The Futility Infielder

Claude Osteen???

Speaking of the Royals... former correspondant from the depths of the the AL Central Rany Jazayerli has an excellent study on Baseball Prospecuts comparing pitchers in a five-man rotation versus those in a four-man rotation.

Rany studied 68 pitchers who made between 37 and 43 starts in a season between 1973 and 1975 (I'll call them the 4-Men), and 68 who made 34 or 35 starts between 1991 and 1993 (the 5-Men). The raw statistical edge between the two groups is split, with the 4-Men featuring a lower ERA and the 5-Men a higher winning percentage. But the big difference is in the number of innings thrown by the 4-Men, an average of 50 more per pitcher. That's 50 innings which under the 5-man rotation would be given from the #1 starter to the #5, a big cost in runs. Furthermore, those extra innings thrown by the 4-Men didn't cause any long-term damage to those pitchers; five years later, they were still throwing MORE innings MORE effectively than their counterparts. As Rany concludes:

Bottom Line: if these numbers suggest anything, it's that pitching in a four-man rotation is less damaging than pitching in a five-man rotation. Now, the difference between the two groups isn't enormous, and neither is the sample size, so I'll concede the point that these differences are not statistically significant. I'm not trying to argue that working on three days' rest is more healthy than working on four days' rest, only that it isn't less healthy. Given the obvious tactical benefits that come from taking innings away from the worst pitchers on your staff and giving them to your best, shouldn't that be enough?

Very interesting stuff. Early on in the piece, Rany imparts some historical perspective to the issue, explaining that the Dodgers were the first to use it--basically because "unlike almost any other organization, they actually had five quality starters. How many teams can boast five starting pitchers whose names are still recognizable a quarter-century later?" The five to which he refers (the Dodgers 1972 rotation) are Don Sutton, Tommy John, Claude Osteen, Bill Singer, and Al Downing.

I thought about that one for a moment, then looked at the Dodger rotation the following season, when Singer was replaced by Andy Messersmith. By my reckoning, that's even more memorable a collection of ballplayers, with three of the five familiar enough to produce knee-jerk associations, the fourth a popular Hall of Famer and one of my personal favorites:

Al Downing - yielded Hank Aaron's 715th homer
Tommy John - gave his name to ligament replacement surgery and a statistical family of pitchers
Andy Messersmith - one of two players in a landmark arbitrator's ruling which created free agency
Don Sutton - Hall of Famer, 324 wins, fought Steve Garvey
Claude Osteen - ?

Claude Osteen won 196 games in the major leagues; he also lost 195. He made up for this with a 1-2 record in the 1965 and 1966 World Series, putting him eternally at .500. Osteen was something of Sandy Koufax's mirror image, a righty who wore #23 (I remember this from an old baseball card showing an awkwardly-torqued elbow which made me think of the Dodger ace). He was the only non-Hall of Famer of that 1966 rotation which included Koufax, Don Drysdale, and the rookie Sutton--each of whom topped 40 career shutouts. Those four also combined for 893 wins and 704 losses in their respective careers, a .559 winning percentage:

           W    L

Sutton   324  256

Drysdale 209  166

Osteen   196  195

Koufax   165   87

TOTAL    893  704  (.559 Win Pct.)

Having left the original purpose of this column and gone galloping down some weird tangent, I now give you another rotation to consider in terms of impressive career totals, the 1970 Minnesota Twins:

                 W    L

Jim Kaat       283  237

Jim Perry      215  174

Bert Blyleven  287  250

Luis Tiant     229  172

TOTAL         1014  833 (.549)

Anybody who can find a rotation with more wins, losses or decisions in their collective career wins a prize. Tomorrow, I'll offer up one of those fancy charts on the pitching staff which included 8 men who won 150 or more games in the big leagues. You'll want to get some sleep before then, trust me.