So, a normal five-man rotation then, with a dude making occasional spot start. That hardly seems radical enough to be news, even in NY.

I remember 30-40 years ago when Bill James said that the problem with five-man rotations is that you're taking eight starts away from each of your four best pitchers and giving all of them to your fifth-best pitcher. Having six starting pitchers seems even worse in that regard.

It is, give or take, a 6-day rotation (as opposed to a 6-man rotation) and is not exactly an innovation but still reasonably new. Houston started out doing this with Javier as the #6 guy. Then Odorizzi got hurt and they mainly went back to a 5-man. Then Javier was so good that when Odorizzi came back, they stuck with a 6-man rotation. (Also by the time Odorizzi came back in early July, they already had a 13.5 game lead and could already focus on keeping folks fresh for the playoffs.) Then when McCullers came back, they traded Odorizzi.

That said, a strict 6-day rotation creates a start for the #6 guy whenever they play 6+ in a row. That happens a lot though so I suspect the practical application is 7+ or 8+. I'll guesstimate that, at the end of the season, the goal is to have 30 starts for #s 1-3, 26 for #4-5 and about 20 for #6.

Weirdly (not sure I've noticed anything like this before) the Mets start with 8 games in 8 days. We'll see the #6 guy in that stretch surely as SPs are still rounding into form. Making it weirder, their first off-day is a Saturday. There's another stretch of 10 straight in April where we'll see the #6 guy. That's followed by a 13-day stretch, followed by another 13-day stretch. The #6 guys is getting plenty of work early. That's 49 games in the first 53 days, busy boys.

Then a 9-game stretch to July 4, July 4 off. After the AS break they get 9 games in 8 days with an actual scheduled DH in Boston, #6 will appear then. Later a 13-game stretch and a 17-game stretch in Sept.

So that's at least 13 starts for #6 by my count, leaving a max of about 30 each for the other 5.

heh, I think either David Peterson or Tylor Megill might start for some teams on Opening Day.
they're not future Hall of Famers, but each had some solid stretches last season.

Mets leaning toward having them each start all year - in AAA until Mets need to break glass and pull one out of the box for a start (or both, if the arthritis medications don't work as well as planned on the top 5).

$400 million doesn't buy you as much as it used to

100% forgot they had signed Quintana.

You have to wonder: now that starters pitch 7 innings, max, and are really only expected to go 6, would a return to a 5-day rotation (mainly 4 pitchers, with a 5th guy who ends up with 15-20 starts) be safe?

I bet it would, but nobody would have the guts to try.

#7 The problem is that pitchers have responded to reduced workload by increasing the intensity. And it's unlikely that they'd react to changes in use patterns by dialing back.

I really thought with SP not going deeper in games, we'd see more 4-man rotations.

#9 I can see it with a new type of opener. Maybe a 3 IP type.

I remember when LaRussa tried a 3 man 3 IP rotation. It didn't work, but that might just be because the pitchers weren't any good.

Daniel Norris had a nice run as a 3 IP starter in 2019. The Tigers made him a bullpen long man the next year instead of continuing with it.

I bet it would, but nobody would have the guts to try.

Yeah, that. Problem is the credit and blame game. If you miss the playoffs by 2 games because your ace made 28 starts instead of 35... well, nobody is ever going to notice and pin it on that. But if your ace makes 35 starts and gets hurt when everybody else's makes 28, then you obviously overused and broke him.

And 3 IP at a time seems like the obvious model that's going to be most effective overall. It just hasn't caught on because the pitchers hate not getting their win stats.

I remember when LaRussa tried a 3 man 3 IP rotation. It didn't work, but that might just be because the pitchers weren't any good.

3 innings is too many. you really only need to steal 1 or 2.

the way i figured it (this was before DH was universal), a national league team, on the road, could start with a pinch hitter (preferable a decent hitting pitcher on their off-day) in the 3 hole, steal that first AB (2 outs, noone on, let someone like cliff lee/cole hamels swing the bat; if there are 2 on/0 outs, then you can put a real pinch hitter in, instead), then use an "opener" for 2-3 innings, until 3-hole came up again, use another pinch hitter to steal another AB, and then go to their bridge guy. doing it this way, your pitchers wouldn't have to pick up a bat until the 3rd time through the order.

I really thought with SP not going deeper in games, we'd see more 4-man rotations.

middle managers are pussies.

#7 The problem is that pitchers have responded to reduced workload by increasing the intensity. And it's unlikely that they'd react to changes in use patterns by dialing back.

Has anyone looked at whether the pitch clock has affected velocity so far this spring? I would think less time between pitches could cause pitchers to dial back a bit, although that would theoretically just enable them to get through the same number of innings they were last year, not necessarily go deeper into games.

Might be a bit hard to figure out, still pretty early. Would they even be at a recognizable velocity now anyhow?

Has anyone looked at whether the pitch clock has affected velocity so far this spring? I would think less time between pitches could cause pitchers to dial back a bit, although that would theoretically just enable them to get through the same number of innings they were last year, not necessarily go deeper into games.

In the minors, there didn't seem to be any tangible effect on velo.