Quote:
Originally Posted by Curtis
RchW pretty well covered this, but the standard from 1946-1970 was a strict four man rotation. If there was an off day they would get four days of rest instead of three, and if there was a doubleheader a spot starter would be inserted somewhere to make sure there were at least three days off.
ejbucs' quote from a friend was very appropo, and I've believed this for years. I was surprised this year while listening to Mets' broadcasts to hear both Ron Darling and Tom Seaver on seperate occaisions refer to reversing that strategy. They claimed that they 'bore down' on the 7-8-9 hitters because 'you don't want those guys to beat you'.
Tom said that he always picked out the one guy in the opposing lineup who he found hardest to get out, and for that guy he'd 'ease up', since 'he's going to get his hits anyway' so just try to ensure that when those hits come they don't hurt you.
Ron didn't say anything like that last bit, but he made a point out of how embarrassing it was to give up a hit to a guy at the bottom of the lineup, so it was to be avoided at all costs.
|
Yeah, Seaver might be making some sense there. The Giants all these years. Why even pitch to Bonds? (at times most didnt). In a lot of situations, I would have told my catcher to stand up take a couple steps away from Bonds and then just lobbed 4 pitches out of the K zone and let him have first base, especially when his knees went, and Kent left. I'd believe I'd have a good shot at Ray Durham if I was a MLB pitcher. If he beats me fine.
Course, another time in the past that I thought similar was looking at the Senators in the 60s. Frank Howard would mash about 40 a year. But, why pitch to him when the rest of the team combined would only hit that many?