It doesn't ruin my day if the Yankees use five pitchers.

"Over the past 18 months, baseball commissioner Rob Manfred has been all but begging major league players for ideas and input on ways to make the product better. He seems ready to discuss even radical ideas, whether it’s some restrictions on defensive shifts, a pitch clock or maybe -- eventually -- an electronic strike zone.

 Here’s a fundamental change that would improve the game on many levels: Limit managers to the use of four pitchers per nine innings, with exceptions built in for injuries and blowouts."

Define "injury" and "blowout" for me.


"Major league baseball desperately needs to get off the growing front-office addiction to relief pitchers, which is helping to destroy important components of the game."

Funny, I actually think it's a natural strategic evolution which makes the game better.


"Among those: the essential pre-eminence of starting pitchers, who need to be marquee-worthy not only for the teams and their marketing departments but also for the players’ union; the scoring of runs by means other than a home run; and batters making contact and putting the ball in play."

1. The "essential pre-eminence of starting pitchers" is diminished, I suppose. On the other hand, the few remaining studs are worth more than ever.

2. The scoring of runs by means other than a home run?

3. Batters making contact and putting the ball in play [sic]? As opposed to, of course, the recent explosion of players putting the ball in play ... without making contact.

Point #1 I largely disagree with. I agree that it's hard to market a middle reliever, but the top relief pitchers have been marketed as superstars for a long time. Sure, you might be disappointed if you show up in a Rivera tee shirt, but the odds of seeing your favorite players are still better than 1 in 5.

Points #2 and #3 both boil down to superior pitching overall. Superior due to specialization and the realization that it's better to go full throttle for a shorter period of time.


"None of this is meant to challenge the analytical wisdom behind the parade of relievers overrunning the sport. It's been demonstrated beyond any doubt that there are statistical advantages in the growing number of reliever/batter matchups and in the strategy of yanking the starting pitcher before he's exposed to the opposing lineup a third time. Smart people are making smart decisions to create effective seven- and eight-man bullpens."

Which side are you on?


"But this trend is affecting the game in ways that will never attract the young fans baseball wants and could also alienate longtime fans.

Few starting pitchers concern themselves with getting through five or six innings these days. Rather, they're increasingly trained to throw as hard as they can, and when their work is finished, they're followed by relay teams of relievers who also throw really, really hard. The number of pitches of 96-plus mph has more than tripled in a span of just four years, and quite frankly, a lot of hitters -- especially older hitters -- are getting crushed."

Oh, the ineffectiveness of older hitters is the problem. Maybe we can pitch underhanded to Adrian Gonzalez to make the game exciting for the youngsters.

I can see where this is headed, but it's a dumb solution to a non-problem.

The batters have to figure this out and adjust (or hit against the freaking shift once in a while). Did you know the total MLB batting average is just .246?

Yeah, the balls will surely be put in play by over-the-hill batters if the pitchers are all out of gas. Sounds like an over-correction and not lots of fun.