs bring a guy up from the minors to make a start, then send him back down afterwards.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.