With the discussion about shutting down Leake at the end of the year, do you think a 6-man rotation might be a good idea later in the season? Maybe something where the first four get somewhere around their regular rest and let Leake and Chapman/Volquez get extra rest? I know most 6-man rotation ideas fall flat on their face, but I think it might be useful in this situation.
I love this idea for teams with younger stars....or injured stars like Edinson. I have heard all the arguments against it but you cannot convince me that it would not help.
Until the starters can get past the 6th inning, you have to have as many arms in the pen as possible. The pen is starting to blow up already because of the starting pitching.
Only if you dumped Harang and Arroyo. I think it would mess with their preparation to much. But if you went... Cueto - Bailey - Leake - Chapman - Volquez - Wood ... That would be acceptable to keep all the wear and tear down on their young valuable arms...
I think it would work with Harang and Arroyo too. They'd just have to adjust.
Arroyo works well on short rest. He has said in the past that he could pitch on 3 or 4 days rest. I don't think he would want any extra rest. Really though I would not have a problem with a 6 man rotation, but I don't know if that's something you want to start in the middle of the season.
They need to stretch out the younger guys and get them to throw more innings, look at how many innings they threw in the 60's and 70's, the pitchers need to throw more not less.
When I see the 2016 Reds, I see a 100 loss team and no direction.
6-man rotations haven't worked by anyone who's tried them.
We have so many guys that can replace him, it will be alright to shut him down.
It's not possible to stretch them out. The reason they can't do it anymore is because children are different. Also, pitchers didn't throw very many innings in the 70's. It pretty much stopped in the 60's. 400 Innings was pretty common in the 40's and before.Originally Posted by redsfanmia
Children grow up differently. Children had farm chores to do before the sun even rose and had chores to do 365 days a year for a long time, and chores to do after they got home from school. The human body grew up differently, and thus the stamina it could endure was much greater. It's too late as an adult to try to "stretch out an arm". There will still be the occasional freak (Randy Johnson), but now it's 225-240 innings max for most anyone, brought along at 30 IP per year to get there.
I'm not too sure about all this. With the emphasis on weight lifting and stretching in almost every sport today, I think children and adolescents are growing up stronger, faster, and with more endurance than ever before. Yes it's true that pitchers used to throw a lot more innings and get fewer days rest than today, but that's just the evolution of the game. I don't know when the 5-man rotation started or why, but I don't think it was because children/players in the 60s and 70s were any different from those in the 40s. If a 4-man rotation was the norm, then that's what pitchers would adapt to.
We won WWII because of the type of bodies and mental toughness Americans had back then.
Is this a serious comment? haha not that disagree per se, just seems to have very little to do with throwing a baseball.
I suspect that the main reason guys throw less pitches is that, in the old days, you weren't paying a guy millions to throw, so it didn't matter as much if he got hurt.
I don't think guys throw less pitches, just less innings. There's more offense now so it takes longer to get through innings. Even as recently as the 80s it wasn't uncommon to see a complete game at around 100-105 pitches, and that rarely happens today.
We would be speaking German if we had to depend on the 18 year old kids of today to win WWII.
I think it is more the mentality than the physical attributes of today's pitchers. Back in the day kids did what coaches wanted and were more eager to please, today the parents are in charge and with all the money out to made by a freak athlete most parents will not allow their child to be abused when they are in high school or younger. Then once they get to the minor leagues the team has too much money invested in them to allow them to be "stretched" out.
When I see the 2016 Reds, I see a 100 loss team and no direction.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
