Posted by just4me on 6/8/2020 3:27:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ozomatli on 6/8/2020 1:35:00 PM (view original):
I don't understand the sentiment around wanting someone for extra starts. I run 200-250 IP pitchers in 2-man rotations all the time at a 40-50 pitchcount. The number of starts / distribution of their innings across a different # of games has no impact on their effectiveness (unless it's over 110 which is unrealistic for a starting scenario). If anything, they are better off this way due to less in average in game fatigue per pitch thrown.
Can someone explain this perspective a bit more?
As skunk206 stated, as well, it's about pitches, not starts or games or innings. Doesn't matter when or how they're used, as long as you use them. So, I'm with you on this, I don't understand this perspective. skunk206 was way more eloquent than I, but we had essentially the same conclusion overall.
I come af this a bit differently (I probably have the fewest titles of anyone who has commented) but I agree it is about pitches. I had a good debate a while back about like it or not. The Log5 WIS algorhithm...im not sure I can even fully understand but I do think there is an inpact.
When Eck pitches in 1989 and walks like 3 guys in 75 innings, his PC is really low. At 200m, you are going to see Ruth/Bonds and other high BB guys and it always seems to me that they get / exceed their BBs but great control pitchers never match theirs. Bonds was largely due to IBB but was Ruths? It comes down to did Ruth face less control pitchers, did they pitch around him or IBB him. I dont know how WIS adjusts for that. I do know that in those years Eck got every call on the corner but to his credit was able to put the ball there every pitch...except to Gibson in the WS.
Net-Net, I think you also have to consider the better hitters you will face vs. expecting the RL pitching performances of many low innings guys. Toney or Schupp is who I always pick...hahahaha..