Starter vs. Reliever (Experienced posters please)

I was having a little chat with someone the other day, and we got into an argument and this leads me to ask you something.

Do you believe a reliever is a less good pitcher just because he isn’t a starting pitcher? Or do you believe that both are pitchers of equal importance just with a different role?

And another question (this one for a teammate). Is it a bad goal to want to have a certain velocity by the next season (while still working on mechanics, off-speed, control, the works)?

I don’t think that one is better than the other because I believe they are totally different. I am a starting pitcher and struggle greatly when trying to relieve for a game. I have to prepare myself differently because I cannot do everything I do before the game to prepare myself to start. Each has their own objective to fulfill and I wouldnt say that one is better or more important than the other.

Up until Dennis Eckersley and Bruce Sutter and Rollie Fingers, the reliever was what was leftover…guys who could get outs but usually on the sunset side of their careers…now just as important as a starter because the strategy is get 5 or 6 “quality” innings out of the starter and the hold, set-up and close…they make big money and it spends just as nice a starters paycheck.

As to your friend, goals and a plan are good things and should be used to acheive the ultimate goal…whatever that may be.

Relievers might be a little worse then starters but they still have to be good. For example look at JP Howell, as a starter he had a record of 2-12 but in his first year as a reliever he is 6-0 so far (he deserves to be an All-Star) and another example is Joba Chamberlain, as a reliever he was lights out but has a starter he has been getting too many ND. just my take.

ok, i do both. It’s completely different. A reliever can rely on one pitch of gimmick for an inning or two. Example, Trevor’s change, wagner’s fb, brian wilson’s fb, k-rod’s breaking pitch. They dont have to pace themselves. When i relieve, a batter only gets one ab against me, so they dont know what i have. Sinker, sinker, splitter. Seeya. As a starter, i have adjust between innings. Also, i get tired very quickly. so for now, i close.

well this is a very hard question if you think about it but you know Starting Pitchers in college may not be the best starter but he gets drafted to lets say the Rays he will most likely become a reliever and its ok cuz almost every pitcher drafted thats a starter or reliever will most likely become a reliever at one point in there career great example of a great starting pitcher who was moved down to the relieving role is John Smoltz and a great example of a starting rookie drafted becoming a reliever is Jorge Del a Rosa of the Kansas City Royals he is currently in (AA) Null Wranglers right now.

ok one more time, there called the rays not devil rays

no way is a top grade reliever such as rivera, papelbon, joe nathan not as skilled as a top grade starter

its hard to compare the 2 being that each has a different role and different ways to approach pitching when only trying to get 3ish outs

relievers for the most part sit back and blow the ball past batters not worrying about pitch count where as starters approach the game with a more thought out plan

the starters job may be harder but that doesnt make the reliever any less skilled

Back in the day…there was a pitcher named Allie Reynolds who could do both. Start—relieve—it seemed not to make any difference to him whether he pitched one inning or a complete game, he did what he had to do and that was get the batters out. It’s only in recent years that the split occurred, and now pitchers were divided up into starters, long relief, middle relief, blah blah blah, all the way to the closer. But each one has a specific function, and so it’s impossible to say that one is any better than another. They’re all different.

a starter and a reliever have different skill levels, but both determine the outcome of the game. both are important, especially nowadays, where starters are on strict pitch counts and usually only get to the 5th or 6th inning. relievers usually have one outstanding pitch. they face 3 or 4 guys and are done. starters usually have a few more, so they can really keep the hitters off balance. it all really depends on your stamina and the amount of pitches you can throw for strikes. and for your second question, it is great to set goals.

I do both in college, and I feel it’s somewhat a skill thing. For me I think it depends on what the pitchers are best at, some may have only two great pitches but another might have 4 average pitches they can throw for strikes. Nowadays though, most closers for MLB clubs who weren’t drafted as closers, converted from starters. These guys have two to three Plus-Plus pitches, one of those being a fastball. Lots of those guys where guys who were drafted with the thought of becoming future aces, but things didn’t pan out like they hoped. Personally I like to start more so than relieve. I just like knowing when I’m going to throw, i’m more of a routine orienated guy. Although coming into big pressure situations is really gratifying when you get the job done. Great Topic…