casimir Posted March 2 Posted March 2 On 2/28/2026 at 9:33 AM, Edman85 said: I don't understand the "Limit guys' innings to protect their arms, but let them max out in relief" strategy... What do you mean? Is this along the lines of throwing harder over fewer pitches rather than pitching for more pitches? Quote
chasfh Posted March 2 Posted March 2 On 2/28/2026 at 4:59 PM, Tenacious D said: I think they’d keep Baez over Jones. We could use a bat off the bench against hooks, and Javy ain’t that. Jones may have had the inside track coming into camp, but I also think we’re also getting a look at Austin Slater for possibly filling that role. Quote
Edman85 Posted March 2 Posted March 2 10 hours ago, casimir said: What do you mean? Is this along the lines of throwing harder over fewer pitches rather than pitching for more pitches? I am saying throwing harder over fewer pitches is worse on the elbow in particular. 1 Quote
gehringer_2 Posted March 2 Posted March 2 (edited) 1 hour ago, Edman85 said: I am saying throwing harder over fewer pitches is worse on the elbow in particular. The difference in TJ morbidity for relief pitchers compared to starting pitchers isn't anywhere near as large as I would expect it to be if it were just based on pitch count. But the question is whether it's throwing harder or more often or just both, that increases the risk for RPs. Edited March 2 by gehringer_2 Quote
Tiger337 Posted March 2 Author Posted March 2 (edited) 1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said: The difference in TJ morbidity for relief pitchers compared to starting pitchers isn't anywhere near as large as I would expect it to be if it were just based on pitch count. But the question is whether it's throwing harder or more often or just both, that increases the risk for RPs. I like to compare pitching to distance running as I am very familiar with the stresses of the latter. It's not the same because throwing different kinds of pitches with maximun intensity strains your arm more than the repetive motion of running. However, I think of frequency and duration of running is analagous to the frequency and duration of pitching. I think that running 33 half marathons in six months versus running 70 5ks in six months would each put a different kind of stress on the joints. Starting pitching has the risk of cumulative long-term wear and tear whereas relief pitching has more risk of acute injury due to max intensity and shorter recovery. Both are big risks, but I think that the routine of being a starting pitcher is easier to manage than the erratic use of relievers. There are pros and cons of each, but I don't think using a young pitcher in short relief versus starting is keeping him safer. Edited March 2 by Tiger337 1 Quote
gehringer_2 Posted March 2 Posted March 2 (edited) there is certainly a complex interaction between the frequency of repetitive stress, the intensity, the max stress and the recovery interval and they are probably all non-linear. Superimpose that on the genetic diversity of the population and the relatively small sample size of pitchers to study and you have really tough epidemiology to solve. OTOH, there is a stupendous amount of money at risk that should be motivating people to solve it. Edited March 2 by gehringer_2 Quote
Edman85 Posted March 2 Posted March 2 33 minutes ago, Tiger337 said: I like to compare pitching to distance running as I am very familiar with the stresses of the latter. It's not the same because throwing different kinds of pitches with maximun intensity strains your arm more than the repetive motion of running. However, I think of frequency and duration of running is analagous to the frequency and duration of pitching. I think that running 33 half marathons in six months versus running 70 5ks in six months would each put a different kind of stress on the joints. Starting pitching has the risk of cumulative long-term wear and tear whereas relief pitching has more risk of acute injury due to max intensity and shorter recovery. Both are big risks, but I think that the routine of being a starting pitcher is easier to manage than the erratic use of relievers. There are pros and cons of each, but I don't think using a young pitcher in short relief versus starting is keeping him safer. Agreed, but as a jumping off point, I should put it this way... If innings and innings alone is the only marker, starters should be dropping off 3x as much as relievers. To me, 6 max effort relief outings are much more dangerous than a 6 inning start. Quote
chasfh Posted March 2 Posted March 2 7 hours ago, gehringer_2 said: The difference in TJ morbidity for relief pitchers Whenever I see something like this, I imagine you're talking about pitchers dying. 1 Quote
diaspora04 Posted March 2 Posted March 2 7 minutes ago, chasfh said: Whenever I see something like this, I imagine you're talking about pitchers dying. I think that would be mortality, though I am not an actuary. Quote
gehringer_2 Posted March 3 Posted March 3 4 hours ago, chasfh said: Whenever I see something like this, I imagine you're talking about pitchers dying. Metaphorically, they go to the IL, they are dead to us. 🤷♂️ Quote
Tigermojo Posted Thursday at 04:43 PM Posted Thursday at 04:43 PM https://blogs.fangraphs.com/kevin-mcgonigles-time-isnt-soon-its-now/ 1 Quote
tiger2022 Posted Thursday at 05:19 PM Posted Thursday at 05:19 PM (edited) I don't get the schedule At Padres At Dbacks Vs Cards At Twins Vs Marlins Vs Royals At Red Sox Vs Brewers At Reds At Braves 7 series against NL teams and 3 against AL teams through the end of April. Then they get the Mets a few series into May. Absolutely zero connection in any of those series against NL teams. What goofball in the mlb office thought that was a good idea? The interleague play stuff has gone way overboard. I'd prefer an extra series or 2 against the Central teams. This seems like a great way to get people not interested in the beginning of the season. Edited Thursday at 05:40 PM by tiger2022 Quote
chasfh Posted Saturday at 08:35 PM Posted Saturday at 08:35 PM People will be interested in the beginning of the season if Kevin McGonigle is on the team and we’re beating the hell out of National League teams out of the gate. Quote
oblong Posted 2 hours ago Posted 2 hours ago Joel Zumaya posted on his facebook account that he's selling his "entire" Pokemon collection. In case you're wondering how things are going with him. Quote
casimir Posted 2 hours ago Posted 2 hours ago 33 minutes ago, oblong said: Joel Zumaya posted on his facebook account that he's selling his "entire" Pokemon collection. In case you're wondering how things are going with him. I hope he doesn’t have to retrieve them from the attic. 2 Quote
casimir Posted 2 hours ago Posted 2 hours ago On 3/5/2026 at 12:19 PM, tiger2022 said: I don't get the schedule At Padres At Dbacks Vs Cards At Twins Vs Marlins Vs Royals At Red Sox Vs Brewers At Reds At Braves 7 series against NL teams and 3 against AL teams through the end of April. Then they get the Mets a few series into May. Absolutely zero connection in any of those series against NL teams. What goofball in the mlb office thought that was a good idea? The interleague play stuff has gone way overboard. I'd prefer an extra series or 2 against the Central teams. This seems like a great way to get people not interested in the beginning of the season. I wonder if there’s a heavier concentration of interleague earlier in the season for all teams. I would theorize that’s possibly intentional. There’s a longer window to get any rescheduling of postponements for matchups that occur only once a season and might be a little more difficult to jam in somewhere. Or I could be completely wrong about that. Quote
Shelton Posted 2 hours ago Posted 2 hours ago 5 minutes ago, casimir said: I wonder if there’s a heavier concentration of interleague earlier in the season for all teams. I would theorize that’s possibly intentional. There’s a longer window to get any rescheduling of postponements for matchups that occur only once a season and might be a little more difficult to jam in somewhere. Or I could be completely wrong about that. No matter what there is an interleague series every day due to 15 teams in each league. You can’t really front load them because everyone plays the same number per season. Quote
Shelton Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago On 3/5/2026 at 12:19 PM, tiger2022 said: I don't get the schedule At Padres At Dbacks Vs Cards At Twins Vs Marlins Vs Royals At Red Sox Vs Brewers At Reds At Braves 7 series against NL teams and 3 against AL teams through the end of April. Then they get the Mets a few series into May. Absolutely zero connection in any of those series against NL teams. What goofball in the mlb office thought that was a good idea? The interleague play stuff has gone way overboard. I'd prefer an extra series or 2 against the Central teams. This seems like a great way to get people not interested in the beginning of the season. Next year you will complain that the tigers have too many interleague games late in the season during the pennant race, and they wasted divisional matchups early in the year when no one was paying attention. Quote
oblong Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago Yeah I don’t miss those days of seeing the white sox and twins and royals and Indians at comerica park for what seems like 3/4 of my games. So boring. Playing NL teams still feels fresh and special to me Quote
Tiger337 Posted 1 hour ago Author Posted 1 hour ago The majority of fans like interleague play. That is why they have it. I don't care for having so mych of it, but they aren't marketing to me. Quote
casimir Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago 55 minutes ago, Shelton said: No matter what there is an interleague series every day due to 15 teams in each league. You can’t really front load them because everyone plays the same number per season. In theory you could front load. If on average there are 3 games each night that are interleague, they could go heavier with 5 early in the season and work on down to 3 or 1 later in the season. Whether or not that is done or practical, I don’t know. Quote
monkeytargets39 Posted 1 hour ago Posted 1 hour ago (edited) On 3/5/2026 at 12:19 PM, tiger2022 said: I don't get the schedule At Padres At Dbacks Vs Cards At Twins Vs Marlins Vs Royals At Red Sox Vs Brewers At Reds At Braves 7 series against NL teams and 3 against AL teams through the end of April. Then they get the Mets a few series into May. Absolutely zero connection in any of those series against NL teams. What goofball in the mlb office thought that was a good idea? The interleague play stuff has gone way overboard. I'd prefer an extra series or 2 against the Central teams. This seems like a great way to get people not interested in the beginning of the season. On the flip side, this schedule likely reduces weather impacting the games for the first few series. Maybe we’d have more early season scheduling options if we played in a stadium with a roof. Edited 55 minutes ago by monkeytargets39 Quote
casimir Posted 59 minutes ago Posted 59 minutes ago 4 minutes ago, Tiger337 said: The majority of fans like interleague play. That is why they have it. I don't care for having so mych of it, but they aren't marketing to me. It’s been going on now for, what, over 30 years now? Quote
monkeytargets39 Posted 57 minutes ago Posted 57 minutes ago I enjoy inter league play because it allows fans from all teams opportunities to see stars on teams from the other league. Example: I went to the Dodgers/Tigers game this past year with a couple family members and got to see Ohtani and crew. This year I’m going to go to a Tigers game at Wrigley. Those types of things didn’t have the possibility to exist when I was younger outside of a World Series. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.