Take a chance on Thor?

[whippoorwill]

The Never Sweats.



Now that's a great team name

[G-Fafif]

Thor officially released today, though not on vinyl.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy MD wrote: I'm not sure I agree with that. If all that's going on is that hitters are better and pitchers are better, then we wouldn't have such a grossly detectable change. It'd be largely a standoff.

I don't think it's a standoff and I don't that's all that's going on. I don't think that pitchers and hitters have improved equally. I think that there are biological and genetic constraints on just how much a baseball player can improve and I believe that those restraints limit pitchers more so than hitters. Pitchers who overthrow end up in hospitals. It's much safer for a hitter to swing from his heels.



But beyond the genetic or evolutionary argument, hitting is also up because there has been a stadium revolution in baseball over the last 30 years, where, during that time, practically every existing stadium was torn down and replaced. And those new stadiums, collectively, are more hitter friendly than the stadiums they replaced. They have smaller dimensions. And they all have less foul territory, this to make the stadiums more intimate and provide seats closer to the action. Also, the DH has been universal since the shortened COVID season, so pitchers don't bat anymore.



Finally, there have been two major philosophical shifts in the way the game is played. The first one stems from the realization that all starting pitchers are less effective each successive turn through the lineup. All pitchers. From fringe pitchers to the very best elite starters. And no matter what they throw. Junkball pitchers to fast ball pitchers and everything in between. So as a result, on top of everything else that was discussed, pitchers are now pitching less innings by design.



The second shift is for batters to try and hit more HRs. This has led to, obviously, more HR's. But also, more strikeouts. The analysts have determined that the extra strikeouts are worth the increased runs scored from swinging for the fences.

[Edgy MD]

I've never been comfortable with the times-through-the-lineup thinking.



It's true enough that pitchers — some more than others — are generally less effective each successive turn through the lineup. But (1) it doesn't necessarily follow that the starting pitcher is going to be less effective than the reliever you replace him with. In fact, when choosing between the starting pitcher (or the pitcher currently in the game) and a couple of relievers warming up in the pen, the guy on the mound is the only one who has really exhibited whether or not he's got his stuff for the day. Sticking with him may or may not be the best decision, but it's the most informed decision, and that's worth something. Everyone in the pen is a crapshoot until he gets out to the mound.



Moreover (2), you don't want to get trapped into thinking that you have to make decisions on pulling your pitcher nine guys at a time. If a guy has given up two baserunners and struck out nine through two turns of the lineup, you don't have to pull a Kevin Cash and decide outright that you don't want him to have anything to do with the third time through the lineup. You tighten the reins. You have somebody ready to pull him quickly if he falters. But every single out you get out of your starting pitcher is a victory — a victory that resounds beyond the game at hand, because each out makes it less likely that you won't be in a game situation two days later with your 10th-best pitcher on the mound.



Getting one more out from David Peterson in the sixth on a Tuesday can mean you don't have to go to Trevor Gott to protect a one-run lead in the ninth on a Thursday.



The game should be less about How can I find one more effective pitcher I can trust? and more about How can I get the most out of the pitchers that I have, that I already trust?

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy MD wrote: I've never been comfortable with the times-through-the-lineup thinking. It's true enough that pitchers — some more than others — are generally less effective each successive turn through the lineup. But (1) it doesn't necessarily follow that the starting pitcher is going to be less effective than the reliever you replace him with. In fact, when choosing between the starting pitcher (or the pitcher currently in the game) and a couple of relievers warming up in the pen, the guy on the mound is the only one who has really exhibited whether or not he's got his stuff for the day. Sticking with him may or may not be the best decision, but it's the most informed decision, and that's worth something. Everyone in the pen is a crapshoot until he gets out to the mound. Moreover (2), you don't want to get trapped into thinking that you have to make decisions on pulling your pitcher nine guys at a time.

I'm quite certain that they've thought of all of that stuff and take it into account. These are game by game decisions for the most part.



Also, I left out a significant factor as another reason why IPs are down -- pitch counts. The data is murky on just how effective pitch count limits protect a major league pitcher's health, but at this point in the evolution of that idea, teams don't want to take a chance and end up on the wrong side of the argument or have their aces sustain serious injuries while bearing high pitch count loads. Limiting pitch counts does appear to benefit the health of young and still growing and developing pitchers, though.

[MFS62]

Edgy MD wrote: Moreover (2), you don't want to get trapped into thinking that you have to make decisions on pulling your pitcher nine guys at a time. If a guy has given up two baserunners and struck out nine through two turns of the lineup, you don't have to pull a Kevin Cash and decide outright that you don't want him to have anything to do with the third time through the lineup. You tighten the reins. You have somebody ready to pull him quickly if he falters. But every single out you get out of your starting pitcher is a victory — a victory that resounds beyond the game at hand, because each out makes it less likely that you won't be in a game situation two days later with your 10th-best pitcher on the mound. Getting one more out from David Peterson in the sixth on a Tuesday can mean you don't have to go to Trevor Gott to protect a one-run lead in the ninth on a Thursday.

I absolutely agree.

That formulaic approach to bullpen use drives me nuts. If a reliever retires the side on four pitches, why not use him to start the next inning?

Or, as Jim Brosnan said in one of his books, he was told to "throw as hard as you can for as long as you can, then I'll get somebody else in there".



Later

[Edgy MD]

=batmagadanleadoff post_id=136490 time=1693589284 user_id=68]


I'm quite certain that they've thought of all of that stuff and take it into account. These are game by game decisions for the most part.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy MD wrote: I'm quite certain that they've thought of all of that stuff and take it into account. These are game by game decisions for the most part. It certainly didn't appear to occur to Kevin Cash when his choice cost the Rays a World Series-winning game. He made clear after the game that pulling his pitcher before facing the third time through the order wasn't a game-by-game choice but a matter of policy, and that there was no circumstance he could think of that would change that. I think that's a bad policy. As for pitch counts, it's great that pitchers are having their pitches counted, but there's nothing magical about the 100th pitch and the decisions that are made based on pitch counts seem half thought out. And again, they sure don't seem to be averting injuries.

Yeah, I know about Cash's World Series decision. That's why I wrote "for the most part". I wasn't necessarily advocating for or against any of the aforementioned policies. I was just answering someone's question about why IPs are down. Better hitters, smaller stadiums, a universal DH -- all leading to more offense -- and then coupled with pitch count limits and times through the opposing batting order. That seems to cover that topic quite thoroughly.