The Gnorkmeister wrote:
> On May 13, 12:09 pm, McDuck comcast.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 May 2010 08:41:42 -0400, "Dano" yahoo.com>
>>> Pearly Soames wrote:
>>>> The Gnorkmeister wrote:
>>>>> You are such an idiot. Really. You continually use inflamatory
>>>>> language to describe reasonable opinions that you do not share.
>>>> Don't you hate it when people who do that?
>>> That's hysterical. Who was that in response to? I missed it I guess.
>> I respectfully suggested that the RS would not go to 11 pitchers if,
>> to do so, they had to extend their starters by 1.5 innings per
>> appearance. I don't think that claim is just my personal opinion ---
>> it is pretty darn obvious, and I'm surprised even a guy like Gnork,
>> who loves to flog the starters, would think the RS were about to so
>> such a thing.
> You are a damn fool. No one ever suggested an extra 1.5 innings per
> appearance per start. Idiot. You just like to make up shit and then
> knock it down. There is a word for that. It begins with "straw". Also,
> MR. Shit for Brains Rat Bastard Son of a Bitch, (see the polite MR?) I
> do not love or even like to "flog" the starters. Worthless asshole
> that you are, you have never given your definition of "flogging". As
> far as I can see it means anyone who thinks a pitcher should throw one
> more pitch than you think they should. It is stupid and outrageous to
> continually use it. But you probably already know that. You are just a
> better educated O'Hara.
Actually, I'd have no problem if the Sox went with 11 pitchers. I could
even handle 10. Considering the Pawtucket Shuttle, there is usually
someone you can send down and get someone up for emergency service.
If they had, okay, let's stay with 11, I think it might help the mindset
of the starters.
In the current regimen, it seems that 6+ innings/110 pitches is the
'norm.' A 7 inning start seems to be a bonus. It shouldn't be. There is
a good argument for getting pitchers stretched to 120-130 pitches by
about the All-Star Break. Then, when they need to go that far in the
playoffs, it's not so much of a mystery.
The only immediate drawback I see is that if a pitcher gets whacked in
the first four innings, the urge to throw in a mop-up guy might prevail,
leading to 'giving up on the game.' This is the only thing that bothers
me. Like, if pitcher X doesn't have it and allows say, 6 runs in three
innings and is rocky in the 4th, if you pull him, does the bullpen get
used to 'stop the bleeding' or 'to get it over with?'
Let's face it, we're not going to see many complete games nowadays. But
7 solid innings means using two RP and maybe a specialist and 3 RP.
There is no reason in my mind why a Relief Pitcher can't be used two
days out of three.
And the extra bench help would be GREAT!
mario in victoria
not the good old days, but logic