After following the discussion presented I offer the following suggestion:

(A) Leave the minimum limits as is

or

(B) raise the mimimum limits on pitchers from 20 IP to 30 or 35 IP. PA limits are not really a major issue but perhaps an upswing from 50 PA to 75 PA would be appropriate if a changs is made.

Here are my arguments supporting my suggestion and discussing other suggestions:
------------------

I oppose raising the limits on pitchers to 40 or more IP for the following reasons

(A) A large percentage of the relief pitchers fall in the range of 70-80 innings. If we are going to require that relief pitchers have 50% of the total innings that most relief pitchers get (40/80 = 50%) then to be equitable on batters we would need to require 50% of the 600 PA that a typical full time player gets (i.e. 300 PA). And I don't think anyone wants to see a scenario where you are required to have 300 PA from your bench players.

I do recognize that Brian has a valid point which is why I offer the compromise solution of 30-35 innings. However; I feel that raising the limit to 40-50 innings would be swinging the pendulum too far in the opposite direction.

As I see it the real problem is not a 20 IP pitcher pitching 4 innings. Its those scenarios where creative management results in those pitchers getting 12 innings (I do it also -- its within the rules). And of course even with a 35 IP limit probably those pitchers would
get 13-15 innings by a creative manager which is still too much.