And Pre-Starter is kind of dumb term for someone as well versed as Sydney.  Can you be a Pre-Starter?  You either start, or you come in as relief.  Seems like you'd a have a short starter and long relievers.

Sydney:

You should see what it would take to simulate this...  I think the results would be pretty cool to look at.

badger80:

And Pre-Starter is kind of dumb term for someone as well versed as Sydney.  Can you be a Pre-Starter?  You either start, or you come in as relief.  Seems like you'd a have a short starter and long relievers.

Pre-Starter is a little awkward, I admit, but I think it conveys the meaning pretty well. What I'm trying to get at is the idea that the starter role is not eliminated. It is preserved, even though it is being time-shifted a couple of innings. The main pitcher is the guy who faces the lineup the second time through; the Pre-Starter is just the opening act.

What made me think of this (and I didn't realize it had been discussed before here) is the problem of our starters trying to get guys out with three pitches when some of them really only have two decent ones. A starter expecting to go through the lineup three times needs three, but a starter in a pre-started game might be able to go further using two (as paradoxical as that sounds), or at least he would have a slightly different opportunity to find his third pitch.

As things are now, we have guys in short starts using their third-best pitch (partly because Kendall thinks it has to be established early) and getting shelled as a result. In the Pre-Starter system, both Pre-Starter and starter can take their best shot because they both have clearer goals.