What we're all trying to accomplish is a game with smaller bullpens and less pitching changes.

That is what you are trying to accomplish, I'm trying to accomplish more position players available in the lineup. I don't care one bit about the excessive overmanagement of the pen.

I think if you capped pitchers, you'd just start seeing a 12th (or 13th) guy on the staff who's a two-way player.



Absolutely nothing wrong with that.

And how is that enforced? Can a minor leaguer with 1 inning in the OF and 52 IP be a backup OF, and "Oops", he might have to pitch if the pen is depleted?

All of these ideas are terrible. I agree with everyone that I would prefer if managers had fewer pitchers, and if two-way play were more common. But adding these contrived and complicated rules (IP:PA ratio?) is not going to make anything better. Simplicity, people.

And how is that enforced? Can a minor leaguer with 1 inning in the OF and 52 IP be a backup OF, and "Oops", he might have to pitch if the pen is depleted?

You're position is determined by whichever ratio is greater between innings pitched vs plate appearances(times two or three even)

All of these ideas are terrible. I agree with everyone that I would prefer if managers had fewer pitchers, and if two-way play were more common. But adding these contrived and complicated rules (IP:PA ratio?) is not going to make anything better. Simplicity, people.

Only reason I want expanded rosters is that the bullpens have expanded, and nothing is going to put that genie in the bottle. I would like more bench players to go back to being a specialist instead of relying on a large contingent of multi-position utility players. Only reason I've ever proposed the scratch concept is that a lot of people still prefer the illusion of a 25 man roster.

I agree with #53 completely.

I would not object to the idea of limiting the September rosters to 30 or something though.

Only reason I want expanded rosters is that the bullpens have expanded, and nothing is going to put that genie in the bottle. I would like more bench players to go back to being a specialist instead of relying on a large contingent of multi-position utility players. Only reason I've ever proposed the scratch concept is that a lot of people still prefer the illusion of a 25 man roster.

Your scratch concept may get some teams to add a pinch-runner or a platoon hitter, but it will absolutely definitely indubitably get them to add more situational pitchers. Every team would immediately go up to 8 bullpen arms, maybe 9. It very clearly would make all of these problems worse.

You're position is determined by whichever ratio is greater between innings pitched vs plate appearances(times two or three even)

So, no position player is ever allowed to pitch?

So, no position player is ever allowed to pitch?

Yeah, this definition of a "pitcher" thing is surprisingly tricky.

(edited to remove some unnecessary arguments)

I agree with everyone that I would prefer if managers had fewer pitchers, and if two-way play were more common.

Allow me please to dissent. I personally think it's long past time for MLB to expand its roster size.

When I watch MLB baseball, I want to see the best players optimally used; and seeing a pitcher play rightfield or a shortstop try to pitch doesn't fill that bill for me.

Obviously, this is a matter of personal preference; and I appreciate the fact that many baseball fans prefer a return to a game that once was, rather than the game that is today; just as there are many football fans who pine for the days when NFL players had to play sixty minutes on both side of the ball. And let me make it clear that all are entitled to their opinion on the subject; but count me on the side that prefers a larger, not smaller, roster.

DB

The Braves under Bobby Cox used to call up a relatively small number of players every September. Most years it was a mere handful. Cox said that calling up 15 new players would clog up the clubhouse and dugout, annoy the current Major Leaguers and mess with team dynamics. It's one of those arguments that sounds pretty lame, but Cox did have a decent ear for those kinds of things.

Including a couple guys on the DL, the Pirates are up to 32 players. Roster use is so flexible now, though, that there's only one callup who hasn't been in the majors before. If they called up the whole 40-man, there'd only be four who were new to the clubhouse.

So, no position player is ever allowed to pitch?

Yes they are allowed to pitch, how they are classified as either a pitcher or hitter would depend if they have the larger number on plate appearance side or the innings pitched side.

If you have a limit of a 11 pitchers, it's about defining who is a pitcher and who is a "fielder" obviously if a guy never pitches, he's clearly a fielder. But if a guy goes out and pitches 30 innings and gets 30 plate appearances...how would you classify him for purpose of where he falls on roster construction? Is he a pitcher or a hitter. By saying to be classified as a pitcher his innings pitched needs to be greater than his plate appearances it's a nice neat line to draw.

I personally think it's long past time for MLB to expand its roster size.

Obviously I agree. Again, the only reason I propose the healthy scratch option is that it's a compromise position to the people who insist that baseball is 25 man roster size and that that is big enough.

"That is what you are trying to accomplish, I'm trying to accomplish more position players available in the lineup. I don't care one bit about the excessive overmanagement of the pen."

I'm sorry for misunderstanding. I wonder if teams would actually use the 3 "extra" roster spots under the "scratch list" plan for more position players, or if they would load up on more pitchers. It's really not that hard to imagine a scenario where a team under the current roster rules would be better off dropping a LOOGY for an extra pinch hitter or LIDR wizard, but no one does it. I'm afraid that bullpens might grow by another pitcher before we see a team decide to trim the bullpen in favor of another position player.

I wonder if teams would actually use the 3 "extra" roster spots under the "scratch list" plan for more position players, or if they would load up on more pitchers.

In previous discussions about this plan, I was told that they probably wouldn't and instead would effectively go to a 13/14 man bullpen. That is the reason I think the limit on number of pitchers would have to be created also.

Ultimately if you increase the roster size by one player(to 26) with no limits, then you will probably see some teams add a second loogy while other teams will add a swing utility player that is a capable backup catcher. If you up it to 27 man roster, you most definitely will see an additional pitcher added to the team, basically the 4A pitcher that most teams keep in AAA now. You won't really see an additional bench player that will be used until you up it to 28 players(probably)

Even though my healthy scratch idea does the same thing(increases the roster to 28 men) I think the nature of having the ability to move people off of the roster will encourage a more traditional bench. Teams would obviously make two of the healthy scratches starting pitchers who won't be used in the series. The third spot would be the flexible spot for whatever purposes. In this scenario then the 25 man roster with a 12 man pitching staff would effectively have a 10 man pitching staff for a series and 15 spots for position players.

"This wig is heavy. What dope wears a wig like this?"

"Everyone used to wear them."

'Then everyone was a dope."

just as there are many football fans who pine for the days when NFL players had to play sixty minutes on both side of the ball

Damn straight!

I don't see any real problem with expanding the rosters, but making teams submit a 25-man roster for each individual game.

A lot of the playing time for call-ups comes in blowouts or the last few innings of a "safe" lead. Can't really predict that, so you'd diminish the opportunity to evaluate call-ups, since clubs would presumably go with their A Team until they'd clinched a playoff spot or been eliminated.

Joe Girardi has used 5 pitchers in an inning today and so far they have recorded one out. It makes for some of the worst television possible.

Major league teams have discovered that it is easier to find - and use - a pitcher who can provide 40 or 50 low-leverage innings than it is to find - and use - a hitter who can be productive in 150-200 plate appearances. I don't see that changing any time soon.

-- MWE