There's a big difference bringing in your closer on 3 days rest than bringing in your setup man to close and then going to your closer on 12 hours rest.

.............................................................................................
Pete's reply: First time I've heard that rationale. Everybody here was saying that since Bergesen was cruising, he should have started the ninth. Clearly, Lackey was cruising. Scioscia obviously needs to be fired, too.

There's a big difference bringing in your closer on 3 days rest than bringing in your setup man to close and then going to your closer on 12 hours rest.

Ummm brian Fuentes is a reliable closer?? George Sherrill isn’t.

.............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Ummm. Sherrill was the hottest closer in baseball entering that game. Facts are inconvenient things.

The difference is they were playing the Orioles.

Arte Moreno team > Peter Angelos team

Pete,
You cant be serious man hahahahaha Are you high?

To the people who really think Ervin coming off injury is to our advantage, think again. This is the same team that got embarrassed by a bunch of Oakland no names, Garrett Olson, etc. Ervin tossing left handed could shut us out.

But hey, we'll become a great team someday. Just not this season.

Show me you’re cooked up stats that Sherrill is better than BF.

.............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Didn't say he was better than Fuentes. I said he was the hottest closer in baseball when he entered the game Wednesday. You've got a laptop. You can look that up yourself if you don't believe me. In his previous 21 games, he had surrendered one run over 21 innings and recorded 13 straight saves. Fuentes has been good too, recording nine of his last 10 coming into tonight, but had given up six runs over the same number of innings.

I agree with you on the Lucky Lackey thing... First time was bad but then... he just kept doing it.... why?!

We were playing one of the best teams in baseball. We're not as good. That's kinda it, isn't it? Should have won the game but the O's didn't exactly hit either. Why fixate on the pitching letdown? Why blame Trembley? Why take out our fustration of losing on this guy?

Say what you want Pete but all O’s fans know that George Sherrill is a adventure and with the O’s are playing the sox anything can happen until the game is over. Brian Fuentes gets the job done.

............................................................................................
Pete's reply: You asked for the stats and I gave them to you. You'r argument is unsupportable. Now you're saying that Dave should have disregarded Sherrill's last 21 games, when he was automatic, and assume that he would fail like he did the first two weeks of the season. You're out on a limb here and you've got the saw.

Guthrie pitched a great game but got beat by a guy who had his number tonight.He made a good pitch and Abreu hit it out,the difference in the game.Also Sciosa is and has almost always been a winning manager,instills confidence in his team,positions his players correctly,they lead the majors in baserunners thrown out ,but they also are second in steals,sacrifices,hit and runs,etc.He'll take the outs knowing that when he puts pressure on the opposing defense they'll make more mistakes than he will.If Mike Scosia was our manger we would be at least .500 right now.If Cito Gaston was our manager we would be at least .500 right now.Bring a winner in here to teach the young guys how to win before they get Brian Roberts disease.Anybody notice Tejada's batting average lately?

I really don't post here much, nor do I usually respond negatively to comments However that being said, wasn't it something like 13 consecutive saves for Sherrill. You're right Pete, those facts are such cumbersome things.

............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Yes, 13 straight. One run in 21 appearances.

I wish i could go back and update my posts to look good like you Pete hahaha

.............................................................................................
Pete's reply: You can. Just send in a new one. I post them all.

Any question why Livingston never got a look?He was real spectacular with Norfolk and solid at Bowie?Hope this isn'tone of those moves that comes back to haunt us.

..............................................................................................
Pete's reply: I have no idea, but he didn't sign a major league contract with anybody. He jumped over to Akron.

Some of these posters need to check their data. Mora is hitting .266 and not .220 as someone early today mentioned. And .266 isn't far from his career avg of .279. His big problem is not hitting HRs and getting RBIs.
Anyhow it is almost a sure thing he won't be here next year which I think is a good thing.

burt, if you give up 9 hits and 5 runs ,4 on 2 homers to a guy with a total of 4 on the season in 7 innings you pitched an ok game at best. Guthrie has an era over 5, and top 6 in hrs allowed. The guy is making bad pitches to good hitters and getting beat. How about he starts finding ways to make the better pitches you need to make to beat good teams.
That would be great.

Sure Lackey pitched great..Guthrie didn't.THe key here was the top 3 hitters in each teams line-up. Angels 6-12 5 rbi's Orioles 0-12 0 rbi's.

Pete's reply: You asked for the stats and I gave them to you. You'r argument is unsupportable. Now you're saying that Dave should have disregarded Sherrill's last 21 games, when he was automatic, and assume that he would fail like he did the first two weeks of the season. You're out on a limb here and you've got the saw.

LOL! Easy man I just think BF is better man he just seems like the more automatic closer to me maybe the next few nights when you see more of him you will agree I didn’t say anything about Dave… I know it was a tough loss tonight. I will try to be more sensitive sorry Pete.

...........................................................................................
Pete's reply: I'm intense, man. I'm interacting with dozens of bloggers. I thought you'd appreciate that I looked up the stats for you.

The problem is the same with this team. When Roberts gets on base or hits we are in the game. And everyone knows this so they pitch very carefully to him.

The point of contention isn't whether Lackey or Bergesen, should've been allowed to pitch the 9th, but the Angels brought in their closer and we didn't. I know people on here want to trade George and give JJ the job as closer, but he hasn't pitched in the 9th all season so why start when you have a chance of following up the greatest comeback in team history with a chance to take 2 of 3 from the best team in baseball?

I don't think Mora should be benched. This guy has taken the job of representing the Orioles on and off the field with class. The guys wants to be an Oriole, but in my opinion, he's never been widely accepted by the fan base for whatever reason. His avg. isn't bad, it's his power #s, but his defense has been stellar. I feel he earned the right to fight his way of out.

Pete, quick question, if Hill gets rocked again, does he come down with some injury that requires a trip to the DL or do the O's continue to let him start for the time being?

firemikesciosscia.com He's just out of control out there. It's bad for the integrity of the game the way that man's coaching Pete.

Much like the point I was making yesterday though in my little research kick.

Personally Pete, I don't know why so many people are so emotional and up-in-arms with this team.

If anyone is expecting this team to compete for the playoffs in the next 5 years, then they have unrealistic expectations. It will take some time for our guys to develop and gel.

However, even when that happens, the Yankees and BoSox will always be there, checkbook in hand...

112 pitches - something that wasn't allowed Sunday

Interesting comparision re: movement to the closer...how about taking it one step further and compare managers?
Except for Dave's immediate family, I'm sure most would rather see Scosia at the helm.

Hey Pete. I've taken your advice and sobered up and now I can see things more clearly. We should stop criticizing Dave T and realize he's part of Andy M's master PLAN to lose big for three or four years in order to draft high and finish high a few years from now. If we fans would only stop and remember that the PLAN is to lose in the near term, we, including me, would stop complaining every time a manager or player screws up. I'm sober now thanks to your admonition and eagerly await the next O's loss. Go Angels. Go PLAN.

Is Sciosia a better manager than Trembley? Yes. Does that make Trembley terrible? No.

Schmuck is absolutely right to point out the hypocrisy of Orioles fans climbing up Trembley's back side for making the exact same move Sciosia made. Parsing Trembley's version of the same move by counting days rest, or whatever, is inane.

For instance, if you want to suggest a pitching change Trembley's part makes him an idiot because he should realize his closer supposedly stinks, then it seems like the problem is the closer, not the manager.

The real issue here is a decade of losing has tried everyone's patience. When an Orioles managerial move backfires it has to be blamed on incompetence. When the Red Sox blow a lead, they are still the Red Sox the next morning. Terry Francona has immunity because he has a winning club behind him.

And no, the Red Sox' and Angels' winning ways are not all due to Francona's and Sciosia's skills. Those managers simply has better talent to work with. So their moves smell like roses.

That's not to say Sherrill is terrible, but he doesn't have the patina of winning, like Paplebon. So no one blames Francona for bringing in Papelbon, even when it doesn't work out.

Suggesting Trembley can't manage because he refuses to steer clear of his bullpen is not a convincing argument.

This reminds me of how fans of losing football teams blame the head coach when their team gives up a fourth quarter lead. If the coach grounded the offense, he's guilty of playing too conservative while trying to sit on the lead like a pansy. If the coach continued to attack and his QB threw a crucial interception, the coach is an idiot for letting the other team back in the game. The critics come out of the woodwork: He should have considered this. He should have considered that.

We're all geniuses at seeing the obvious, in retrospect.

Sorry Pete but the pitch count shouldn't have been an afterthought to your report but the main statistic as it was the deciding factor in the manager's decision. Bergeson was averaging 13 pitches per inning against the Red Sox. He had thrown 103 pitches through 8 innings. There's a very good chance he would have ended the game with under 120 pitches thrown. This is the real "magic number" for pitches thrown that managers will not go above in most cases. Lackey had thrown 114 pitches through 8 innings and most likely would have approached 130 for the game if he stayed in. No way Sciosca was going to do that and it was the right call in this case, just as it was the wrong call that Trembley made with Bergeson. 11 pitches is a huge difference when you talk about pitch count once you get over 100 pitches.

Pete, I'm sure DT is a nice guy and I sympathize with him because if he loses this job he will never get another chance to manage in the bigs. On the other hand, he has lost the backing of most of the fans and I wonder how much credibility he has with the players. For example, (and regardless of whether it was the right managerial move or not) does anyone really believe that Bergeson did not want to go back out for the ninth inning?

Also, I question whether it's useful to generalize from one situation to another. For example, it's perfectly possible that Sciosa made the right move last night but that DT misused the pen when he wound up bringing in Sherrill on 12 hours rest after a taxing final inning the night before. And as others have said, he took Johnson out before he even had a chance to warm up. Was that move made on the merits or to avoid criticism? A lot of times it takes a reliever a batter or two to get comfortable on the mound. So if jj is really an all-star quality reliever, why pull him out of the game so quickly?

According to the pretzel logic by some who write that Trembley should be fired because Sherrill blew it by pitching two days (12 hours) in a row, then Terry Francona should be fired also. After all, he used Papelbon in all three games against the O's. Johnson and Sherrill have been lights out the past month or so and you can't fault Trembley for the move. No doubt if Bergesen stayed in and blew the game in the ninth these same people would be screaming for Trembley's head for not bringing in Johnson and/or Sherrill. Go figure.

One more thing; the home plate umpire should be fired too, because the breeze felt by Varitek's "checked" swing on a 3-2 pitch was felt at Boog's BBQ. If the ump didn't blow the call, Sherrill gets the strikeout; game over, O's win and all the Trembley bashers are quiet for another day.

Scioscia let Lackey throw 114 pitches against a team they should beat easily. The Orioles were coming off a historic win against the best team in baseball and a chance to beat them again. Why not give Bergesen at least 114 pitches to keep our momentum going and get a cg. Momentum matters. And that loss Thursday killed their momentum.

Pete,

I listened to your radio show the day that Bergeson was yanked, and while I did not agree with you, I respected your logic. But your comparison of last nights decision by Scioscia as being equivalent to Trembley's breaks the bank.

No denying the facts:

(1) Lackey's coming off arm injury; Already throwing 114 pitches; .297 batting average against; 1.40 whip; 4.70 era;

Compare to Bergesen's lower pitch count; .251 average against; 1.16 whip; 3.53 era;

(2) Out of the two managers one has managed a champion.

(3) Out of the two closers one averages 4.4 walks per 9 innings - and just to put an emphasis on this fact, Daniel Cabrera averages 5.24 and played for the same team.

(4) Sherrill almost blew the save the night before against the same team he blew it against 12 hours later.

(5) Last night there were 6 first chance save opportunities in the majors. 3 saves and 3 blown saves. 1 additional came on a 2nd opportunity in the same game. Saves are overated.

(6) Earl Weaver had a belief that you don't take a pitcher out of the game unless the pitcher he brings out of the bullpen is better than the one presently on the mound. Bergesen was clearly the better pitcher Wednesday and Fuentes was clearly the better pitcher Thursday.

And no you don't fire Trembley for yanking Bergesen Wednesday. At best, ranking this Bergesen thing as a reason to fire Trembley comes in no higher than 61 on the ever-growing list.

All this anguish over a manager bringing in his closer to (gasp!) finish a game! I don't understand why everyone's angry at Trembley but not at Sherrill or Johnson. If the two relivers had done what I'm sure everyone expected them to do, get 3 out while giving up less than 4 runs, nobody would have second guessed Trembley.
I'm not the biggest Trembley fan in the world, and think he needs to go at the end of the season if he can't find a way to get these apparently overpaid vets to start playing like major leaguers again, but blaming him for the loss to Boston is just absurd.
Johnson and Sherrill blew it, it happens, get over it.

Pete this is very flawed logic. The fact that this worked out for the Angels does not make it the correct strategy. For one there are differences between the players involved and the teams. Second, just because a decision, or a circumstance works out once does not make it a correct decision. I have heard of people falling from planes and not getting hurt. It is rare but it has happened. So the next time you are in a plane experiencing turbulence consider jumping, because people have survived falling from great distances (I am not saying this to be mean, or take a swipe at you. I am just using this as an extrpolation, of a certain type of thought process.)

The point is why stop doing something that works for something that may, or may not work. To quote some popular sayings.

"Go with the hot hand"

"If it aint broke don't fix it."

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush."

"Don't take a pitcher out, unless the one you are bringing in is better."

"Finish what you start."

Lunatics!

This blog needs to be renamed the Worlds Largest at Home in my Mom's Basement Complaining about the O's Blog Asylum.

How abut this for crazy... I think Trembley should have left JJ in to straighten out the kinks! How damaging was it to JJ's confidence to get yanked like that?

Peter,

You seem to be implying both on the radio and in your blog that every manager pulls Bergesen in the same sitaution as Trembley faced. That is just not true. Looking at this week's box scores online, the last five times a manager was in Trembley's situation (started had pitched 8 ip, 1 or less runs allowed, and 110 or less pitches), the pitcher was allowed to start the 9th inning and either finish or taken out after giving up an extra base hit. These teams also won all five games. Why were these pitchers left in? Common sense. If your pitcher is pitching that well with a low pitch count (103 through 8 ip is a low pitch count to me), you let the guy try to finish the game. Here are the last 5 games:

1. 7/2/09 , CHW vs. KC,

Buehrle up 4-1, entered 9th inning having thrown 95 pitches was allowed to start 9th, faced 2 batters, gave up a double and was yanked for closer Jenks. Jenks pitches 2/3 inning for save. CHW wins 4-1.

2. 7/1/09, STL vs. SF

Wainwright in a 1-1 tie entered 9th inning having thrown 104 pitches, pitched 9th inning, struck out the side. was removed in 10th inning, STL wins in 10th inning.

3. 6/30/09, COL vs. LAD

Marquis up 3-0, entered 9th inning, having thrown 82 pitches, completed shutout with 1-2-3 inning vs. Dodgers.

4. 6/29/09, SF vs. STL

Lincecum up 10-0, entered 9th inning having thrown 89 pitches completed shutout with 1-2-3 inning vs. Cardinals.

5. 6/29/09 HOU vs SD

Oswalt up 3-1, entered 9th inning having thrown 94 pitches, pitched 1-2-3 inning.

-Jesse

............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Good research. All of them except Wainwright were veteran pitchers with much lower pitch counts than Bergesen. If Wainwright had been leading, he would have been removed. But more importantly, how many of them had their worst outing in their previous six starts immediately after being stretched to get a complete game. Bergesen came back after his CG and tired quickly against the Phillies, giving up four runs in the seventh inning. Lots of people, by the way, wrote here then that Trembley can't handle pitchers because he should have sensed he was tired and gotten him out of there while it was still a strong performance. Funny how these things work.

Regardless of stats or precedents the DT pitching decisions were made and the results were not good. But that happens. Baseball is debateable. But how many managers, if they saw a glove tag play out call made with the ball still in the hand, would not have come out to argue? Trembley in the wired wednesday interview claimed he saw the ball in the Pedroia's bare hand but didn't leave the dugout. If the umpire had asked for help it very possibly could have been overturned, so thats any manager's job to see that he asks the first and third base umps. And the bonus chuckle: Gary Thorne insisted that Reimold picked
the ball off the ground and the umpire blew the out call. Turns out he was wrong on that. Oh and hey Gary Thorne, are you sure that was a fastball that missed low? Why does he even try to identify the pitches? why doesn't he just call it a baseball, or an orb or a sphere or something?

I think there needs to be blog entry on why Jones keeps swinging at low and away breaking stuff to get behind the count early.

And why Markakis thinks he can hit 95 mph fastballs in his eyes, same with B-Rob...

I am still excited about this year- Riemold is an animal, Wieters has such an effortless swing, hope Bergy doesn't fade... how would that be? 1-2-3 in ROY voting? The only other viable AL rookie is Elvis Andrus and he has like 12 rbi's.

Unlike in years past, the O's aren't promoting guys based on talent, but on old fashioned results. Look at some of the minor league stats: Larry Bigbie has hit 27 hrs over parts of 9 SEASONS in the minors, DCab started 50 GAMES with mixed success before his call up... performance, not talent

Jesse,

How many of those players are rookies? None? So that's relevant to Bergesen, a big leaguer for a month, how?

It's not at all? Oh ok.

Yeah but the Angels have Fuentes! We have Russian Roulette in our bullpen!

............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Right now that's true, but at the time Sherrill was 13 for 13. Fuentes, coming into last night, was 9 for 10 and had given up six runs in the same number of previous innings in which Sherrill had given up 1.

SHAMROCK:
I agree with you, I think he should have left Johnson in to try and clean up the mess. He was fresh, hadn't pitched in 4 days.

Sherrill on the other hand looked completely gassed the night before. He was sweating so much he had to step off the rubber to wipe his face several times. His control was the worst it's been in weeks, but he stuck in there for the save. I think it was a bit of a stretch for Trembley to throw him back out there 12 hours later.

Just because he is the "closer" doesn't mean he has to pitch every time it is a last-inning save situation.

Jeff

..............................................................................................
Pete's reply: I said at the time I would have left him in. The reason he was pitching the ninth was to try and avoid Sherrill. I would have let him go until one more guy got on base, but you'd have to eventually go to Sherrill there if he continued to struggle.

SHAMROCK:
I agree with you, I think he should have left Johnson in to try and clean up the mess. He was fresh, hadn't pitched in 4 days.

Sherrill on the other hand looked completely gassed the night before. He was sweating so much he had to step off the rubber to wipe his face several times. His control was the worst it's been in weeks, but he stuck in there for the save. I think it was a bit of a stretch for Trembley to throw him back out there 12 hours later.

Just because he is the "closer" doesn't mean he has to pitch every time it is a last-inning save situation.

Jeff

With all the trite quotes and truisms being thrown around, someone should point out that "they pay the other team too".

Damed if you do Damed if you don't

What difference does it make that Bergesen's a rookie? Rookies can't throw more than 103 pitches? On 6/14 on another warm afternoon game, Bergesen threw a cg victory and threw 112 pitches. Why couldn't he do that again? It didn't seem to damage him.that time. In Mike Mussina's first major league game with the Orioles, he lost 1-0 and threw 124 pitches. Did that damage his career? Did Johnny Oates take him out after 103 pitches cuz he was a rookie? No. He was pitching well so they let him pitch and it didn't hurt his arm. He had a long productive borderline-Hall of Fame major league career.

............................................................................................
Pete's reply: DId you see what happened his next time out?

Yes, Mussina had a bad game the next game. That happens. His third game he threw 128 pitches and won 10-2. His fourth game he threw 91 pitches and lost a pitcher's duel to Nolan Ryan, His fifth game he threw 132 pitches and beat Scott Erickson He didn't have good stuff that second game. Just like Jim Johnson and Sherrill didn't have good stuff on Wednesday and Bergesen did, which is why Bergesen should have been left in. Mussina ended the '91 season with a 2.87 era. He ended the next season he had a 2.54 era. He was hardly ever injured his whole career. He was younger and less experienced in professional baseball then than Bergesen is now..

.............................................................................................
Pete's reply: Jesse, we all know that Johnson and Sherrill weren't sharp on Wednesday....now! And I was talking about Bergesen's start after the complete game. Wasn't too good.

Hey Pete,
Check this out. It's an article on the Tigers handling of Rick Porcello. I read it a few days ago just took me some time to find it. Maybe Jim Leyland should be fired too!

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/9729216/Tigers-taking-it-slowly-with-Porcello-

You say Mike Mussina, I say Ben McDonald. If you want to fine one more, so can I. At the end of the day there's a reason to do it either way and Trembley is not some know nothing moron because he went his way.

That's the point I've been making.

Also, Pete's right in referring to the June 20th game where Brad could only throw 81 pitches and gave up 4 runs in a 5 run 7th for Philly. Luckily the O's scored 3 in the 9th to win. Pete could also have mentioned the 5/24 game where he was chased out in the 6th against the Nats after throwing 107 the game before (an eventual loss).

well, obviously he made the wrong decision on wednesday. trembley and perlozzo before him have had too quick of a hook the last few years. our starting pitchers have consistently thrown some of the fewest amount of innings in baseball and our bullpen is burned out by the second half and we collapse every year. Every year it seems I hear "our starters need to go longer in games" and then they get pulled unnecessarily when they r pitching well because they've thrown approximately 100 pitches...

.............................................................................................
Pete's reply: But saying it over and over doesn't make it true. Nothing obvious about it. That's why we're having a debate about it.

Bergesen had 148 IP last year in the minors. This year he already has 102 IP between AAA and MLB.
If you look at baseball-reference he is on a pace to hit 223 IP. If anything, the O's have been using him too much.
From a player development standpoint Bergesen may have to get shut down before the season ends, or his workload lightened. Not to mention that after the game Bergesen said himself that he would have "battled" had he gone back out for the ninth.

.............................................................................................
Pete's reply: You're wasting your time on this Chuck. There are a handful of posters who think it's way more important to win a game on July 1 than worry about burning up one of your best young pitchers. You're not going to change their minds. They're going to rationalize all day long that if Jim Palmer could throw 300 innings, this kid can too.

Chuck, I heard similar quotes from Bergesen too. I think he told DT he "could get this guy out" when he came to the mound in the 8th.

Jesse, You're missing the point. You're comparing a rotation that's included guys like Liz, Trachsel, Burres, Cabrera, Olson, Sarfate, Benson and other gap fillers to the expectation of a rotation like Maddux, Smoltz and Glavine. I wish that the starters would go longer every year. Most of them just aren't ready or able to. That's why you bring in the Trachsels and the Hills and the Eatons. You don't pay them much and maybe you get lucky and they eat up innings for you because you know the young guys won't. Eventually, we'll have a rotation that's experienced and young and actually good. That's not in 2009, so why push your future rotation to the brink now?

I just don't get it. If you take it easy on him, there's no loss other than one win in a season where we're expected to be lucky to make .500. If you extend him every game then maybe we win a couple more games(assuming he gets shelled half the time for being in too long)? Two extra wins in an 80 win season are not worth the risk of blowing his arm out. In the microcasm of one game, sure I can see the argument you're making. This is about a season. This is about a career. Better safe than sorry is fine with me for this year and probably next year.

You all make good points and maybe I just hate losing like that to the Red Sox again. In general, I think these guys can go longer than they do. Bergesen was so dominant that game I think he should have been allowed to finish. It's not like his pitch count was 120, it was 103. I think this young team could have gotten some momentum from that historic comeback and now all that momentum is gone. It is very frustrating. I am not a Trembley fan. I think he makes poor decisions with handling the pitching staff and being over aggressive on the bases. Earl Weaver believed every out was sacred and I agree with him. This team gives away outs like it's going out of style and I think Trembley and the coaching staff are at least partially to blame...

Pete

Can you (or anyone) explain how Palmer, McNally and Cuellar were able to have such long careers in an era where there were no pitch counts (and they routinely recorded 25 or more complete games in a season)? Are their stats an aberration, or is there something wrong with the way pitchers are trained in today's game? Has Palmer ever spoken on this topic? (I'm not being sarcastic - I genuinely would like to know)

.............................................................................................
Pete's reply: They were brought along differently and forced to be more durable. Of course, there were a lot of others who fell by the wayside in those days. Palmer has talked about it and most of the older guys would like to see teams throw their minor league pitchers more. Trouble is, a guy like Bergesen has not thrown that many innings in the minors, so you can't suddenly stretch him out in his rookie season if you want him to be around in September.

I think its the way pitchers are trained. I am against the 100 pitch rule myself, but these days young pitchers are limited to 100 pitches since the moment they step in the minors. They aren't really given a chance to build up arm strength to throw much beyond that.

Nolan Ryan has instituted a no pitch count policy in the Rangers organization. He believes what Earl Weaver did, as in the pitcher is done when his body language tells you he's done. But even with that its going to take a few years for viable results to show up.
Maybe in 10 years the pitch count rule will be a thing of the past.

The lunacy of the 100-pitch rule is that major league management and coaching settled on that number with no evidence to back it up. Pitchers arms, and durability are as different as snowflakes, yet managers managed to settle on this nice, easy, round number of 100 on with to base major strategic decisions with an infinite variety of pitchers and playing conditions. Like so many other "traditional" ways of doing things in baseball - it makes no sense.