What’s Wrong With a Four-Man Rotation?

by Jason Epstein

Yahoo’s Jeff Passan:

The [Doug] Fister deal recompensed for the fifth-game nausea and dread that surrounded the Tigers. They should win the Central. They could catch the AL West winner and earn home-field advantage in the first round. Fister isn’t the only reason. He is a big one.

And yet the trade for him wasn’t the only possible course of action.

The Tigers could’ve done something opening day to save at least a few of those miserable outings from even happening.

It would have been wild. Unconventional. Part of the evolution back to the proper usage of pitchers instead of the anxiety that pervades the game today.

A four-man rotation.

How very novel.

And how very rational. . . .

Maybe it’s time to let somebody finish the thought. For those who dare question rote pitcher usage — who gag at the New York Yankees’ six-man rotation and twitched upon seeing its use with the Kansas City Royals, Chicago White Sox and Tampa Bay Rays, too — the four-man is begging to be implemented. Going with four regular starters who pitch on four days’ rest and using a fifth starter as the schedule dictates — with him otherwise serving as a swingman in a long-relief role — doesn’t only give a team the flexibility necessary to keep it from carrying up to 13 pitchers.

It actually lets their best pitchers pitch more.

More here.

Right Field

Brief chronicles of our sporting times.