Bruce on Z's Game Last Night

[jjgman21]

I don't think there really is dilution of the pitching though. I know there are more teams and other activities to engage in, but the talent pool on both offense and pitching is so much deeper due to population of the country, expansion internationally, and modern sports economics.

 

 

You make some good points, but with the explosion of sports like soccer, basketball, and even football, and the specialization of all of these sports that may diminish somewhat, the expansion of the population. It would be interesting to see if there has been any studies that have taken all of these things into consideration.

 

you have to remember that those sports dilute hitting too. plus, baseball is now a global game. it's growth globally is probably more than any other sport. soccer was always an international game, football hasn't really expanded, and basketball became popular globally 30-40 years before baseball. IMO opinion, if there is any dillution, it is through the growth of non-ball sports...TO THE EXTREME!!!

[stitchface]

a month too late on the Z trade jigman - could have commanded a ransom in july.

[badgercub]

I don't think there really is dilution of the pitching though. I know there are more teams and other activities to engage in, but the talent pool on both offense and pitching is so much deeper due to population of the country, expansion internationally, and modern sports economics.

 

 

You make some good points, but with the explosion of sports like soccer, basketball, and even football, and the specialization of all of these sports that may diminish somewhat, the expansion of the population. It would be interesting to see if there has been any studies that have taken all of these things into consideration.

 

you have to remember that those sports dilute hitting too. plus, baseball is now a global game. it's growth globally is probably more than any other sport. soccer was always an international game, football hasn't really expanded, and basketball became popular globally 30-40 years before baseball. IMO opinion, if there is any dillution, it is through the growth of non-ball sports...TO THE EXTREME!!!

 

Football hasn't expanded? (Since 1995 the NFL has added 4 franchises in Jacksonville, Carolina, Cleveland, and Houston. Not to mention the use of NFL Europe, and the use of the practice squads that have expanded rosters.) Basketball has exploded both in the U.S. and globally only probably since the height of Magic and Bird and continuing with MJ and into the present, probably only the last 20 years in the U.S. and less than that globally. Plus 20 years ago kids played multiple sports, now you see kids concentrate predominantly on one sport year round. I don't necessarily disagree with your points I was just looking for a little more concrete info behind it, and maybe there isn't any as I don't have any to back up my assertion.

[jjgman21]

I don't think there really is dilution of the pitching though. I know there are more teams and other activities to engage in, but the talent pool on both offense and pitching is so much deeper due to population of the country, expansion internationally, and modern sports economics.

 

 

You make some good points, but with the explosion of sports like soccer, basketball, and even football, and the specialization of all of these sports that may diminish somewhat, the expansion of the population. It would be interesting to see if there has been any studies that have taken all of these things into consideration.

 

you have to remember that those sports dilute hitting too. plus, baseball is now a global game. it's growth globally is probably more than any other sport. soccer was always an international game, football hasn't really expanded, and basketball became popular globally 30-40 years before baseball. IMO opinion, if there is any dillution, it is through the growth of non-ball sports...TO THE EXTREME!!!

 

Football hasn't expanded? huh. basketball has exploded both in the U.S. and globally only probably since the height of Magic and Bird and continuing with MJ and into the present, probably only the last 20 years in the U.S. and less than that globally. Plus 20 years ago kids played multiple sports, now you see kids concentrate predominantly on one sport year round. I don't necessarily disagree with your points I was just looking for a little more concrete info behind it, and maybe there isn't any as I don't have any to back up my assertion.

 

there was a long discussion on these issues last winter. I don't know that there has been any comprehensive study or it would have been linked in that thread.

 

football hasn't expanded beyond North America, Europe, and places here or there, and I may be wrong, but the only other major professional league, NFL Europe, plays to half empty stadiums. football couldn't put together a WBC or a world championship like we see in hoops.

 

eastern european nations were playing basketball at a high level as far back as the 60's. the sport has been hugely popular globally for decades. even latin american countries didn't produce the caliber of player to regularly make MLB until the 80's. the best international players didn't come to the NBA sooner only because the best international players were behind the iron curtain. baseball did not catch on in Europe or the Mideast or Australia until long after basketball took off. although I do agree that basketball got an extra boost in the 80's and 90's.

[badgercub]

I don't think there really is dilution of the pitching though. I know there are more teams and other activities to engage in, but the talent pool on both offense and pitching is so much deeper due to population of the country, expansion internationally, and modern sports economics.

 

 

You make some good points, but with the explosion of sports like soccer, basketball, and even football, and the specialization of all of these sports that may diminish somewhat, the expansion of the population. It would be interesting to see if there has been any studies that have taken all of these things into consideration.

 

you have to remember that those sports dilute hitting too. plus, baseball is now a global game. it's growth globally is probably more than any other sport. soccer was always an international game, football hasn't really expanded, and basketball became popular globally 30-40 years before baseball. IMO opinion, if there is any dillution, it is through the growth of non-ball sports...TO THE EXTREME!!!

 

Football hasn't expanded? huh. basketball has exploded both in the U.S. and globally only probably since the height of Magic and Bird and continuing with MJ and into the present, probably only the last 20 years in the U.S. and less than that globally. Plus 20 years ago kids played multiple sports, now you see kids concentrate predominantly on one sport year round. I don't necessarily disagree with your points I was just looking for a little more concrete info behind it, and maybe there isn't any as I don't have any to back up my assertion.

 

there was a long discussion on these issues last winter. I don't know that there has been any comprehensive study or it would have been linked in that thread.

 

football hasn't expanded beyond North America, Europe, and places here or there, and I may be wrong, but the only other major professional league, NFL Europe, plays to half empty stadiums. football couldn't put together a WBC or a world championship like we see in hoops.

 

eastern european nations were playing basketball at a high level as far back as the 60's. the sport has been hugely popular globally for decades. even latin american countries didn't produce the caliber of player to regularly make MLB until the 80's. the best international players didn't come to the NBA sooner only because the best international players were behind the iron curtain. baseball did not catch on in Europe or the Mideast or Australia until long after basketball took off. although I do agree that basketball got an extra boost in the 80's and 90's.

 

I see where you are coming from. Globally there hasn't been a dilution, but definitely in the states I think there has been. Good point

[goonys evil twin]

I don't think there really is dilution of the pitching though. I know there are more teams and other activities to engage in, but the talent pool on both offense and pitching is so much deeper due to population of the country, expansion internationally, and modern sports economics.

 

 

You make some good points, but with the explosion of sports like soccer, basketball, and even football, and the specialization of all of these sports that may diminish somewhat, the expansion of the population. It would be interesting to see if there has been any studies that have taken all of these things into consideration.

 

you have to remember that those sports dilute hitting too. plus, baseball is now a global game. it's growth globally is probably more than any other sport. soccer was always an international game, football hasn't really expanded, and basketball became popular globally 30-40 years before baseball. IMO opinion, if there is any dillution, it is through the growth of non-ball sports...TO THE EXTREME!!!

 

Football hasn't expanded? huh. basketball has exploded both in the U.S. and globally only probably since the height of Magic and Bird and continuing with MJ and into the present, probably only the last 20 years in the U.S. and less than that globally. Plus 20 years ago kids played multiple sports, now you see kids concentrate predominantly on one sport year round. I don't necessarily disagree with your points I was just looking for a little more concrete info behind it, and maybe there isn't any as I don't have any to back up my assertion.

 

there was a long discussion on these issues last winter. I don't know that there has been any comprehensive study or it would have been linked in that thread.

 

football hasn't expanded beyond North America, Europe, and places here or there, and I may be wrong, but the only other major professional league, NFL Europe, plays to half empty stadiums. football couldn't put together a WBC or a world championship like we see in hoops.

 

eastern european nations were playing basketball at a high level as far back as the 60's. the sport has been hugely popular globally for decades. even latin american countries didn't produce the caliber of player to regularly make MLB until the 80's. the best international players didn't come to the NBA sooner only because the best international players were behind the iron curtain. baseball did not catch on in Europe or the Mideast or Australia until long after basketball took off. although I do agree that basketball got an extra boost in the 80's and 90's.

 

You can't claim that eastern europe played high level basketball as far back as the 60's, then claim latin america didn't produce much until the 80's. Latinos have been a part of major league baseball for decades, and baseball has been huge in Japan for nearly as long. Basketball's global growth has trounced baseball's.

[jjgman21]

 

You can't claim that eastern europe played high level basketball as far back as the 60's, then claim latin america didn't produce much until the 80's. Latinos have been a part of major league baseball for decades, and baseball has been huge in Japan for nearly as long. Basketball's global growth has trounced baseball's.

 

why can't I? there's noting inherently contradictory about it. the best international baseball players are in our consciousness because they made it to the majors, or played in the only other major professional league, Japan. they had the opportunity to make it to MLB.

 

just because we only hear about great internationals in basketball now doesn't mean they haven't been around and playing the game professional across the globe for decades. like you said earlier about the history of pitching injuries, alot of it is perception. it took players around the globe a long time to catch up but the players that could have made the NBA did not have the opportunity due to global politics. do you think any other country could have stayed close to the US in baseball in 1968, bad referring or not? not a chance. they were by far the dominant nation in the sport. now they aren't even the favorite in the WBC.

 

also, I am speaking relative to the pertinent period of time. basketball is more popular globally, but when you compare the growth since dillution of baseball has become an alleged problem, the mid 70's or so, baseball's growth internationally has been huge. before that time it was played in North America, Latin America, and Japan. at that point in time, basketball was being played and watched on large scales globally. that isn't true about baseball until the past decade and a half.

[Outshined_One]

they were by far the dominant nation in the sport. now they aren't even the favorite in the WBC.

 

Um, one problem with that argument. The US suffers in the WBC because there are a number of rule changes that go against the US' strengths in basketball. The problem is, the NBA has been hell-bent on getting their name players and coaches in there. We saw this when Larry Brown was in Athens and completely botched everything by not playing his promising young players and sticking to a poor coaching plan. We saw this when a bunch of the me-first ballhogs and egomaniacs were selected to the teams (and continue to be, I'll add), which resulted in a number of no-look passes going flying into the fifth row and tons of low-percentage shots taken. It's an exhibition during the offseason to these guys; I don't think many of them take it seriously.

 

The WBC isn't necessarily about talent. It's about putting together the best team to fit the rules. Unfortunately for the NBA, a number of their star players simply do not fit that mold. They do have a number of guys who are average/above average who would thrive in that environment, however. Unfortunately, those guys rarely get the nod thanks to jersey sales and ratings.

[NorthsideAvenger]

Look, I am as about annoyed as anyone about Baker trying to ride Z for some extra meaningless wins to pack his resume, but I was more upset with Baker for allowing Marmol to throw over 100 pitches in 5 innings, after he had walk 8 batters. That was SOOOO unnecessary

 

Baker simply does NOT know how to run a pitching staff, and every Cub fan in Chicago, and around the country should be bitter at Baker, for possibly ruining two young pitchers, for the benefit of trying to pad his reume.

[CubColtPacer]

Look, I am as about annoyed as anyone about Baker trying to ride Z for some extra meaningless wins to pack his resume, but I was more upset with Baker for allowing Marmol to throw over 100 pitches in 5 innings, after he had walk 8 batters. That was SOOOO unnecessary

 

Baker simply does NOT know how to run a pitching staff, and every Cub fan in Chicago, and around the country should be bitter at Baker, for possibly ruining two young pitchers, for the benefit of trying to pad his reume.

 

At some point you have to leave the starters out there though-Marmol had to stay in that game on Sunday. There were 2 relievers who were unavailable for Sunday's game because they had pitched so much recently, and if we had taken out Marmol earlier we may have run out of pitchers.

[C.C.]

Look, I am as about annoyed as anyone about Baker trying to ride Z for some extra meaningless wins to pack his resume, but I was more upset with Baker for allowing Marmol to throw over 100 pitches in 5 innings, after he had walk 8 batters. That was SOOOO unnecessary

 

Baker simply does NOT know how to run a pitching staff, and every Cub fan in Chicago, and around the country should be bitter at Baker, for possibly ruining two young pitchers, for the benefit of trying to pad his reume.

 

At some point you have to leave the starters out there though-Marmol had to stay in that game on Sunday. There were 2 relievers who were unavailable for Sunday's game because they had pitched so much recently, and if we had taken out Marmol earlier we may have run out of pitchers.

 

I was just going to say that.

[jjgman21]

they were by far the dominant nation in the sport. now they aren't even the favorite in the WBC.

 

Um, one problem with that argument. The US suffers in the WBC because there are a number of rule changes that go against the US' strengths in basketball. The problem is, the NBA has been hell-bent on getting their name players and coaches in there. We saw this when Larry Brown was in Athens and completely botched everything by not playing his promising young players and sticking to a poor coaching plan. We saw this when a bunch of the me-first ballhogs and egomaniacs were selected to the teams (and continue to be, I'll add), which resulted in a number of no-look passes going flying into the fifth row and tons of low-percentage shots taken. It's an exhibition during the offseason to these guys; I don't think many of them take it seriously.

 

The WBC isn't necessarily about talent. It's about putting together the best team to fit the rules. Unfortunately for the NBA, a number of their star players simply do not fit that mold. They do have a number of guys who are average/above average who would thrive in that environment, however. Unfortunately, those guys rarely get the nod thanks to jersey sales and ratings.

 

not twhat I am saying at all though. the point was that in 1968, other countries could stay with us when our 22 year old hoopsters matched up against their best. in 1968, our 22 year olds would smoke the rest of the baseball world. I can't prove it. just seems that way because the rest of the world didn't come close to playing baseball on the same level as we did back then, but they were getting close in basketball.

 

the statement about the WBC is to show how big the global talent pool of baseball players has grown in the past few decades when compared to the global talent pool of basketball players.

[jjgman21]

Look, I am as about annoyed as anyone about Baker trying to ride Z for some extra meaningless wins to pack his resume, but I was more upset with Baker for allowing Marmol to throw over 100 pitches in 5 innings, after he had walk 8 batters. That was SOOOO unnecessary

 

Baker simply does NOT know how to run a pitching staff, and every Cub fan in Chicago, and around the country should be bitter at Baker, for possibly ruining two young pitchers, for the benefit of trying to pad his reume.

 

At some point you have to leave the starters out there though-Marmol had to stay in that game on Sunday. There were 2 relievers who were unavailable for Sunday's game because they had pitched so much recently, and if we had taken out Marmol earlier we may have run out of pitchers.

 

I was just going to say that.

 

you also have about 5 guys you could start rotating between Chicago and Iowa if some guys need a break and actually sacrifice an occasional game for the greater good of the team.

 

naw, gotta win every game to keep up the integrity of blah blah blah.

[Soul]

Why can't we just win and be happy like other teams? :)

[UK1679666180]

 

There's been significant research that shows that starters in a 4-man rotation are not any more likely to be injured than those in a 5-man.

 

 

Do you have a source on that?

 

For BP subscribers only:

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1596

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1605

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1622

 

It's a three-part article by Rany Jazayerli. He's holding a chat at 5:00 tonight, so feel free to ask him about the pros and cons of the 4-man rotation, Dusty's usage of Z, etc:

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/chat/chat.php?chatId=220

 

I believe non-BP subscribers can participate in the chat.

 

There's always one thing that needs to be added. A 4 man rotation that is closely monitored as far as pitcher fatigue and being overworked is more healthy than a 5 man rotation that is being over-worked and vice versa.

[Caryatid]

Why can't we just win and be happy like other teams? :)

 

I don't think that's possible...for a number of reasons.

[cheapseats]

 

There's always one thing that needs to be added. A 4 man rotation that is closely monitored as far as pitcher fatigue and being overworked is more healthy than a 5 man rotation that is being over-worked and vice versa.

 

Of course. When Bob Boone used a 4-man rotation in 1995, Kevin Appier and Chris Haney both ended up with arm injuries. Leaving Appier out to throw 141 pitches right before he went down probably had something to do with his injury.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

 

There's always one thing that needs to be added. A 4 man rotation that is closely monitored as far as pitcher fatigue and being overworked is more healthy than a 5 man rotation that is being over-worked and vice versa.

 

Of course. When Bob Boone used a 4-man rotation in 1995, Kevin Appier and Chris Haney both ended up with arm injuries. Leaving Appier out to throw 141 pitches right before he went down probably had something to do with his injury.

 

I don't think Appier's "mechanics" helped at all either.

[Guest]

Look, I am as about annoyed as anyone about Baker trying to ride Z for some extra meaningless wins to pack his resume, but I was more upset with Baker for allowing Marmol to throw over 100 pitches in 5 innings, after he had walk 8 batters. That was SOOOO unnecessary

 

Baker simply does NOT know how to run a pitching staff, and every Cub fan in Chicago, and around the country should be bitter at Baker, for possibly ruining two young pitchers, for the benefit of trying to pad his reume.

 

At some point you have to leave the starters out there though-Marmol had to stay in that game on Sunday. There were 2 relievers who were unavailable for Sunday's game because they had pitched so much recently, and if we had taken out Marmol earlier we may have run out of pitchers.

The season is toast, anyway. You can rotate relievers through Iowa if you need fresh arms.

[Caryatid]

The argument that you need to lean harder on stud starters during a pennant race is an acceptable argument, although I don't necessarily agree with it.

 

There is absolutely no argument, however, for 120 pitch games for a team that's 21 games under .500

[CaliforniaRaisin]

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/chat/chat.php?chatId=220

 

I believe non-BP subscribers can participate in the chat.

 

Conor Glassey (Woodinville, WA): Rany - Do you think the Royals should try and stretch Sisco out and convert him back to a starter for next season?

 

Rany Jazayerli: I've been advocating this particular move for about a year now, but that ship has sailed. Sisquatch needs to show some semblance of control in middle relief before we can contemplate whether he can hold up for seven innings at a time.

 

Sisquatch. Holy crap, that's freaking awesome.