I'm old enough to remember when starting pitchers completed their games if they weren't getting clobbered. I also remember when there was such thing as a "middle reliever" that could come in an pitch 4 or 5 or 6 innings when the starting pitcher obviously "didn't have it" on any particular day. Back "in the day", if a starting pitcher was getting clobbered early in the game, he was replaced by the middle reliever. Where have all the middle relievers gone? Is there no longer enough room in the roster for them? Is that why they leave starting pitchers in so long and allow the team to lose?
Today, it seems managers have an entirely new set of rules relating to how they handle their starting pitchers during a game. We get that same crazy formula of a 7th inning guy, an 8th inning guy, and the closer who only comes in for the 9th inning, and only comes in when the team is ahead.
What in the heck is going on?
I point to Nate Robertson's start a couple of days ago. He gave up five runs in the first 3 innings, yet he wasn't sent to the showers. Why not? Leaving him in the game ran the risk of giving up ten runs in the first six innings. Is that any way to manage a ball team? Shouldn't the manager be on their toes, and ready to yank ANY pitcher at any time, if it's in the best interests of the team? Today, you don't even see the pitching coach reach for the telephone until the game is pretty much out of reach. If I'm managing a team and the starting pitcher gives up 2 or 3 runs in the first 3 innings, then SOMEBODY is warming up in the bullpen and one more solid contact may be enough to get that starter yanked from the game.
I remember Jack Morris was one of the few exceptions. He could give up 3 runs in the first couple of innings, and then settle down and shut the other team down for six more innings, and salvage a nice day's work. I don't know of any pitchers these days who can give a few runs early and then shut the opponent down for the next several innings.
Certainly Nate Robertson is no Jack Morris. Why then did Leland leave him in the game after he'd given up five runs in three innings? This just makes no sense to me whatsoever.
Captain Hook where are you?
Today, it seems managers have an entirely new set of rules relating to how they handle their starting pitchers during a game. We get that same crazy formula of a 7th inning guy, an 8th inning guy, and the closer who only comes in for the 9th inning, and only comes in when the team is ahead.
What in the heck is going on?
I point to Nate Robertson's start a couple of days ago. He gave up five runs in the first 3 innings, yet he wasn't sent to the showers. Why not? Leaving him in the game ran the risk of giving up ten runs in the first six innings. Is that any way to manage a ball team? Shouldn't the manager be on their toes, and ready to yank ANY pitcher at any time, if it's in the best interests of the team? Today, you don't even see the pitching coach reach for the telephone until the game is pretty much out of reach. If I'm managing a team and the starting pitcher gives up 2 or 3 runs in the first 3 innings, then SOMEBODY is warming up in the bullpen and one more solid contact may be enough to get that starter yanked from the game.
I remember Jack Morris was one of the few exceptions. He could give up 3 runs in the first couple of innings, and then settle down and shut the other team down for six more innings, and salvage a nice day's work. I don't know of any pitchers these days who can give a few runs early and then shut the opponent down for the next several innings.
Certainly Nate Robertson is no Jack Morris. Why then did Leland leave him in the game after he'd given up five runs in three innings? This just makes no sense to me whatsoever.
Captain Hook where are you?
Comment