You've made a good case about the health of pitchers, but we have to remember, the rotation when I was growing up was a 4 man rotation, not so very long ago.I think the real reason behind longer pitching careers in the four-man rotation era is that until the 1960s pitchers didn't throw even half as hard as they've since come to throw. The torque of throwing that hard takes at least as much toll as that taken by throwing certain pitches whose grips put a stress on the forearms or elbows, especially dependent on whether you throw straight overhand, three-quarters, or sidearm/submarine.
(Then again, it was a while ago. Father time has a funny way of manipulating the clock).
This may have played a greater role in the pitcher's longevity more so than how many at bats a pitcher had throughout his career.
I think the real reason behind longer pitching careers in the four-man rotation era is that until the 1960s pitchers didn't throw even half as hard as they've since come to throw. The torque of throwing that hard takes at least as much toll as that taken by throwing certain pitches whose grips put a stress on the forearms or elbows, especially dependent on whether you throw straight overhand, three-quarters, or sidearm/submarine.
One reason Warren Spahn had such a long career (He'll never get into the Hall of Fame---he won't stop pitching, Stan Musial once said about him) is that he never was a truly hard thrower. (Nolan Ryan is a kind of outlier when it comes to hard throwers with long careers.) His fastball couldn't break a sheet of paper and he lived on the screwball, which he figured out how to throw without putting stress on his arm. His most famous quote should give you a hint: Hitting is timing. Pitching is destroying timing. You don't have to throw hard to destroy a hitter's timing, you merely marry your arm to your brain. How else could pitchers like Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine who didn't throw hard at all pitch as long as they did (and into the Hall of Fame while they were at it)? Randy Johnson didn't have to push it throwing those hard dancing sliders and look how long his career lasted.
But thanks for the kind words! I'm pretty sure others will have me burned at the stake as a heretic, but oh well . . .
Denny McLain was one of the hardest throwers in the pitching business. And it took a toll on him. All those innings pitched especially in his back-to-back Cy Young Award seasons (and especially his 31-game winner) and by 1970 his shoulder was trying to resign its commission. Within two years---dead and gone.
I think the real reason behind longer pitching careers in the four-man rotation era is that until the 1960s pitchers didn't throw even half as hard as they've since come to throw.
Walter Johnson didn't throw hard? Rube Wadell?They threw fast, but you don't always have to throw a fastball that good that hard. If you've got the speed naturally, you don't have to pump it to get the ball to the plate fast.
Great article, as always, @EasyAce , but it will be a shame when the DH comes to the NL. Baseball as a sport appeals to the cerebral, and one of its joys as a spectator is to play along with the manager the chess match that occurs in the late innings when he's gotta decide between letting his pitcher bat and that runner in scoring position. The game is rapidly losing these chess-match type moments; there are fewer stolen bases and sacrifice bunts, and soon, inevitably, the union will flex its muscles to make sure there are jobs for aging Dr. Strangegloves.I get your point, but anyone who thinks the DH has eliminated the chess matches hasn't really been paying attention to the game. It isn't the DH that reduced the running game or the sacrifice; its been hitters up and down the lineup (and coaches fool enough not to show them otherwise) worried more about their "launch angles" than just hitting the damn ball to wherever.
I will rue the day.
I think the real reason behind longer pitching careers in the four-man rotation era is that until the 1960s pitchers didn't throw even half as hard as they've since come to throw. The torque of throwing that hard takes at least as much toll as that taken by throwing certain pitches whose grips put a stress on the forearms or elbows, especially dependent on whether you throw straight overhand, three-quarters, or sidearm/submarine.
One reason Warren Spahn had such a long career (He'll never get into the Hall of Fame---he won't stop pitching, Stan Musial once said about him) is that he never was a truly hard thrower. (Nolan Ryan is a kind of outlier when it comes to hard throwers with long careers.) His fastball couldn't break a sheet of paper and he lived on the screwball, which he figured out how to throw without putting stress on his arm. His most famous quote should give you a hint: Hitting is timing. Pitching is destroying timing. You don't have to throw hard to destroy a hitter's timing, you merely marry your arm to your brain. How else could pitchers like Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine who didn't throw hard at all pitch as long as they did (and into the Hall of Fame while they were at it)? Randy Johnson didn't have to push it throwing those hard dancing sliders and look how long his career lasted. Tom Seaver had a long career and while he did have a live fastball (If you don't want to stop you better know that I throw harder than you, you old fart, he once hollered at Bob Gibson at the plate, after he knocked Gibson down following a Gibson brushback), his real secret was pitching with 65 percent his legs. The leg driving he learned from Rube Walker kept most stress off his arm and shoulder.
But thanks for the kind words! I'm pretty sure others will have me burned at the stake as a heretic, but oh well . . .
Denny McLain was one of the hardest throwers in the pitching business. And it took a toll on him. All those innings pitched especially in his back-to-back Cy Young Award seasons (and especially his 31-game winner) and by 1970 his shoulder was trying to resign its commission. Within two years---dead and gone.
The DH and Astroturf are the devil.
Professional baseball, like all other forms of Pro "sports" is no longer a game. It is a business driven by statisticians and bean counters and I, for one, HATE that with every fiber of my being!
Several pitchers come to mind, having their power derived from their legs.It was standard procedure on Met pitching staffs when Rube Walker was their pitching coach; Seaver, Jerry Koosman, Nolan Ryan, just about all the pitchers the Mets developed in those years had the leg drive. (If any developed arm or shoulder trouble---as happened to Gary Gentry---it came for other reasons.) And if I remember right, Whitey Ford was as much a leg as arm pitcher. So was Ford's fellow Hall of Famer Jim Bunning, driving low off his leg with that wide sidearm throwing style he had.
Billy Wagner is one that I saw regularly in Houston, who had strong legs.
I don't know.
Arguing who's the best of all time at this or that position, stats are usually the facts used to make the point.
When I was about 10, my mother hollered at me, "You can remember the stats of a 3rd string, 3rd baseman of the Pittsburgh Pirates, but you can't remember to take out the trash.
I started to tell her the the Pirates didn't have a 3rd string 3rd baseman, but I thought it would be better if I just took out the trash.
@EasyAceNot really. That myth comes from the old doggerel, "Spahn and Sain and pray for rain." Those Boston Braves actually had a four-man rotation: Spahn, Johnny Sain, Bill Voiselle, and John Bickford. The 1950 Braves looked like they had a three-man rotation (Spahn, Sain, and Bickford), but swingmen Bob Chipman, Johnny Antonelli, and Normie Roy were the fourth man in the rotation at various times on the season, with Chipman getting sixteen starts to lead that group.
Wasn't Spahn, at one time, in a 3 man rotation?
I don't know.Statistics plus factors like parks and the general condition of the game as it was played. You have two .300 hitters, let's say. One played in the era before night baseball, one played in the night ball era where his games were two thirds or more at night. You can argue based on that that the guy hitting .300 in the night ball era was arguably better than the guy hitting .300 strictly in daylight because even with the stadium lights (and sometimes because of it) it's harder to hit at night, especially with the kind of power pitching in the night ball era that wasn't as widespread in the strictly day-ball era. You look at the entire game and its conditions.
Arguing who's the best of all time at this or that position, stats are usually the facts used to make the point.
When I was about 10, my mother hollered at me, "You can remember the stats of a 3rd string, 3rd baseman of the Pittsburgh Pirates, but you can't remember to take out the trash.At least your mother had an idea about the Pirates at all.
I started to tell her the the Pirates didn't have a 3rd string 3rd baseman, but I thought it would be better if I just took out the trash.
I don't know.
Arguing who's the best of all time at this or that position, stats are usually the facts used to make the point.
When I was about 10, my mother hollered at me, "You can remember the stats of a 3rd string, 3rd baseman of the Pittsburgh Pirates, but you can't remember to take out the trash.
I started to tell her the the Pirates didn't have a 3rd string 3rd baseman, but I thought it would be better if I just took out the trash.
No.
Pitchers need to have more "skin" in the game, make 'em bat.Hitting .115 as a whole all year long last year didn't give pitchers more skin in the game and didn't do their teams any big favours, either.
Hitting .115 as a whole all year long last year didn't give pitchers more skin in the game and didn't do their teams any big favours, either.Yeah and will give them a bit more incentive to improve. I'm an "old school" kind of fan, if and when you step up to the plate, you'd better be ready. The DH "steals" that. JMHO.
Major League baseball is the only professional sport that makes half of its teams play by a different set of rules than the other half. It's a joke.
Either put the DH in both leagues or get rid of it. But enough of this half-fast nonsense, and don't give me any of that "it takes away the strategy and gamesmanship!" It's called gimmickry. I'd also ask that if you're going to start making pitchers hit, put in another rule: if you swap out a pitcher with a pinch-hitter, the pinch-hitter can't be replaced until he takes the mound and gets at least one out. So, if you have a field position player, the pinch-hitter all of a sudden is going to be a liability on the defensive end, and that chickenscratch will stop pretty darn quick.
Like it or not, the designated hitter has been part of baseball for over 40 years now, and it's high time they start implementing it on a consistent basis.
Communists have been entrenched in our government for 100 years so I guess it's time to just lay down and let them have it!Comparing the Designated Hitter Rule to Communism... what a hot take. Now I've heard everything.
Comparing the Designated Hitter Rule to Communism... what a hot take. Now I've heard everything.
...the designated hitter has been part of baseball for over 40 years now, and it's high time they start implementing it on a consistent basis.
Just illustrating how F'n stupid your statement above was! Here it is again!In context, Bigun...
In context, Bigun...
...my point was: either put the DH in both leagues, or don't do it at all. But again, you are comparing a baseball rule that affects only a few players to Communism. Whether a pitcher is required to go to the batter's plate in a baseball game is a wee bit (sarcasm) less important than the ruthless, totalitarian micromanagement of an entire nation's economy and its people's way of life.
This is the second time in a week you've tried to goad me into a flame war over a piece of entertainment. Get over yourself.
NO! Just pointing out the complete absurdity of what you said!
Comparing the Designated Hitter Rule to Communism... what a hot take. Now I've heard everything.
The DH and Astroturf are the devil.I don't know if I'd go far enough as to call the DH the devil, but regarding Astroturf . . .
And I for one agree with the comparison. The DH is un-American!@Jazzhead
I don't like the DH rule simply because a Pitcher never has to face a 95 MPH "haircut" and is thus more likely to throw them.
That and I truly loved watching Randy Johnson at the plate... :silly: That stance....
I had Bartolo Colon on my dice league team the year Big Sexy hit first and only home run. Sure enough, that homer appeared on his card the following year. Sad to say I never rolled it, but I had fun, at the end of the year when my team was already out of it, summoning him as a pinch hitter.
I don't like the DH rule simply because a Pitcher never has to face a 95 MPH "haircut" and is thus more likely to throw them.
That and I truly loved watching Randy Johnson at the plate... :silly: That stance....
Baseball is America's game, and it's the most fun to follow as the battle of wits unfolds. The DH takes a way a good measure of that fun. And for that, I say it's un-American.Jazz, I know you're smarter than that. What fun is it to see pitchers who can't even be called banjo hitters (the banjo hitters are better) trying to hit even if they might maybe pop one with the frequency of Halley's Comet appearances? Sure it was fun the day Madison Bumgarner hit those two Opening Day home runs---but that was an outlier. It was fun to see Tony Cloninger hit those two grand slams in a game in 1966---but that was an outlier. (Cloninger lifetime was a .192 hitter, in case you were wondering.)
It is here in effect, anyway.
American League has it full time when they play each other.
The National League adopts it whenever they travel to an American League ballpark.
Frankly, it did bother me at first, but doesn't so much now.
Pitchers are yanked after 80 to 100 pitches now, so in either league, they may bat 2 times max.
So, you've taken out what is in effect, about 4 at bats total, by having a DH, since you would most likely start pinch hitting by the 5th or 6th inning anyway.
Proposed rule changes, such as having a runner on base to start extra innings, outlawing defensive shifts, and forcing relievers to face a minimum of 3 batters each, bother me more than have a universal DH rule.
Damned straight. Especially the Defensive Shift BS. @EasyAce had a whole thread (couple hundred posts, IIRC) on that one. A solution in desperate search of a problem. If the Manager wants to shift, let him, then throw him a blanket party after the game when the batter drives a long one the other way.@Cyber Liberty
*****rollingeyes*****
The problem is the Players' Unionwill never allow the AL to do away with the DH.
I grew up in New England as a Red Sox fan, but after I moved to Philly and tasted the NL game, I realized how much more strategy was involved in the late innings. It is far more satisfying to watch, not withstanding the affront to the sensibilities that EA mentioned of pitchers waving their bats like hankies.
But, "Chicks dig the long ball." Professional sports have gone out of their way to try to make the sports more appealing to women.
This chick is plenty happy with real baseball and thinks the DH is a perversion of the rules.With all due respect, my special baseball friend . . .
With all due respect, my special baseball friend . . .
where on earth did you get that idea? (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,350937.0.html) (And you're talking to a man who held out against the DH for over four and a half decades.
I'm not necessarily disputing your logic. I'm just an old-fashioned girl who likes the old-fashioned game.:beer:
I'd still share a beer with you anytime, though!
:beer:
I'm not necessarily disputing your logic. I'm just an old-fashioned girl who likes the old-fashioned game.
I'd still share a beer with you anytime, though!
:beer:
I'm not sharing a beer with him! NO way! I want my own damned beer! wink777*laughing* I'm pretty sure she meant having a beer with me, each of us having our own damned beer.
*laughing* I'm pretty sure she meant having a beer with me, each of us having our own damned beer.
(Well, in my case, it would actually be a bourbon and Coke or a glass of wine, since you can count on half your hand how often I drink beer.)
*laughing* I'm pretty sure she meant having a beer with me, each of us having our own damned beer.
(Well, in my case, it would actually be a bourbon and Coke or a glass of wine, since you can count on half your hand how often I drink beer.)