On Jan 27, 10:06=A0am, Jack Linthicum
wrote:
> On Jan 27, 9:39=A0am, Insane Ranter wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 27, 8:07=A0am, Jack Linthicum
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 27, 12:52=A0am, The Horny Goat wrote:
>
> > > > On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:13:50 -0800 (PST), Rich Rostrom
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >Or WI a batter who scores lines up to bat
> > > > >again immediately? I.e. the #5 batter
> > > > >doesn't bat until #1 through #4 are either
> > > > >out or on base.
>
> > > > Thus making the 1927 and 1961 NY Yankees even scarier!
>
> > > > >Or WI a baseball game had just one inning,
> > > > >with each team getting 27 outs? This would
> > > > >create a scoring situation similar to
> > > > >cricket: the visiting team would win by
> > > > >some number of runs, but the home team
> > > > >would win by 1 to 4 runs, with some number
> > > > >of outs remaining (equivalent to a cricket
> > > > >win by some number of wickets remaining).
>
> > > > That would certainly make baseball betting more complicated!
>
> > > > >The effects of longer innings would be
> > > > >* increased scores
> > > > >* great reduction in bunting, base stealing
> > > > >and other 1-run strategems
> > > > >* pitchers would be used differently (I
> > > > >don't think a pitcher could go for 27 outs,
> > > > >or even 9 outs, with no breaks.)
>
> > > > I would think underhanded pitching would change the game even more.
> > > > Probably more so than the forward pass changed (American) football.
>
> > > Moving the pitcher's box back helped batters.
>
> > > and
>
> > > "When the National League first started in 1876, pitchers had to pitc=
h
> > > underhand and the batter could request a high or low pitch. Strikes
> > > only occurred if the batter swung and missed."
>
> > >http://www.squidoo.com/baseballtrivia
This is not quite right. In the early years (into the late 1860s)
pitching was full underhand, but pitchers gradually started raising
the delivery point. Umpiring was less formal in those days, and there
was not a clear line between a legal and an illegal delivery. So the
pitchers kept pushing the envelope of what they could get away with.
The official rules were a trailing indicator of actual practice. Full
overhand was not legal until the mid-1880s, but there was a
transitional phase in the 1870s as the legal delivery moved through a
sidearm phase. This is, not coincidentally, the period when effective
curve balls are introduced. Also not coincidentally, very few
pitchers from the beginning of the decade successfully made the
transition.
> > It'd be alot like softball. No 5 pitcher rotations only have maybe 3
> > at the most?
>
> At the beginning, 1887 seems a popular year, Cincinnati had a 19 team
> roster, 7 pitchers. Two had 100 games between them, one 22, then 8, 2,
> 1, 1. One guy, Pop Corkel, is listed as a relief pitcher and had 5
> appearances and a similar ERA 5.52.
I have no special knowledge of the 1887 Cincinnati club, but I
strongly suspect that a closer examination would show that their
actual roster was never that large. Typical in that era would be to
carry perhaps twelve to fif guys at a time. There often was a
fair amount of churn in the backup roster as young hopefuls were given
tryouts.
In the case of Pop Corkel, he was actually a perfectly respectable
outfielder, playing in 128 games that season with a .311 batting
average. My guess would be that he was brought in from the outfield
to finish out a few blowouts, except that he is credited with one
win. In any case, pitching wasn't his main job. |
