So now you don’t think piggybacking makes much sense or tandems and feel that they won’t have rigid roles? You can’t have two pitchers throw 4 or 5 innings and 80 pitches and somehow pitch one or two days later to avoid “piggybacking”. The guys will need either 3 or 4 days off if they throw that many pitches. If teams were to start going this route of trying to get 4 innings from a couple guys per game, what’s going to happen when you burn through 8 pitchers in a two game span because they all got lit up and threw a bunch of pitches? Since they don’t have strict piggybacking roles, are you bringing in a guy to pitch 3 innings after throwing 65 pitches only 2 days prior? What about that dreaded 16 inning game where you burn through 6 multi inning guys? I don’t see baseball going this piggybacking route at all. It’s difficult enough finding 5 quality big league starters. Look at what the Brewers were getting from their starters so far this season. A lot of those runs were being scored in the first three innings so piggybacking wouldn’t of been a revolutionary change. Our starting pitching couldn’t even get through 4 innings without giving up 4 or more runs. You can keep suggesting these ideas, but there isn’t a single team in baseball that could implement this strategy effectively by having 10 arms that can throw 4 innings each of mostly effective baseball by only allowing one or two runs. It just won’t happen. If a team had that many arms that could hold down their opponent every single day, there would be a 130 game winner in baseball. Not even the Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox, Cardinals, or Astros have 10 starting pitchers that are all highly effective. That doesn’t even include injuries to 3 or 4 of those guys. Now you need 13-14 3 or 4 inning pitchers at the least. Not sure how a team could fit all of those high quality pitchers onto a payroll and somehow field an adequate offense to go along with it. This idea is getting way more run than it deserves. If anything, Stearns is trying to use relief pitchers like teams did in the 70’s and 80’s where they would pitch multiple innings. It is not some new concept. It isn’t some new term that you tried to use first so you can take credit for being the first to say it and be able to say “I told you so”. Teams see the value in multi inning relievers and realize that they are weapons used to shut down the opponent for a couple innings. If they were prevalent in the sport, teams wouldn’t covet them. There aren’t that many pitchers that can do it. Usage of relief pitchers from the 80’s could be making a comeback. Just like I think hitters will start to go back to striking out less, putting the ball in play more, spray hitting, and not trying to hit a home run in every at bat. Will it take years to implement? Absolutely because players need to see the value in that and strive to become hitters like that. If it happens, did I discover a new concept? I would say no.