Josh Beckett had his 6 game suspension for throwing at Bobby Abreu reduced to 5 games today by Major League Baseball. It means that Beckett won't miss his next start.
Forgive me, but what's the point of suspending him in the first place? He is a starting pitcher, which means he only plays every 5th to 6th day in the first place, all those other days he's sitting on the bench or doing his otherwise scheduled workouts. So, he's suspended for 5 games, which doesn't mean anything to him because he's a starting pitcher, and we're supposed to assume that that taught him a lesson? It didn't teach him anything, as the article notes, Beckett didn't think he deserved even a game suspension.
If an everyday player gets suspended for 5 games, he misses 5 games (unless you're Milton Bradley who tends to get hurt and wasn't going play in those games anyway); if a starting pitcher gets suspended for 5 games, he doesn't miss anything. How does that make any sense? Baseball needs to figure out this suspension policy as it affects starting pitchers, because if the goal is to show how a starting pitchers' actions can harm a team, then they need to tie it to starts and not to games. As the Beckett example shows- 5 games is still a serious suspension, for an everyday player, but it doesn't harm a starting pitcher who doesn't miss a turn in the rotation.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment