How the Twins' Organizational Pitching Plan Informs Trades for a Starter

10 hours ago, DocBauer said:

I don't think the mention of Ohtani is even relevant as he's both special and unique.

As to any other ideas about a 6 man rotation, I don't see it as viable or necessary. To some degree, all teams do it here and there between double headers, giving someone an extra day or rest, trying to extend a season for a young or rehabbed arm, etc. But the 5 man rotation has been successful for DECADES. It works.

With apologies to those who clamor for the days of a 4 man staff or starters consistently going 7 IP, or more, you just have to understand the game has CHANGED. 

And MLB, IMO, has been too slow to adapt...in some areas.

I still remember when a guy who threw 88mph had a good fastball. Now, that's a junk ball thrower. BACK IN THE DAY, it was considered a no-no for position players to lift weights as it would decrease their flexibility and ability to hit. Yes, that was true.

Things began to change dramatically sometime in the 80's where players began to get bigger, stronger, faster, through weight training and good exercise programs. (Yes, there was a steroid situation, but not for everyone). I dare say a player from TODAY, even a slightly above average player...let's just say a Kepler, Polanco, healthy Kirilloff player from our current Twins...would have been DOMINATE in the 60's and 70's. They would just be a different kind of athlete.

Let's think about the NFL for a moment. Even through a good chunk of the 80's, if you didn't have a STUD RB, you weren't going to win, generally. Have you ever looked at career passing numbers from HOF QB's from the 20th Century? Tarkenton was the outlier in the 70's who's numbers were beat, eventually, by Marino, Payton, Farmer, etc, in a NEW GAME and 16 game season. But look at Tittle, and Otto Graham and Bradshaw and Namath, and the list goes on. Their numbers don't even compare to late 20th and 21st century numbers produced in today's game. 

So MLB should stay stuck in retro because why? 

Analytics are NOT some disease, it's just a change. Hitters are so much more dangerous, so pitchers have become more wicked in their stuff and velocity. For DECADES, analytics have been in play. The very nature of platooning a LH or RH batter or pitcher was considered "natural". They just didn't call it "analytics" back then.

Discovery has shown that as players have grown, so has the usage of players grown. Unless you have one of a very special group of SP at your disposal, you are proven to be better off having your SP go through the lineup twice, maybe three times, but no more.

No offense to Blyleven, or Ryan, or Palmer, or pitcher X you want to name from the 60's to 80's, but if they faced today's athletes, and those players had I Pads to watch their approach at the plate, our perspective of their careers and results would change.

And that's OK. It's just a natural progression of the game.

I applaud the pitch clock. I applaud the 3 batter minimum unless finishing an inning. I applaud the 2 throws to 1B as it was getting ridiculous! I love speed being brought back in to the game because of the 2 throws. (The larger bases are really not a big deal). And I applaud the 26 man roster, though I think MLB is making a mistake there.

For YEARS I have DESPISED the NFL 45 man game day roster. Especially as the game has changed, why in hell did they have a 53 man roster but only 45 could play? ESPECIALLY when the seasons became longer, and injury concerns became more prominent, why?? THANKFULLY they've adapted and the practice squad ups and downs have become more flexible, though I still have some issues with game day rosters.

I actually LOVED the MLB roster construction during covid. It was a 30 man roster that dropped down to 28. I may be recalling incorrectly.  But I believe that was the initial plan. 

With the way the game has changed, SP now throw as hard as they can for 5-6 IP, occasionally more. And that's done for maximum effort and production. But for so many reasons, we are in a new era. And if we want more excitement and energy in the game we love, I wish MLB would reflect back to the covid days. 

Why not a 28 man roster permanently to adapt to today's game? 13 pitchers is enough, IMO. But how about 15 position players so injury is less of an issue. Or platoons could take place for more exciting production. Or a PH or speedster off the bench might make a difference. 

In years past, a 10 man staff was accepted. An 11 man staff was understable. Anything more was crazy. But its not where the game is today.

You'd rather have a 14/14 split, I will only debate you to a certain degree. But I think a 13/15 split just makes sense.

4 SP is never coming back. I don't think a 6 man rotation makes sense either, we're just talking about "give away" games as most teams can't even find 5 good SP.

MLB, IMO, should just adapt to the 28 man roster they had a couple years ago and just allow for the changes in the game as it is TODAY. 

 

Games seem a little more exciting with the 28 man in September! I think the roster limitations and a maximum of options on a player are both in place so the rich clubs can’t stash players and water down the rest of the League’s talent pool. Tough for me to argue against this. IMO - 26 man with a decent AAA team to supplement in times of injury, all bases are covered.