Marlins manager Don Mattingly was the latest manager to complain about September roster expansion rules, stating that “the game you play for five months is not the game you play in September.” According to Mattingly, the roster expansion from 25 to 40 in the month of September changes the “fundamental nature of the game” by allowing clubs to use up to 40 players in a given contest as opposed to the 25 they’d be able to use from April to August.
Objectively, Mattingly’s accusation that the game is fundamentally different is hard to argue. With a hat tip to Jerry Crasnick of ESPN for the stats, the recent Saturday contest between the Marlins and Phillies was the first non-DH game since 1900 in which no pitcher recorded a plate appearance. It was also just the fourth game in MLB history in which no pitcher tallied more than six outs. Mattingly’s not the first manager to take issue with roster expansion; former Brewers GM Doug Melvin complained about the change as early as 2005.
Here are a pair of other notes from throughout baseball earlier today…
- Mets hitter Jay Bruce apparently wants his “audition” with the Mets late this year to “mean something”, per a report from Mike Puma of the New York Post. Taken in context, it’s quite a turnaround to hear such words about a player who less than a year ago was signed to a three-year, $39MM deal in hopes that he’d be a difference-maker for the Amazins. But an unfortunate fall from grace this year has seen the once-proud slugger struggle to a .221/.300/.373 batting line with just 8 homers while bouncing between the outfield and first base in Queens. Bruce hopes his recent power surge since being activated from the disabled list has dispelled any notion that the Mets “goofed” by signing him. Furthermore, the fact that they’ve given him significant time at first base might hint that he could have a leg up on former top prospect Dominic Smith for the starting first base job in 2019.
- Though many front offices began their free agency planning as early as August 1st, we’re just now entering the time period at which many players begin evaluating their foray into the market. Buster Olney of ESPN.com details the high-payday potential of a few names on the market who are less high-profile than the frequently-mentioned 2018-2019 headliners. That list includes outfielder Michael Brantley, left-handed starter Patrick Corbin, and recently-traded infielder Daniel Murphy. Olney’s subscription-only piece doesn’t list any surprises; they’re all players a reasonable baseball pundit might expect to earn significant dollars this offseason. But his piece offers an interesting preview of the list of players whose high stock is perhaps overshadowed by the likes of Bryce Harper, Manny Machado and Clayton Kershaw.
Wonder if the Mets and Reds could make a bad contract swap. New York sends 2 years of Jay Bruce back to Cincinnati for 1 year of Homer Bailey. Reds could chip in couple million since Bailey has 23 million plus a 5 million dollar buyout while Bruce sits at 26 million
Doesn’t seem like a terrible idea, but I think the Reds would have kick in something else with at least moderate value. Also don’t know if Cincy would be keen on Bruce though. Their outfield is a little full and they still need to find room for Senzel and maybe eventually Trammell next year.
Really who cares??Just another article from this site trolling for NY Fans. The Mets and Bruce irrevelant
A dude name bubba….. how delicious
So why is it a bad thing that the game is different in September? I’m not saying I like expanded play, but you gotta have a better argument against it than “it’s different.”
Two sets of rules is not inherently any worse than 1 set of rules or 3 sets of rules.
Agreed. Nowhere does it say a team HAS to increase its roster from 25 to 40; they could call up just one or two players as well — rewarding veterans who had a solid year, or a couple of prospects to give them a cup of coffee at the big league level.
If anything, I always thought it was a good plan in September to call up a few players to give your regulars a rest before the postseason. I wonder why more dislike it; the game is the same and it’s not making it much longer. It’s just nice to get a look at a few more players in September and rest the starters a little bit.
I guess Don feels just terrible that he ruined the 1982 season for the Yankees when he was a September call up.
No having Mayberry hit Mendoza with no power did.
Agreed. I love baseball, obviously, so why is more of it bad? Especially when certain prospects get extended looks, it’s fun to watch that as a fan.
Who up votes these asinine comments?
In the entire history of baseball, when has a team only called up one or two guys in September? Please I’m so interested to hear when this happened.
Could does not mean should, Juice.
Are you two nuts? What other sport has such a jump in personnel? It also allows teams to play differently and impacts playoff races.
Why is that bad?
How can playoff teams be determined if you play by different rules? Same reason I don’t like the play in game. The beauty of baseball is it’s not like other sports in that you have to play multiple pitchers. It would be like playing football with different QBs each game for four weeks in a row. Imagine the U.S. Open allowing the use of different clubs on the last day of the tournament.
It’s not like these teams are calling up Mike Trout; they’re calling up bullpen arms, prospects and fringy things like pinch-runners or defensive replacements.
As to your other point, well, theworetically an NFL team could start 16 different quarterbacks in a season. It’s not practical because of the complexity of NFL offensive systems, but there’s no rule against it. And in the PGA, players play with whatever clubs they want. Some have tons of clubs they never use at all or for very specific situations, and clubs aren’t standard equipment because every player uses his own brand. Not a great analogy.
In that sense, Baseball is a lot like Cricket, but your point definitely stands.
Team A is fighting to make the play offs playing against to B who are out of it. While both teams could be carrying 40 man rosters Team A is less likely to use their bring ups while Team B is bringing on one guy after the other and you know next to nothing about them.
And……It has gone on for decades…..Why is it such a big deal now? Mattingly himself was a September call up on a losing team in 1982. Your scouting staff should know everything about every player that Team B is bringing in to play.. If you still do not know anything about the player coming in, go complain to your scouts.
Not to this extreme. Seems to be more of an issue because pitchers don’t pitch as many innings and due to injuries. The ten day DL list was abused especially right before the all star break.
Why the HELL WOULD THE METS WANT HOMER BAILEY????
They have plenty of Good starters, and don’t need someone else’s useless junk.
For science, we need to see how much more and what crazy ways Homer could injure his arm. And who better to do that with than the Mets.
Why would anyone named Homer want to be a pitcher?
Same reason Beathard plays QB.
Why the hell do the Mets want Bruce?
It’s just a bad contract swap idea. Neither team really benefits
Corbin is a lefty not a righty
Anyone else read Mattingly’s whining as “OLD MAN YELLS AT CLOUD”?
Also, worth noting that Mattingly debuted as one of those September callups he now decries – and didn’t do much with it: 2 singles and a sac fly in 13 PAs in September 1982.
My take on his statement is that teams have to prepare different in September than the rest of the season. The game changes from the view of the coaching staff since opposing teams have more than 25 weapons to use against you. Baseball has changed quite a bit since September call-ups in 1982. Baseball before was throw the ball hit the ball catch the ball with limited intel on players. Today’s game is micro managed down to the exact pitch in certain counts to this guy or that guy. A game within a game if you will. Myself, I don’t really care if there’s 25 or 55.
@heater:
Contrary to what you claim, baseball was not “throw the ball hit the ball catch the ball with limited intel on players.”
There was plenty intel on players – but it was gathered, assessed, recorded, utilized and shared through different means and methods.
Today’s analytics have both enhanced and diminshed the quality of play as tried and true techniques – the nuances of the game are lost through over-reliance on excess data rather than in-game skill and situational awareness, the capacity to adjust through the art of the game.
One of the most interesting aspects of the analytics revolution in baseball is, now that all the teams rely on advanced stats, how does any team use them to their advantage? Seems to me, the teams are battling each other effectively to a standstill on that front, while hoping they can come up with some sort of proprietary stat that reveals an aspect of the game that the other teams haven’t figured out yet. For a game that’s been studied for as long and as hard as this one, good luck with that.
The irony is, when it comes right down to it, human judgment is required to interpret statistical models. The sciences aren’t just numbers spit out of a computer model, they require interpretation, verification, and application. If baseball is going to be treated like a social science, then it’s the human element that will make the real difference. Full circle.
You are saying exactly what I said. Limited intel. Compared to the analytics of today’s world. In 1982 it wasn’t near like it is today.
Every team has their own proprietary systems, using lots of different data collected in lots of different ways; they’re not just going on Fangraphs and looking things up – they aree hiring a lot of the analysts and writers for places like FG, but they’re developing their own systems. Remember, statcast data is incredibly new. There’s still lots of ways to analyze that data that each team incorporates in different ways. It’s absurd to think they are all just doing the same thing.
Talking to me? It might be absurd if I said they were “just looking things up,” but of course, I did not say that. Nobody did.
Well, the argument was that the teams are “battling each other to a standstill” and that implied they’re all using the same information or stats or systems to establish value and they clearly aren’t Teams win and lose for a lot of reasons, but the best teams in baseball – the Red Sox, Dodgers, Yankees, Astros, Rays, Cubs – those teams were all in on the “analytics” revolution early and created systems when other teams like the Reds and O’s were very late adapters to operating in that fashion. I mean the Red Sox famously hired Bill James years and years ago, and he basically invented the science of baseball analytics or Sabrmetrics or whatever you want to call it. If teams were “battling to a standstill” there’s be a lot more parity in the game, right? But instead theres teams that will both win and lose 100 games this season.
I think what has remained the same over the years, is not necessarily the data that is available to Teams, but how they choose to adopt it. Everyone is in an information arms race, for sure, and their capacity to store and mine data that represents the game in front of us, is effectively equal. But where Teams are separated is what they do with that data and how they apply it to making on-field adjustments. Every Team is capturing data ala Statcast, but not every Team invests the same time and money into understanding it.
Just like Teams adopted the defensive shift at different rates, there are separations in what actions come out of that data. Some shifted aggressively as they saw benefit, others were slower to adopt.
Similar to how pitching is being reviewed. A few years ago, spin rate was barely an afterthought. The idea for most pitchers was fastball down, breaking ball away. Now, with the advent of the ability to capture things like spin rates, Teams have started to figure not just pitchers being different, but WHY they are different, and how to maximize their output.
It still takes adoption and application on the field, that human element won’t be lost.
Analytics have been around in some form since the sport became professional. It’s just evolved, and will continue to evolve.
I am not sure that is really worth noting. It really does not have anything to do with the argument Mattingly makes. He would have been called up with a corresponding roster move or called up the following year.
Also the main issue this day and age is really who is not called up. The service time issues need to be addressed. I realize your comment was not related to service time but since I was rambling anyway …
I could see a modified call up limit of 5 (30 instead of 40) more accessible to the current system.
@met man
Within MLB, there seems to be increased complaints and concerns about September abuse. I doubt what fans want will matter when Manfred does yet another thing to change the game.
I agree, we can see limits placed on # of players allowed to suit up per game, or strict rules on pitching changes – or the number of pitchers a September roster is allowed to carry per game. Something is going to give – especially when it impacts Manfred’s obsession with game length. I expect to see changes perhaps as soon as next season or in the next few.
Agreed on the extra five call up but no service time which should be limited to the active and DL rosters.
Option 1) Call ups are fine, and a larger active roster through the year would be fine, but at the time the manager sets his starter and lineup he selects his bench and bullpen too. Have the actual active roster for a particular game limited to keep the number of available pitchers reasonable so each game still somewhat resembles baseball.
Option 2) Ruin April games instead of September. The rosters don’t have to be down to 25 until May 1.
I like option 2. Allows for close spring training position battles to be decided on a bigger stage.
Anybody have predictions of what Brantley will take home in free agency?
His glove and bats?
Expand the standard 25 man roster to 28 or even 30.
Delay reduction to standard roster size until May 1.
Establish a ceiling of maximum number of players to be carried
up until May 1 and after September 1.
Expand the DH to the National Conference
No batter leaves the box or asks for time unless they have SWUNG the bat
Eliminate the sacrifice fly as a way of runners advancing or scoring.
Limit the parameters of defensive shifts.
National Conference. You’re a hoot.
Phew ! Mattingly hadn’t complained about something in a while – I was worried that there was a glitch in the matrix or something. Good to see that order has been restored.
I kind if like what JD said.
Expand to 40. Have your 25 man roster set before the game. Of course teams may leave 3 starting pitchers off ever day which expands the bench by 3 but still its only a 25 man roster. You can even say the 25 man roster must include ____ Number of pitchers
This is the right way to do it; have 40 to choose from, but only 25 eligible for each game. It gives the call-ups a chance to play, the regulars a chance to be rested, and it doesn’t change the basic rules of the game.
I would say you could limit it even below 25 which, for the most part is always the reality since the last two starters are out of commission and the other starters are emergency options only. Something like 22 might be a good number. It would help preserve the value of a roster spot and make teams make tough decisions sometimes. Manager would just submit today’s pen and bench along with the lineup card.
That prevents us from having to make arbitrary limits on how many pitchers and position players you can have. Could still have a pitcher that could be added to todays available bullpen in case of extras or an injury to the starter early in the game.
This way we could carry a bigger active roster (28/30 maybe) without ruining the game. It keep some marginal players out of DFA hell. We’d probably need some provision requiring players to be activated at least twice a week or something so you can’t cheat and warehouse Rule 5 picks or anything like that.
September call ups allow smart managers to rest players. Also a good chance to give some guys a chance. I would like to see all year 27 man team. Keeping 12 or 13 pitchers has changed the game.