Jeff Passan of Yahoo! Sports has a truly fantastic idea. Sadly, like most great ideas, it’ll be tossed aside as “too unconventional” to work. You know, kind of the idea of establishing a relief ace rather than annointing a closer, but I digress… Here’s Passan’s idea.
“Maybe it’s time to let somebody finish the thought. For those who dare question rote pitcher usage – who gag at the New York Yankees’ six-man rotation and twitched upon seeing its use with the Kansas City Royals, Chicago White Sox and Tampa Bay Rays, too – the four-man is begging to be implemented. Going with four regular starters who pitch on four days’ rest and using a fifth starter as the schedule dictates – with him otherwise serving as a swingman in a long-relief role – doesn’t only give a team the flexibility necessary to keep it from carrying up to 13 pitchers.
It actually lets their best pitchers pitch more.”
The problem with the five man rotation is that it’s a complete and utter failure. Seriously, let’s try to come up with a list of all the fifth starters over the last ten years… Wait a second. What did you say? You can’t think of any? Well, I think that pretty much proves Passan’s point.
Currently, major league teams give anywhere from 24-32 starts per season to replacement level pitchers, many of whom have no business receiving regular playing time at the major league level. Furthermore, their presence on the roster (combined with managerial obsession with hard pitch counts) has forced most teams to go with biggie sized eight man bullpens. This is not only ridiculous, but also an incredibly inefficient use of resources. going with a 13 man pitching staff leaves one three bench spots, one of which will go to the backup catcher. Platoon situations? Under the current scenario, it’s not possible.
As Passan suggests, major league teams would put themselves in a much better position by shelving the five man rotation concept, and using a fifth starter only when he’s absolutely needed. In the interim, he could serve as a spot starter, long man, mop-up man, etc. This would allow managers to save their bullpen, rather than endlessly rotating pitchers in and out of a game; thus reducing reliever fatigue.
Clearly, several obstacles exist keeping this scenario from becoming a reality. Most notably, baseball insiders hate change, and it’s possible the five man rotation is too ingrained into the culture. Still, I can’t but help thinking how much it makes sense transitioning to a “four and swing” rotation. Your four best pitchers would get a chance to pitch upwards of 4-6 additional games per season than they would in the traditional five man rotation. Isn’t that enough of a competitive swing to at least give the idea a shot? I think so. Then again, I neither get paid the big bucks, nor have to be held accountable for making such a decision.
Still, a guy can dream about a baseball world where logic and reality collide. Can’t he?