PDA

View Full Version : Does the 22-man roster and no DL actually hurt the pitching staff?


Silver Sox Fan
07-06-2007, 01:32 PM
Now I know the 22-man roster is for financial reasons but I thought I'd start a straight baseball discussion. Just curious on your thoughts because I would argue that it does.

Just thinking outloud, teams should have 9 position players (counting the DH who plays some where else) and 2-3 bench players.Under that scenario, a team would have about 10-11 pitchers. On the surface, that is probably just 1-2 less than their affiliated ball counterparts/MLB. With 5 starters (and some would argue 4), that still leaves a decent bullpen of 5-6 players.

However, with no DL, guys who are dinged up and only miss a few games are retained on the roster rather than being put on the inactive list.

If they are pitchers, you now drop to maybe 3-4 guys out of the pen.

So, I think a 22-man roster means you have the following:

1. Over-worked pitchers. If your starter is getting bombed, do you leave him in? Or do you have your bullpen rack up the innings? And do you cut to a 4-man rotation to increase the bullpen? And does this lead to a higher than normal level of pitching injuries?

2. No true specialists...the guy who can come in for 1-2 tough outs and then give it up to a middle reliever/set-up man.

3. The high scores we see in all the games around the league. I know defense is also an issue since most team ERAs are in the high 4s and low 5s range. But is the quality of pitching less because there are not enough pitchers to go to on each team?

Back to our Silver Sox, we have seen injuries decimate the team. Because some were kept on the active roster when they were hurt that led to situations where pitchers played the field, starters came in as relievers, and some plitchers getting left in the game even though they were completely ineffective.

Do you think that pitching is hampered by a 22-man roster with no DL? And if not, what is problem (if there is one) with the overall pitching in the league?

RW22
07-06-2007, 02:10 PM
Good points SSF,
I think it is a combination of all of the above. Reno has been hit so hard by injuries--and Les should be commended for getting the most out of the least! Going to the DH was a bad idea to start with, there is one roster spot that could be opened up for a "specialist/closer". Pitching in the indy system is always a priority. There has never seemed to be enough of it, and Reno was very solid in that area last year. Its a double edged sword, Les had a great staff last year, but could not keep them because their contacts were being sold. Great for the kids, grey hair for Les! The level of play, overall, this year seems to be sub par from seasons past. So, if the defense lets you down, there isnt much a starting pitcher can do. I am sure frustration with the defense, and the noted lack of quality officiating is adding up. In the gmae last night in OC, there was call at first base where the runner was clearly safe by 5 feet(!!!!) and was called out---Im starting to beleive what I read here now. I dont think there is a clean cut answear, but I do know that its alot better to talk baseball than about management!

peeaanuut
07-06-2007, 03:04 PM
I would actually say that it hurts both the position players and the pitching staff. Some teams are heavy on pitchers and some teams are heavy on position players. It seems to leave a scenerio of a position player getting hurt and hes done. Cant afford to keep him on the roster if he misses more than a game or 2. This is why I am glad the GBL has the DH so it limits the number of injuries a pitcher can sustain (less time on field means less chance of injury). It also hurts the bullpen because if a starter goes down, usually a releif guy has to step in and may not be good in the long innings which leads to possibly overpitching and more injury. I just dont like the limited roster. They should have bumped the # since there is no IR.

heavesrock
07-07-2007, 11:14 PM
What hurts the Pitching staff is the DH. Get rid of that and it opens up another spot for one more pitcher.

Silver Sox Fan
07-08-2007, 01:06 AM
I know some people rally hate the DH but would it really make a difference in pitching? I mean the way pitching changes work in the GBL, it is not uncommon (based upon box scores) to change pitchers frequently. If they used typical no-DH strategy that is 2-3 pinch hitters as opposed to a DH who stays in the whole game. It seems like a wash to me if not slanted toward having a DH.

DCNationals
07-08-2007, 02:32 PM
I see I am not the only one who thinks going to the DH was a stupid idea. It makes the game a heck of a lot more boring. I would say I will boycott the league until they get rid of it, but since the league is boycotting me by taking away the Surf Dawgs I guess that point is moot.

S.Sox
07-08-2007, 02:41 PM
DC Nationals,
There are rumors that the "Dawgs" will be back next year!! Have you heard the same?
S.Sox

DCNationals
07-08-2007, 02:44 PM
No, I have not. If true, that would be very nice. The question is, of course, where will they play? I doubt SDSU is going to be acceptable.

S.Sox
07-08-2007, 02:49 PM
I think that is the problem, from what I heard..( by the way, my sources stink)
S.Sox

heavesrock
07-08-2007, 03:24 PM
Reasons to get rid of the DH.

1. It makes the game boring
2. The object of the league is develop. Managers need to learn to manage without the DH if they are going to go anywhere in managing.
3. Pitchers should learn to hit before they are put in that situation in the minors or MLB so they can help their team.
4. Getting rid of it would open up a spot for another pitcher.
5. Pinch Hitters would be needed more keeping bench players fresh.
6. It would put pinch hitters in pressure situations so they can learn to deal with them before they get to a higher stage.

DCNationals
07-08-2007, 06:34 PM
Hopefully the league comissioner is reading this...