162 Inning Pitchers are Disappearing

[AGuinness]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Out of curiosity, I looked up the Yanks pitchers, and they will likely only have 1 pitcher (Tanaka), qualify with enough innings for the ERA title.



Yanks top two WAR pitchers are relievers (Britton and Ottavino).

That’s a surprise.

My Red Sox will have two SPs qualify for the ERA title with 162 or more innings, although the downside is that one of them is Rick Porcello...

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Out of curiosity, I looked up the Yanks pitchers, and they will likely only have 1 pitcher (Tanaka), qualify with enough innings for the ERA title.

Yanks top two WAR pitchers are relievers (Britton and Ottavino).

Originally Posted by AGuinness

That’s a surprise.

My Red Sox will have two SPs qualify for the ERA title with 162 or more innings, although the downside is that one of them is Rick Porcello...

Both are ahead of the Brewers with zero. Consider yourself lucky.

Zach Davies needs 12 more innings, but has been averaging less than 5 innings per start.

[todeen]

Cincinnati Reds have two (Luis Castillo and Sonny Gray) and Anthony Desclafani could be a third if he has two remarkable starts to end the season - he is 14 innings away. Trevor Bauer has thrown over 200 innings, but since he was traded mid-season he can't qualify for a league ERA award.

To me, the future holds changing the rules for qualification. They could change the rules to games-started, rather than innings pitched, and inflate the number of qualifying pitchers. By doing that, you still end up with the healthiest pitchers, and presumably the best pitchers fans would want to see qualify anyway.

[AGuinness]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

Both are ahead of the Brewers with zero. Consider yourself lucky.

I believe Ricky P. Has the highest ERA for qualified pitchers in MLB this year, not the kind of luck I’m looking for...

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by AGuinness

I believe Ricky P. Has the highest ERA for qualified pitchers in MLB this year, not the kind of luck I’m looking for...

With fewer qualifying pitchers each year, it becomes easier to excel at either end of the scale.

[frankbmd]

The final data for 2019 is in and a grand total of 62 hurlers qualify by pitching more than 162 innings pitched, slightly more than 2 per team. Wow!

[insidethewrapper]

Currently a starter has to pitch 5 innings at the start of the game for a win, do you think this rule will change in the future ? Maybe 4 innings etc.
Is it right that a starter pitches 4 innings and all the relievers pitch 1 inning and one of them gets credit for the win ?

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by insidethewrapper

Currently a starter has to pitch 5 innings at the start of the game for a win, do you think this rule will change in the future ? Maybe 4 innings etc.
Is it right that a starter pitches 4 innings and all the relievers pitch 1 inning and one of them gets credit for the win ?

Unless the starting pitchers are averaging more than 7 innings per start, the whole concept of winning and losing pitchers is of little value. Changing the rule to 4 innings is not the answer.

What percentage of games are decided in the first 4 innings?

Too many games are decided in the late innings. A lefty-righty relief specialist comes into the game to get the third out in a late inning. He succeeds in striking the batter out. His team then scores in the next inning to assume the lead. The pitcher is replaced by a closer in the next inning.

Is one late inning strikeout worthy of a win? Really?

With the vanishing 162 inning pitchers, look at the rosters of the playoff teams. I believe all of them have several bullpenners whose body of work is less than 50 innings and some of them probably have more wins than 5 inning starters with less than 162 innings.

Perhaps the concept of winning and losing pitchers should be abandoned. Perhaps the distinction between starting pitchers and relief pitchers should be abandoned. Let’s just call them all JAPs (Just Another Pitcher) instead of SPs and RPs.