Why not give elite starting pitchers the ball more often?

[DavidGee24]

If you have a starting rotation where you've got one or two really good pitchers but either your fifth guy really sucks or you have to use mediocre spot starters, with days off why not just skip that fifth spot when you get the opportunity?

Let's say for example that some combo of Castillo/Kirby/Gilbert/Miller were pitching like aces and Hancock/Woo were sucking eggs. You could easily use your better pitchers every fifth day with days off during the season and put the ball in the hands of your better pitcher(s) up to, say, 35-37 times instead of 32.

Why give your worst spot in the starting rotation an equal say in the team's fortunes as your best one? That's a thing about modern baseball that doesn't make sense and nobody will waver from just because "That's the way it's done". Oh, and (in really whiny voice) "Someone might get huuuuuurt", which is why nobody will do it. Give your ace one extra start and if he by some miracle gets hurt at any random point during the season management gets blamed and ohhhhhh we can't have that! Guys get hurt now pitching meager innings as it is, so you might as well go for it.

Look at the last three seasons. If we get our ace 35 starts and sit Marco or somebody else's ass those three (or more if we get our #2 guy more starts) times, we likely have three straight playoff appearances.

Does this make sense?

[desbcoach]

One could argue saving gas for the playoffs or stretch run. But your point is valid

[D-train]

If you have a starting rotation where you've got one or two really good pitchers but either your fifth guy really sucks or you have to use mediocre spot starters, with days off why not just skip that fifth spot when you get the opportunity?

Let's say for example that some combo of Castillo/Kirby/Gilbert/Miller were pitching like aces and Hancock/Woo were sucking eggs. You could easily use your better pitchers every fifth day with days off during the season and put the ball in the hands of your better pitcher(s) up to, say, 35-37 times instead of 32.

Why give your worst spot in the starting rotation an equal say in the team's fortunes as your best one? That's a thing about modern baseball that doesn't make sense and nobody will waver from just because "That's the way it's done". Oh, and (in really whiny voice) "Someone might get huuuuuurt", which is why nobody will do it. Give your ace one extra start and if he by some miracle gets hurt at any random point during the season management gets blamed and ohhhhhh we can't have that! Guys get hurt now pitching meager innings as it is, so you might as well go for it.

Look at the last three seasons. If we get our ace 35 starts and sit Marco or somebody else's ass those three (or more if we get our #2 guy more starts) times, we likely have three straight playoff appearances.

Does this make sense?

Because they obsess on limiting their innings instead of keeping them on regular rest which is absurd. Going from 4 days rest to 5 periodically is probably worse for them. And boy with the recent epidemic of are injuries pretty clear given extra rest has been so effective.

[DavidGee24]

One could argue saving gas for the playoffs or stretch run. But your point is valid

Unfortunately, in our case two of the last three years we had plenty of gas left in the car but had only the golf course to go to.

You know what's a great example of riding your best horses? The Dodgers of the '60s. If they hadn't given the ball to Drysdale and Koufax 40+ times, at most they only would have won one of their three pennants (twice they won the pennant by just two games, the other time by six). Yes, they retired young, but considering that several other star pitchers lasted a lot longer that's the chance they had to take.

[D-train]

People are saying Hancock should pitch tomorrow because he will get shelled by the Rangers but wouldn't to be better to have a sweep in hand before going to Texas and hope for the best with Hancock starting one game there?

[desbcoach]

People are saying Hancock should pitch tomorrow because he will get shelled by the Rangers but wouldn't to be better to have a sweep in hand before going to Texas and hope for the best with Hancock starting one game there?

I disagree, Believe he has above odd of winning tomorrow and less odds in Texas. With weather the way it is Kirby or Gilbert could have a hard time with spin and being hittable

[D-train]

People are saying Hancock should pitch tomorrow because he will get shelled by the Rangers but wouldn't to be better to have a sweep in hand before going to Texas and hope for the best with Hancock starting one game there?

I disagree, Believe he has above odd of winning tomorrow and less odds in Texas. With weather the way it is Kirby or Gilbert could have a hard time with spin and being hittable

It's a great plan until Hancock loses tomorrow and Gilbert loses vs. Texas which is very possible. Highly unlikely Gilbert loses tomorrow but he could easily lose the Rangers.

[Donn Beach]

What is so fantastic about the Rangers? They were two games better than the mariners last season and the mariners are tied with them this season

[Juliooooo]

What is so fantastic about the Rangers? They were two games better than the mariners last season and the mariners are tied with them this season

They actually have talent.

[bpj]

If you have a starting rotation where you've got one or two really good pitchers but either your fifth guy really sucks or you have to use mediocre spot starters, with days off why not just skip that fifth spot when you get the opportunity?

Let's say for example that some combo of Castillo/Kirby/Gilbert/Miller were pitching like aces and Hancock/Woo were sucking eggs. You could easily use your better pitchers every fifth day with days off during the season and put the ball in the hands of your better pitcher(s) up to, say, 35-37 times instead of 32.

Why give your worst spot in the starting rotation an equal say in the team's fortunes as your best one? That's a thing about modern baseball that doesn't make sense and nobody will waver from just because "That's the way it's done". Oh, and (in really whiny voice) "Someone might get huuuuuurt", which is why nobody will do it. Give your ace one extra start and if he by some miracle gets hurt at any random point during the season management gets blamed and ohhhhhh we can't have that! Guys get hurt now pitching meager innings as it is, so you might as well go for it.

Look at the last three seasons. If we get our ace 35 starts and sit Marco or somebody else's ass those three (or more if we get our #2 guy more starts) times, we likely have three straight playoff appearances.

Does this make sense?

Agreed, when you have a couple guys at the top of your rotation that are clearly better, the team would be better off skipping the #5 guy when there's a day off to keep the aces on schedule.

Plus, the 5th starter is usually the one they're trying to "limit innings" anyways, so it's just a natural move imo.