Jump to content
North Side Baseball
  • Welcome to the Era of the Six-Man Starting Rotation


    Matt Trueblood

    Whether you've noticed or not, you've been living in the time of the six-man rotation for a few years. In 2023, we saw an inflection point that has to shape the Cubs' offseason plans.

    Image courtesy of © David Banks-USA TODAY Sports

    Cubs Video

    When MLB expanded to 30 teams in 1998, just over 42 percent of all starts were made with five or more days of rest. By then, the four-man starting rotations that prevailed in the 1960s and 1970s were receding rapidly into memory, but every team was doing their utmost to field a consistent five-man rotation. At right around that same time, though, modern standards for protecting pitchers from overuse took root, and a gradual trend toward more rest prevailed.

    Still, it was 2011 before as many as half the league's starts happened on extended rest. Four days remained the most common interval between outings--no longer the majority, but the plurality, and that by a wide margin--until 2018 or so. At that point, though, an upsurge in starts on five days of rest occurred. It hasn't abated. In fact, coming out of the pandemic, it's only become more pronounced.

    Percentage of Starts Made on 5 or More Days Rest, MLB, 1998-2023.png

    There have been a few subtle changes to the seasonal schedule, adding an extra day off or two for each team. A few teams (most notably, perhaps, the Angels, who needed to accommodate Shohei Ohtani's two-way play) have converted to an outright six-man rotation, and a few others used it extensively in 2021, to work around the disruption to their pitcher's seasonal workloads due to the COVID-induced shortening of the 2020 season. Even among the teams still ostensibly using a five-man rotation, though, there's been a shift. Teams use off days to shorten their rotation and skip a struggling fifth starter much less often. When the schedule doesn't give them a break for more than 10 days or so, they often sneak in a bullpen game, or call someone up from Triple A to make a spot start.

    Even when teams get a couple of clustered off days, they often opt to let the rotation stretch out to a week, rather than prioritize keeping their ace on a five-day schedule. Until 2015, the league had never seen even 900 starts made on six or more days of rest. Since 2018, every full season has seen at least 1,000 such starts. In 2023, the median teams (the Marlins and Rangers) used starters on what would traditionally be counted as long rest (at least five days) 102 times. The Cubs only had 73 starts on at least that much rest. The only team who had fewer was the Giants, who survived much of the second half by keeping Alex Cobb and Logan Webb on a regular rotation and filling the other three days with piggyback starters, openers, and Johnny Wholestaff.

    By the end of the year, it was pretty clear that the Cubs' bucking of the global trend wasn't going to be a triumph of old-school thinking. On the contrary, their starters all seemed to break or wear down, contributing significantly to their September collapse. For 2024, this team needs not only to amass depth beyond their established rotation, but to consider making that rotation itself longer. 

    If both Marcus Stroman and Kyle Hendricks return, they'll slot right into the group, alongside Justin Steele, Jameson Taillon, and Jordan Wicks. That's five, already, but it doesn't need to (and, in fact, shouldn't) be the end of the team's plan. They still ought to pursue a front-of-the-rotation starter, and not at the expense of any of the guys listed here. Nor do they need to be looking to trade Javier Assad, Cade Horton, Hayden Wesneski, Ben Brown, or Drew Smyly, who would not fit into the Opening Day rotation picture if an established star were added to the crew of Steele, Stroman, Hendricks, Taillon and Wicks. 

    Some of the Cubs' rotation depth pieces will be perfectly set up to open 2024 in Iowa. Some will be well-suited to relief work, while staying ready to work into the rotation if and when needed. Injuries will crop up, so having at least 10 viable starters is the smart way to line things up if the goal is to reach the postseason. They can make trades from whatever surplus they establish. Even before those things happen, though, the Cubs should be looking to make use of six starters. It's become the modern standard, and they're not set up to defy it.

    Obviously, this will be an expensive spot to fill. That's why the discussion we began Wednesday, about how high the front office will be able and willing to steer the overall payroll, is so important. Who do you want to see the team add to the starting corps for 2024? Who's expendable? Can you stomach the six-man rotation, which would have seemed so radical just a few years ago?

    Think you could write a story like this? North Side Baseball wants you to develop your voice, find an audience, and we'll pay you to do it. Just fill out this form.

    MORE FROM NORTH SIDE BASEBALL
    — Latest Cubs coverage from our writers
    — Recent Cubs discussion in our forums
    — Follow NSBB via Twitter, Facebook or email
    — Become a North Side Baseball Caretaker

     Share


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    It's hard to say what the team's preference is around a 6 man rotation since prior to Assad and Wicks balling out to end the year they hadn't had a good 6th starter since Mike Montgomery. 

    I'd expect next year them to do a 6 man coming out of ST.  Hendricks and Stroman could use a bit of a breather, and Steele could REALLY use one.  You've also got off days almost every week early on.  I don't expect it to go much further than that though unless maybe the sign one of the Japanese starters.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Why would you want your best two pitcher to pitch less often.  And your two worst pitchers pitch more often.  Give me the 4 man rotation.  Teams don't even have 5 very good pitchers.  

     

    I would actually try this.  The first 2 months, I'm pitching my four best guys as my rotation.  In June, July, and August, I'd add a 5th pitcher to help them out in the hot months.  In September, I'm dropping the worst pitcher and bringing it home with the best I have.  The more often our best pitchers pitch, the better chance of winning games.

    Edited by thawv
    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    51 minutes ago, thawv said:

    Why would you want your best two pitcher to pitch less often.  And your two worst pitchers pitch more often.  Give me the 4 man rotation.  Teams don't even have 5 very good pitchers.  

     

    I would actually try this.  The first 2 months, I'm pitching my four best guys as my rotation.  In June, July, and August, I'd add a 5th pitcher to help them out in the hot months.  In September, I'm dropping the worst pitcher and bringing it home with the best I have.  The more often our best pitchers pitch, the better chance of winning games.

    I am speechless

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    45 minutes ago, I owned a Suzuki said:

    I am speechless

    What do you want?  Your best pitchers get 15 starts??  Believe me, the pitchers will be fine.  After several months off, resting, going with a 4 man rotation until summer will work just fine.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    13 minutes ago, thawv said:

    What do you want?  Your best pitchers get 15 starts??  Believe me, the pitchers will be fine.  After several months off, resting, going with a 4 man rotation until summer will work just fine.  

    Thawv, come on. I know you are from the era where guys like Jenkins got 41 starts a year and three over 300 innnings. 30 complete games.  I am too. But what you are suggesting just won’t happen now. No chance. Pitchers won’t be ok doing this. And it isn’t going to happen. We are from an era long gone. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, thawv said:

    What do you want?  Your best pitchers get 15 starts??  Believe me, the pitchers will be fine.  After several months off, resting, going with a 4 man rotation until summer will work just fine.  

    I do not believe you, though.

    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 hours ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

    I do not believe you, though.

    What don't you believe?  That I want to see my best starter getting way more starts than my bad starters?

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    10 hours ago, Rcal10 said:

    Thawv, come on. I know you are from the era where guys like Jenkins got 41 starts a year and three over 300 innnings. 30 complete games.  I am too. But what you are suggesting just won’t happen now. No chance. Pitchers won’t be ok doing this. And it isn’t going to happen. We are from an era long gone. 

    I know bud.  But if it was up to me, he would take that type of route with the staff.  It would also throw an additional arm in the pen the first 2 months and last month of the season.  The first 2 months are when their arms are the freshest, and having a 4 many rotation would be pretty easy, I believe.  Not doing it is more about contracts, and agents.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Whether you believe they should be able to or not, pitchers in the modern game are not built to carry that kind of load. We could speculate as to why, but all you have to do is look at Justin Steele this year to see what happens when you increase a guy's workload dramatically. He was absolute nails until his final few starts when he was merely ok. The starters generally would not remain healthy or effective when you dramatically increase their workloads. It's possible some might thrive, but the more likely result is guys being burned out and/or injured and your season falling apart because you have to fill in the gaps with guys like Caleb Killian or Drew Smyly or Adrian Sampson.

    A more effective solution to improving the pitching is building a better bullpen and taking the load off of the rotation early in the year and finding a way to bring in reinforcements throughout the year as injuries and ineffectiveness remove options.

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, Rex Buckingham said:

    Whether you believe they should be able to or not, pitchers in the modern game are not built to carry that kind of load. We could speculate as to why, but all you have to do is look at Justin Steele this year to see what happens when you increase a guy's workload dramatically. He was absolute nails until his final few starts when he was merely ok. The starters generally would not remain healthy or effective when you dramatically increase their workloads. It's possible some might thrive, but the more likely result is guys being burned out and/or injured and your season falling apart because you have to fill in the gaps with guys like Caleb Killian or Drew Smyly or Adrian Sampson.

    A more effective solution to improving the pitching is building a better bullpen and taking the load off of the rotation early in the year and finding a way to bring in reinforcements throughout the year as injuries and ineffectiveness remove options.

     

    Take a look at Justin's IP since they drafted him.  If I didn't know any better, they were training him not to be able to pitch deep in to the season.  Injuries or not, they just didn't pitch him.  It almost looks like they were grooming him for the pen.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    32 minutes ago, thawv said:

    Take a look at Justin's IP since they drafted him.  If I didn't know any better, they were training him not to be able to pitch deep in to the season.  Injuries or not, they just didn't pitch him.  It almost looks like they were grooming him for the pen.

    This is NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. Honestly man. You have been preaching this for years. It is not happening. Guys throw too hard now. Too much max effort. They are not trained for this. The fastest way for a coach staff and manager to get fired is to try this. This isn’t the agents pushing this. It is reality. Guys are not going to be able to do this. 

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 minute ago, Rcal10 said:

    This is NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. Honestly man. You have been preaching this for years. It is not happening. Guys throw too hard now. Too much max effort. They are not trained for this. The fastest way for a coach staff and manager to get fired is to try this. This isn’t the agents pushing this. It is reality. Guys are not going to be able to do this. 

    Yeah the only way we can turn back the clock on innings is if we also turn the clock back on velocity.   I love Kyle Hendricks but I don't want to go back to 87 being an average fastball.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    18 minutes ago, Rcal10 said:

    This is NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. Honestly man. You have been preaching this for years. It is not happening. Guys throw too hard now. Too much max effort. They are not trained for this. The fastest way for a coach staff and manager to get fired is to try this. This isn’t the agents pushing this. It is reality. Guys are not going to be able to do this. 

    It's not going to happen, but there's no way it can't happen.  Guys like Ryan, Jenkins, Gibson, etc. were throwing really hard and they threw complete games and over 200 innings year after year.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 hours ago, thawv said:

    What don't you believe?  That I want to see my best starter getting way more starts than my bad starters?

     

    That the pitchers will be fine.

    Hitters are a lot better than they were in the 1970s.  Pitchers have to be fresher to be successful.  You can't be noodle-arming 91 down the middle 35 starts a year anymore.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    28 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

    I knew some of these PSD discussions would make their way over here 

    This was a familiar one. Same thing about giving guys a rest. Thawv always felt that was overblown too. I am from the same era as he is. So I understand his thinking. But I have come to realize the baseball I watched as a kid is not the same as today. He is still of the believe that baseball in the 70’s was a better brand. And, maybe it was. But it isn’t going to be like that any longer. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, Rcal10 said:

    This was a familiar one. Same thing about giving guys a rest. Thawv always felt that was overblown too. I am from the same era as he is. So I understand his thinking. But I have come to realize the baseball I watched as a kid is not the same as today. He is still of the believe that baseball in the 70’s was a better brand. And, maybe it was. But it isn’t going to be like that any longer. 

    Baseball isn't going to be like the 70's, but the 70's had hitters that batted .300 with 35-40 HRs and they played full seasons along with the pitchers who threw hard, pitched every 4th day, and pitched at least into the 7th inning for the whole season.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, Backtobanks said:

    Baseball isn't going to be like the 70's, but the 70's had hitters that batted .300 with 35-40 HRs and they played full seasons along with the pitchers who threw hard, pitched every 4th day, and pitched at least into the 7th inning for the whole season.

    Pitchers pitched longer because relief pitchers sucked. Pen guys were just guys not good enough to start. So starters stayed in. The averages were higher because guys didn’t have to face specialist. They didn’t have to face a guy throwing 95+ coming out of the pen. They didn’t have to face a guy groomed specifically to pitch one inning out of the pen. Back then that is how teams were built. 4 good starters and 8 good position players. It just isn’t that way any longer. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, Rcal10 said:

    Pitchers pitched longer because relief pitchers sucked. Pen guys were just guys not good enough to start. So starters stayed in. The averages were higher because guys didn’t have to face specialist. They didn’t have to face a guy throwing 95+ coming out of the pen. They didn’t have to face a guy groomed specifically to pitch one inning out of the pen. Back then that is how teams were built. 4 good starters and 8 good position players. It just isn’t that way any longer. 

    Our bullpen consists of Leiter, Alzolay, Fulmer, Smyly, and Wesneski who all were guys just not good enough to start.  The same could be said about today's hitter who are facing mediocre/poor starters for 3 or 4 days out of a six-man rotation.  Now teams have 2 good starters, 3-4 good position players, and 2=3 good relievers.

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, Backtobanks said:

    Baseball isn't going to be like the 70's, but the 70's had hitters that batted .300 with 35-40 HRs and they played full seasons along with the pitchers who threw hard, pitched every 4th day, and pitched at least into the 7th inning for the whole season.

    You are remembering things that didn’t happen. It was a HUGE deal when Foster hit 40 HRs. 
     

    and guys like Ernie Broglio (traded for Lou Brock) we’re washed up by their early 30s. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The thinking on bat weight has changed drastically in my lifetime.  I could probably research this and be more exact, but I would imagine the average bat weight in MLB is down at least 2 oz since the late 70s.  Combine that with hitters staying in better shape have caused pitchers and how teams thought about pitching to adjust. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    12 hours ago, CubinNY said:

    You are remembering things that didn’t happen. It was a HUGE deal when Foster hit 40 HRs. 
     

    and guys like Ernie Broglio (traded for Lou Brock) we’re washed up by their early 30s. 

    I guess it was more like the 60's when all of the greats were hitting HRs and the pitchers were throwing more innings, but the point remains the same - back then hitters could not only hit HRs, but also manage a good BA and starting pitchers could work in a 4-man rotation and could consistently pitch deep into games for the whole season. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    49 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

    The reason hitters hit for good BA then is beause the tired pitchers were not as good at getting whiffs, and because defenses were not as good at positioning.

    Ryan, Gibson, Koufax, Seaver, McDowell, etc.??????????

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    33 minutes ago, Backtobanks said:

    Ryan, Gibson, Koufax, Seaver, McDowell, etc.??????????

    The average whiff rate is way higher today. As is the average velocity. Cherrypicking the most memorable names won't change that.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...