162 Inning Pitchers are Disappearing
 

92 (2010)
93
88
81
88
78
74
58
57
53 (2019) (Yes, this number will be little higher when the season ends.)

From 2010 to 2019 the number of pitchers qualifying for the ERA leadership in their league, requiring 162 IP, is decreasing. From 2010 to 2019 the trend is from the low nineties to the fifties.

I suspect the number of starting pitchers completing 5 innings, to qualify for a win, is similarly decreasing. Certainly the number of innings per game has similarly been decreasing.

Pitching to a batter three times in a game will soon be unheard of.

The number of bullpen seats either increases or their occupancy rate does.

What does the future hold?

1. A single pitcher in one league wins an ERA crown with an ERA of 4.87, because no other pitcher in the league qualifies.

2. Ten game winners will be considered outstanding.

3. Bull pens will have to be expanded to 18-20 seats and rosters will have to be expanded to 30-32 players per team.

4. To address pace of play the next pitcher to enter the game will have to stand behind the mound, so that he can take over with a simple wave of the manager from the bench. The next pitcher would then assume the position behind the mound as soon as possible transported by a Harley-Davidson from the pen after a foul ball, a challenged play or the next commercial break.

5. More surgeons will be needed to specialize in Tommy John surgery to meet the ever increasing demand.

6. Fielder's gloves will never wear out with the ever increasing number of strikeouts and home runs.

What else does the future hold in your opinion?

It cannot all be due to managers being creative and using the bullpen more. What effect does injuries have on this trend? Are pitcher injuries up over the years?

Middle Relief pitchers will begin to get more consideration from Cy Young Award voters.

Out of curiosity, I looked up the Yanks pitchers, and they will likely only have 1 pitcher (Tanaka), qualify with enough innings for the ERA title.

Yanks top two WAR pitchers are relievers (Britton and Ottavino).

That’s a surprise.

My Red Sox will have two SPs qualify for the ERA title with 162 or more innings, although the downside is that one of them is Rick Porcello...

Both are ahead of the Brewers with zero. Consider yourself lucky.

Zach Davies needs 12 more innings, but has been averaging less than 5 innings per start.

Cincinnati Reds have two (Luis Castillo and Sonny Gray) and Anthony Desclafani could be a third if he has two remarkable starts to end the season - he is 14 innings away. Trevor Bauer has thrown over 200 innings, but since he was traded mid-season he can't qualify for a league ERA award.

To me, the future holds changing the rules for qualification. They could change the rules to games-started, rather than innings pitched, and inflate the number of qualifying pitchers. By doing that, you still end up with the healthiest pitchers, and presumably the best pitchers fans would want to see qualify anyway.

I believe Ricky P. Has the highest ERA for qualified pitchers in MLB this year, not the kind of luck I’m looking for...

With fewer qualifying pitchers each year, it becomes easier to excel at either end of the scale.:D

The final data for 2019 is in and a grand total of 62 hurlers qualify by pitching more than 162 innings pitched, slightly more than 2 per team. Wow!

Currently a starter has to pitch 5 innings at the start of the game for a win, do you think this rule will change in the future ? Maybe 4 innings etc.
Is it right that a starter pitches 4 innings and all the relievers pitch 1 inning and one of them gets credit for the win ?

Unless the starting pitchers are averaging more than 7 innings per start, the whole concept of winning and losing pitchers is of little value. Changing the rule to 4 innings is not the answer.

What percentage of games are decided in the first 4 innings?

Too many games are decided in the late innings. A lefty-righty relief specialist comes into the game to get the third out in a late inning. He succeeds in striking the batter out. His team then scores in the next inning to assume the lead. The pitcher is replaced by a closer in the next inning.

Is one late inning strikeout worthy of a win? Really?

With the vanishing 162 inning pitchers, look at the rosters of the playoff teams. I believe all of them have several bullpenners whose body of work is less than 50 innings and some of them probably have more wins than 5 inning starters with less than 162 innings.

Perhaps the concept of winning and losing pitchers should be abandoned. Perhaps the distinction between starting pitchers and relief pitchers should be abandoned. Let’s just call them all JAPs (Just Another Pitcher):D instead of SPs and RPs.

You could probably do the inverse diatribe on who gets the loss?

No doubt. It doesn’t matter who wins or loses. Both stats are corrupt.

Shall we discuss the "hold"? :)

Let’s hold off until we discuss the GWRBI, a failed pre-WAR concept.

Incidental trivia question

Who threw the last spitball in the major leagues?

Burleigh Grimes if you mean the last legal one.

I guess they could just do away with wins and loses for the pitchers and give them to the managers. The managers are the one directing the players anyway. Then the pitchers could get their recognition with ERA, K's, etc.

The illegal spit ball has essentially become a moot point in the current game, in which a new ball is introduced into the game seemingly three times during every at bat. Any ball that touches the dirt is gone.