Many years ago I remember thinking that a team ought to try a 3-3-3 approach. Get three guys to throw three innings apiece. Heck, you could have three sets of those guys on your staff and pitch every other game that way. Anyway, it was a notion no one took seriously and that's probably good.
Despite the disappearance of the complete game every team still wants a rotation of five Max Scherzers. Of course there is only one of him and maybe a handful of guys just as good as him. There aren't 150, that's for sure. Thus we have killer bullpens and five-inning starters. The so-called "opener" has come to the fore and teams are giving it a try. Why not? If you have LOOGYs why can't you have openers?
Is it a gimmick? Will it wind up in the dustbin of baseball history? Maybe. But teams are playing baseball RIGHT NOW and they need to win ballgames RIGHT NOW. We can worry about the history books later. I say do what works. If the opener gives the Giants a better chance to win then what's the problem?
Nick Vincent gets the call today against Toronto. No, this outing is not a referendum on the new-school, analytics-driven baseball of the 21st century. It's one game. It's not going to make or break Farhan Zaidi's tenure as PoBO. But it does say something, and it's pretty simple: do what you have to do to win. Get the best matchups for your players. I appreciate that Mr. Old School Himself, Bruce Bochy, is smart and adaptable and willing to risk opprobium in order to try to make the team better. If a guy like Boch can embrace the opener, shouldn't we all?
GO GIANTS!
--M.C.
6 comments:
I am so old school that I wish the DH was abolished. I can understand the kneejerk reaction against this idea because change is not always good and it seems like the game is being tinkered with far too much. When I think about the specific reasons to be against using openers, however, nothing holds up. Insulting to proud starters, but really is that a good enough reason? I say let's give it a try and then we can rip it apart later.
And the DH has been around since 1973! That's when I was leaving the 8th grade and entering the 9th. Baseball has changed a lot in my lifetime. Free agency and division play, for example, have had huge impacts, throw in the Wild Card and now Wild Cards and you have a very different landscape from my childhood. I forgot to mention expansion--there were only 20 teams in 1968, now there are 30. The mound was lowered in 1969, that was a pretty serious change. How about Astro-turf and domed stadia? Maple bats and "axe-handle" bats? Juiced balls? Steroids? Think of the incredible scrutiny of the umpires, what with instant replay and strike zone mapping, this isn't just fans yelling at them anymore.
Baseball revenues have really increased over the last 20 years and the ubiquity of the coverage is astounding. You can not only watch every single game but you can now track every single pitch and batted ball! The information available to the average fan is overwhelming, imagine the kind of information teams are now using. It's a very different game from "back in the day." The athletes, in particular, are so much fitter, faster, stronger, and smarter than in the old days.
The little things that Manfred is talking about are pretty trivial by comparison to the changes we have witnessed already.
24-year old RHP Shaun Anderson will be starting and making his debut tomorrow.
From MLBTR on Shaun Anderson:
Anderson, 24, was a third-round pick out of the University of Florida back in 2016. He came to San Francisco as part of the mid-2017 deal that shipped Eduardo Nunez to Boston. Thus far in 2019, Anderson carries a 4.11 ERA in 35 innings over seven starts at Triple-A, with 9.5 K/9 against 2.8 BB/9. The 6’4″, 225-pound righty is generally regarded as one of the Giants’ best pitching prospects, ranking fourth in the system both at MLB.com and on Baseball America’s preseason rankings. He’s viewed as a potential mid-rotation starter who may not have a true plus offering but possesses average or slightly better stuff across the board.
That worked out well, huh? Still don't see the logic in it. Even theoretically. Bout I guess if your team has little substance, hype will have to do.
Well, one time is not enough to decide!
The logic is simple--get a better early matchup for your starter. He faces the lower part of the lineup first. Relievers, in short stints, are generally more effective than starters, so put them to work facing the best hitters right away. Teams score more runs in the 1st inning than in any other inning.
If you have Justin Verlander or Max Scherzer or Chris Sale you don't use an opener. That should be obvious. But if you have Drew Pomeranz or Derek Holland it might just give you a better chance.
Nothing is for certain, all you can work on is improving the odds. When a team is playing as poorly in the 1st inning as the Giants then NOT trying something new is just plain stubbornness.
"In war, doing something, even if it is the wrong thing, is better than doing nothing."
--U.S. Grant
Post a Comment