That is insane thinking. No way you could get 1 starting pitcher to go with that, lettle own 4. Their stats are what makes them a pitcher. Who wants a pitcher that only pitches 3 innings to be a starter. Not one of those starters is going to stay with the Blue Jays for their entire career. Not to mention even trying to get a coach to think this way.
The other reason for this being insane is consistency! From my ball playing days (which does still include now! albeit slowpitch) one of the most important things to a teams chemistry and the teams ability to win is consistency. If you have a pitcher that can go 5-6 innings every single time they are pitching, do their 100 pitches and then have the bullpen take over and consistently maintain the lead of a game, that is what brings a winning team together.
You are essentially making Dickey a middle reliever with this equation. One reason why pitchers tend to do worse the 2nd, 3rd and 4th time through a teams batting order is because their stuff (arm) is getting weaker and therefore they have lost velocity and movement on their pitches. Although a knuckle ball pitcher gets tons of movement, and unpredictable movement on the ball, the velocity tends to be much slower. Bringing Dickey in as a middle reliever defeats the purpose bringing in a middle reliever in my opinion. I believe you bring in a reliever, whether middle or ending of a game, to bring back the velocity and movement that the batters couldn't hit at the beginning of the game.
The other thing is, you can look at your assessment of how to use the pitching for the blue jays as how you should use pitching for any team. Only let the pitchers (where a knuckle baller or fast baller or a junk thrower) pitch to the batters only once. I am sure if you look at the averages of 95% of the pitchers in the league you will find the same kind of Hitters Average changing through out the game. That is the reason you usually want to pull a starting pitcher at the first sign of trouble. Most coaches feel obligated to letting their starters going 5 innings and that is where blowouts happen.
Have you heard of a coach leaving a pitcher in the game when the other team has scored 9 runs on that one pitcher? It happened the other day. Miami scored 9 runs in the first 5 innings. They scored 4 runs in the second inning. I am willing to bet if the Braves pitcher was pulled in the second, the Marlins would not have scored 5 more runs in the next 3 innings!!!!!!!!!!! To me, this was a coach trying to please his starting pitcher by keeping him in the game. The Braves ended up scoring 3 runs in the last 4 innings of the game and losing 9-3. Would it have been a different game or possibly a different outcome if they would have pulled the starter in the 2nd inning and not the 5th. A 4-3 game is a game you have a chance to come back and win in the 9th inning. A 9-3 game isn't. If the starter would have went 5 innings without having a run scored, and then the Marlins score 4 runs in the 5th, do you think that starter would have finished the 5th inning? I doubt it. So why let him finish the 2nd and even start the 3rd/4th or 5th inning if they scored 4 runs on him in the 2nd? But this is the thinking of teams/managers/pitchers in the league and I don't see it changing.
Look at "Moneyball". That was a major change in how the league thinks about their lineups, but you still have over 75% of the leagues teams playing the same baseball they were in the 90s. Only a few teams implore the ideas brought to the table in Moneyball.
Your idea, although I find it to be insane IMO, may work for a little while, 10 game stretch or something like that, but eventually, I think it would blow up in the face of the manager that tried it and their team would be far worse off with that type of system.
Last edited by Golfnut77777
on 2014-May-Fri-12-05, edited 1 time in total.