Rogers: MLB kicking around idea of making starting pitchers reach a 100 pitch count

[spaincubsfan]

Posting here because it would also impact Cubs, but likely years away from being implemented.

 

[Irrelevant Dude]

I'm not going to read the article, but I can conclude that it is a stupid idea.

[WhyCantWeWin]

I like it, but i wonder if it would make pitching injuries worse? 

[Tryptamine]

Don't need to read it to know it's stupid. 

[Tank]

What issue does it solve though? 

[LBiittner]

How would this affect the cubs if implemented today.

Welp , Assad would definitely be relegated to the bullpen.

Every young cub starter would have to throw 100 pitches.

Certainly no openers on a bullpen game.

We'd end up having 7 or 8 starters on the IL. (Whoops already been there)

Let's just switch to an electronic game, and the best programmers meet in the W.S.

This is so horsefeathers dumb

 

[Rcal10]

13 minutes ago, LBiittner said:

How would this affect the cubs if implemented today.

Welp , Assad would definitely be relegated to the bullpen.

Every young cub starter would have to throw 100 pitches.

Certainly no openers on a bullpen game.

We'd end up having 7 or 8 starters on the IL. (Whoops already been there)

Let's just switch to an electronic game, and the best programmers meet in the W.S.

This is so horsefeathers dumb

 

I don’t like the idea. But I also don’t see the need. To me the biggest thing they should do is get the strike zone figured out. And they need to do that by not having umpires call balls and strikes. To me that is a much bigger issue than making a starter go 6 innings. My biggest issue with this is what happens when a manager would normally do a bullpen day? I guess they couldn’t do that. 

[Tank]

1 minute ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t like the idea. But I also don’t see the need. To me the biggest thing they should do is get the strike zone figured out. And they need to do that by not having umpires call balls and strikes. To me that is a much bigger issue than making a starter go 6 innings. My biggest issue with this is what happens when a manager would normally do a bullpen day? I guess they couldn’t do that. 

Tennis has recently gotten rid of line judges in favor of a fully-automated line calling system. Aside from a few kinks to work out, it has largely been a success. It's time for baseball to do the same. 

[Irrelevant Dude]

58 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I don’t like the idea. But I also don’t see the need. To me the biggest thing they should do is get the strike zone figured out. And they need to do that by not having umpires call balls and strikes.

I agree.  And they need to do it FULL TIME, not some half-assed challenge system.  If they need to use a challenge system at the big league level for a year to get some bugs ironed out, that's fine, but that should be nothing more than an interim solution toward the ultimate goal of a fully automated strike zone.

[jersey cubs fan]

1 hour ago, Tank said:

What issue does it solve though? 

I think one thing it would do is increase offense. The article referenced the concept of moving away from pitchers focusing on overpowering stuff and focused more on command. In theory you’d see more hittable strikes, fewer walks and strikeouts. More balls in play. Teams would have to adjust how they develop pitching. 
 

First thought was I hated it but after reading it’s not terrible. If pitchers don’t go 6 they can come out if throw 100 pitches, give up 4 runs, or get injured. The last one is enforced with mandatory IL stint if pulled for injury. 

[Tryptamine]

Yes, what MLB needs is more injured pitchers. Every team is going to have to roster like 7 starters with another 2 or 3 ready to go in AAA.

[CubinNY]

22 minutes ago, jersey cubs fan said:

I think one thing it would do is increase offense. The article referenced the concept of moving away from pitchers focusing on overpowering stuff and focused more on command. In theory you’d see more hittable strikes, fewer walks and strikeouts. More balls in play. Teams would have to adjust how they develop pitching. 
 

First thought was I hated it but after reading it’s not terrible. If pitchers don’t go 6 they can come out if throw 100 pitches, give up 4 runs, or get injured. The last one is enforced with mandatory IL stint if pulled for injury. 

yes, at first it seems preposterous, but after reading the article there is some sense to it. I know TT was all about the double hook. That's not a bad idea if a team wants to yank a pitcher. But also, do everything- Automatic strike zone, lower the mound or move it back, double hook. Just do it all. 

Edited August 15, 2024 by CubinNY

[sneakypower]

you're permitted an early exit if you throw 100 pitches, so Assad could still throw his customary 3-1/3 IP of sweaty 1-run ball

Edited August 15, 2024 by sneakypower

[Tank]

36 minutes ago, sneakypower said:

you're permitted an early exit if you throw 100 pitches, so Assad could still throw his customary 3-1/3 IP of sweaty 1-run ball

Stop that! 😂

[Brock Beauchamp]

I like the idea of changing rules to return starting pitchers to prominence but I'm not sure this rule set gets us there. But I'm glad MLB is no longer sitting on its hands and doing nothing while analytics continue making the game less fun for spectators.

[LBiittner]

So horton brown wicks will no longer be considered starters because none of these are permitted to throw 100 ???

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

I like the idea of changing rules to return starting pitchers to prominence but I'm not sure this rule set gets us there. But I'm glad MLB is no longer sitting on its hands and doing nothing while analytics continue making the game less fun for spectators.

I am all for making changes that make the game better. But they need to start with the automatic strike zone. And I agree it should be used full time without a challenge system. To me that is the first thing they should do. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

2 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

I am all for making changes that make the game better. But they need to start with the automatic strike zone. And I agree it should be used full time without a challenge system. To me that is the first thing they should do. 

I don't have a strong preference of ABS versus the challenge system but agree that one of the two needs to be implemented.

[Rcal10]

1 hour ago, LBiittner said:

So horton brown wicks will no longer be considered starters because none of these are permitted to throw 100 ???

All would be starters and all would have to be conditioned to throw 100 pitches. I am certain Wicks has thrown 100 before. I would imagine if they did this they might allow for some early season shorter outings. Maybe 85 pitches through mid April and then 100. But it is so hard to really do this. Often guys come back from an injury and the team hopes to get 75 pitches or 5 innings out of a guy. Not sure how that would work now. 

[Rcal10]

1 minute ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

I don't have strong feeling of ABS versus the challenge system but agree that one of the two needs to be implemented.

There are just too many missed calls to do a challenge system. It has to be just all automated, IMO. 

[Irrelevant Dude]

3 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

I don't have a strong preference of ABS versus the challenge system but agree that one of the two needs to be implemented.

To me, the biggest problem with a challenge system is the way it takes the excitement out of the moment.  I want there to be finality to the umpire's call.  As a fan, I don't want to have to temper my reactions knowing that any ball/strike call could be challenged and overturned.  Let's just get the calls right, and get them right immediately.

[chibears55]

Not 100 pitches, the rule would be to go 6 innings ..

This is a dumb idea

 

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/mlb-reportedly-weighing-six-inning-requirement-for-starting-pitchers-how-mandatory-outings-could-work/

[sweetpeteman]

It's multiple things:

6 innings

100 pitches

Giving up 4 or more earned runs (why not just runs?)

Getting injured

 

 

[Soul]

It’s starting to sound like 6 innings unless he’s not doing well...

[Rcal10]

7 hours ago, Soul said:

It’s starting to sound like 6 innings unless he’s not doing well...

That is because that is what it is. If he is in the 5th inning and at 100 pitches he probably isn’t doing well. If he gave up 4 runs before the 6th inning he isn’t doing well. So call it as you said, 6 innings unless he isn’t doing well.