Which probably has something to do with what you’re talking about, Andrew (as Tomas rightfully points out). Relief pitchers often get placed in high-pressure situations, and the ability to consistently perform in that circumstance tends to get recognized.

It’s a different thing than what we see with the attitude towards starters. I think people are right to lament the fact that the definition of a “good” starter has been watered down. Baseball has changed, sure, but that doesn’t mean it’s wrong to point out that not all of the changes are good.

Also regarding the latter part about scrappiness, I’ve only heard that meme from ProgressiveBoink’s Dugout, and I’m pretty sure it’s just the creation of a 20-something white guy trying desperately to point out how everyone else is racist. That site lost me when he (JonBois) said that every time he hears people wistfully talking of old time baseball that it’s basically code for wanting anti-black racism to make a comeback. Sure buddy, whatever you say. *rolls eyes*

People like relief pitchers better than starting pitchers.

Well, that’s probably dressing it down a little. Everybody knows that your starting five are probably the most important piece of a championship puzzle, and of course that a starter is more important than a reliever…

…oh wait. They actually don’t know that last part, as anyone who is subjected to the Yankees and my Yankee-loving girlfriend’s father can tell you. If he had his way, Phil Hughes and Joba Chamberlain would both be where they belong – in the bullpen.

But yes, here’s the basis for this (and I suspect that I’m only scratching the surface of something else here): I’ve been hearing a lot of noise (and it is cacophonous) about how the Orioles are being foolish in sitting Brian Matusz and potentially Chris Tillman for the end of the year. “They’re babying these guys! Stop coddling these pitchers!”

This is just the continuation of trend in all of baseball that has a lot of people’s underwear in a knot – starting pitchers aren’t real men. They have a sissy goal of a 4.50 ERA quality start, they rarely pitch deep into games anymore, they are handled with stupid kid’s gloves to prevent injuries when Bob Gibson – there was a man! – didn’t need or want that luxury and so on and so on. In general, people are angry that starting pitchers don’t work harder, I suppose.

But relief pitchers, totally different story. Some of baseball’s most highly prized pitchers are closers, who are judged almost entirely by a stupid metric (Fangraphs did a good dismantling of the save recently, go read it), and are rarely asked to pitch more than 3 or 4 innings a week.

When you talk about a manager on a hot seat, people (myself included) will always bring up how they misuse the bullpen and overwork some of their relief studs. If you find a reliever who can pitch 3 days in a row it’s a minor miracle, and we’re entering into an era where relatively mediocre relievers are getting into the hall of fame (I’m looking at you, Bruce Sutter!). When Jim Johnson blew a couple of saves recently, the scuttlebutt I heard wasn’t that he needed to man up or fix his mechanics or whatever – it was that he doesn’t have the “closer’s mentality” (this goes on the list of cliches I will never understand about baseball). “He’s still a great pitcher, he just doesn’t have the heart to be a closer. Andy MacPhail needs to go get Billy Wagner this winter!” Jim Johnson gets the benefit of the doubt – people like him more than they would if he were a starter, who would just need to man up and turn in a gutsy performance (sorry Neal).

Anyway. Give me some feedback here. I’m not claiming at all that this is a universal thing, but just like how white guys who suck at baseball are called scrappy, I think there is a natural inclination to perference for relievers over starters. And I don’t know why yet.