WHY ALL PITCHERS DON'T PITCH 2 INNINGS EVERY DAY.

Like the guys who hit and field every day like Albert Pujols, why has the entire lineup never been utilized.

One hitters don't make pitchers look good, they make offensive teams look bad, they cant get a hit off Dallas Bradenn in the 9th, the Rays freaking SUCK! Dallas Braden for sure doesn't rule.

If each pitcher were to pitch one two innings, every day, they'd be fresh and lively, none of this weeks rest, "I'm God" blogona.

We want KERSHAW!

I have no idea what you're talking about but if you try pitching everyday you'll realize why this isn't close to being possible.

Sorry bro, this isn't physically possible. The throwing motion is so unnatural, if guys throw in games every day, 75% of pitchers would be hurt.

Dude put down the purple drink and step away. I actually lol'd out loud trying to read this.

I think you have been watching too much softball where the chicks pitch every inning of every game all year long... Lol

But on the flip side if it were a game 7 and you had all 5 starters available it would be tougher as hitters to face 5 good starters for 2 innings each or so than 1 on short rest IMO

Kinda like an all star game you get to see 5-9 stud pitchers. But there is a reason that only happens once or very rarely.

Not to mention if you utilized your entire bullpen they would each throw to like 2 batters

Hallsgator said:

Sorry bro, this isn't physically possible. The throwing motion is so unnatural, if guys throw in games every day, 75% of pitchers would be hurt.

Click to expand...

Aren't they already.


Still trying to comprehend if this topic is in English or not.

I used to have a theory of having a 9-pitcher rotation, three guys throwing 3 innings every 3 days. I think it was more to make the 3/9 numbers so common in baseball match up more for the pitching side, but I started to wonder if it was a secret formula for success. I'm sure it was an obvious recipe for disaster. But if I ever own a minor league team I'll try it. And they'll all throw Dr. Mike Marshall style.

smapdi said:

I used to have a theory of having a 9-pitcher rotation, three guys throwing 3 innings every 3 days. I think it was more to make the 3/9 numbers so common in baseball match up more for the pitching side, but I started to wonder if it was a secret formula for success. I'm sure it was an obvious recipe for disaster. But if I ever own a minor league team I'll try it. And they'll all throw Dr. Mike Marshall style.

Click to expand...

La Russa tried that with the A's (1995?), and the pitchers rebelled. I'm with you, though, I think it would make a lot more sense; just look at how expensive reliable starting pitching is, and how cheap effective relievers are. If a low-payroll team could get rid of the starters and cobble together nine or ten relievers, it might actually garner support, since all of a sudden Ws would start appearing on their records.

James52411 said:

Click to expand...

Great clip!

Ummm... that's a great twitter handle afrobandit. I'm sure you are a blast to follow - especially if your tweets are anywhere as insightful as this original post.

LWMM said:

La Russa tried that with the A's (1995?), and the pitchers rebelled. I'm with you, though, I think it would make a lot more sense; just look at how expensive reliable starting pitching is, and how cheap effective relievers are. If a low-payroll team could get rid of the starters and cobble together nine or ten relievers, it might actually garner support, since all of a sudden Ws would start appearing on their records.

Click to expand...

That would be terrible. You would have a bunch of Chad Durbins and Chris Resops throwing everyday. And if you want the good relievers, you still have to pay, look at Papelbon, Soriano, Lidge, etc.

Most relievers are successful because they only have to face the line-up one time through because they only have two pitches. Once they start turning the line-up over, they will most likely be hit hard.

Wes said:

I have no idea what you're talking about but if you try pitching everyday you'll realize why this isn't close to being possible.

Click to expand...

Baby steps, Wes. First, he needs to try not drinking for ONE day

What in GOD'S holy name are you blathering about!?

Hallsgator said:

That would be terrible. You would have a bunch of Chad Durbins and Chris Resops throwing everyday. And if you want the good relievers, you still have to pay, look at Papelbon, Soriano, Lidge, etc.

Most relievers are successful because they only have to face the line-up one time through because they only have two pitches. Once they start turning the line-up over, they will most likely be hit hard.

Click to expand...

Papelbon, Soriano and Lidge are all closers. I'm talking about middle relievers, such as JP Howell, Tommy Hanson, Burke Badenhop, Grant Balfour, Ryan Webb. All sub 4 ERA guys--good, but not spectacular---making a couple million a year (Balfour is 4m a year, the others are between .5 and 1.5). Toss them out for 3 innings every three days, and they're still only going through the lineup one time before they're replaced. Then you're only paying 20 million/year on pitching, instead of 20 million/year on just one starter.

I'm not sure how closers fit into this model. As posed, it goes for the 3 inning save. I suppose you could also have a specialist for when the 9th inning starts to get out of hand, although closers tend to be expensive, and this model is about bang for the buck.


Edit: just looked up the highest paid relievers. Of the top 25 contracts, 20 are for closers and 5 are for middle relievers. None of the contracts of those five would even crack the top 28 list for starting pitchers, and only two are for even half as much as #28 (Kevin Milwood, 12 million/year):

Kerry Wood: 10.25
Danys Baez: 6.33
Mike Gonzalez: 6
Octavio Dotel: 5.5
Joaquin Benoit: 5.5

LWMM said:

Papelbon, Soriano and Lidge are all closers. I'm talking about middle relievers, such as JP Howell, Tommy Hanson, Burke Badenhop, Grant Balfour, Ryan Webb. All sub 4 ERA guys--good, but not spectacular---making a couple million a year (Balfour is 4m a year, the others are between .5 and 1.5). Toss them out for 3 innings every three days, and they're still only going through the lineup one time before they're replaced. Then you're only paying 20 million/year on pitching, instead of 20 million/year on just one starter.

I'm not sure how closers fit into this model. As posed, it goes for the 3 inning save. I suppose you could also have a specialist for when the 9th inning starts to get out of hand, although closers tend to be expensive, and this model is about bang for the buck.

Click to expand...

That's why I said you be throwing a bunch of Durbins and Resops unless you want good relievers. Then you have pay anyway.

How do you know they go through the line-up once? How many times do pitchers only face 9 batters in three innings? How many relievers typically go three innings? Not very many. This plan would not work with a bunch of average middle relievers. They are in the bullpen for a reason. They aren't good enough to be a starter and they don't have closer stuff. This plan is doomed to fail.

Wait, Tommy Hanson? Dude is a #2 starter for the Braves.

You may be saving money, but you'll also be winning 60 games a year.

Hallsgator said:

That's why I said you be throwing a bunch of Durbins and Resops unless you want good relievers. Then you have pay anyway.

How do you know they go through the line-up once? How many times do pitchers only face 9 batters in three innings? How many relievers typically go three innings? Not very many. This plan would not work with a bunch of average middle relievers. They are in the bullpen for a reason. They aren't good enough to be a starter and they don't have closer stuff. This plan is doomed to fail.

Wait, Tommy Hanson? Dude is a #2 starter for the Braves.

You may be saving money, but you'll also be winning 60 games a year.

Click to expand...

Edited this into my above post, but I'll repost it here:

Just looked up the highest paid relievers. Of the top 25 contracts, 20 are for closers and 5 are for middle relievers. None of the contracts of those five would even crack the top 28 list for starting pitchers, and only two are for even half as much as #28 (Kevin Milwood, 12 million/year):

Kerry Wood: 10.25
Danys Baez: 6.33
Mike Gonzalez: 6
Octavio Dotel: 5.5
Joaquin Benoit: 5.5


I don't think it's a stretch to imagine most relievers having the stamina to go three innings, since we're talking about an extra day of rest here: 1-2 days instead of 0-1.

The average MLB whip is about 1.3 (it's the median of team stats), so we're looking at a 3 inning reliever facing about 13 batters. The question, then, is whether he can fool a third of them twice. I don't think that's out of the question, although I'm not sure how to exactly quantify that outlook. Sure, you're not going to take Howell or Balfour and turn them into a starter, eating 6 innings and going through the lineup three times. But can they do half that? Right now there's no role inbetween 1-2 inning reliever and 6 inning starter, just as there's no AAAA for the Matt Diazs and Alex Gordons to tee off in. But if you select a number of good quality relievers, as outlined above, I believe that they could fit that, as yet undefined, role.


My bad on Hanson. Meant to say Livan Hernandez, who has a .75mil contract and a 3.68 ERA.