Front Page: A Look at Brusdar Graterol’s Role for the Postseason and Beyond

[jokin]

 

I think it makes sense to manage his innings next year and I think it does.

The easiest way to manage his innings is to make him a pitcher and forget starter or set up guy designations.

Don’t make him throw 6 innings as a starter when he pitches and don’t limit him to 1 inning as a reliever when he pitches.

We will be losing a lot of innings that have to be replaced next year if Odorizzi, Pineda, Gibson and Perez go away.

You can try shove arms into the traditional 5 man rotation model created by past generations or... you can be like Steve Jobs and create something new and effective.

Just call them pitchers and find 15 good ones and divide the innings up based on performance.

Think differently. The teams that have been are consistently winning.

 

Great post. It's coming. The crazy economics and pitching arm fragility demands it.

 

Tampa Bay and MN are the #1 and #2 teams in RP fWAR since August 1.

I'd wager that their RP budgets are some of the lowest in MLB.

 

14 pitchers likely on most MLB active rosters in 2020. (The Twins, via SP injury, illness and suspension are already more than halfway there- they might become the first playoff team that logs more RP than SP innings during the post-season).

Edited September 21, 2019 by jokin

[jokin]

14 active roster pitchers and 6 more on the AAA shuttle- that's 20 MLB-capable arms- now put pencil to paper and project and "manage" the ~1600 innings needed in 2020.

 

Apply an econometric model- you can probably produce a more effective outcome than signing two $18-25M AAV SPs and another two $8-12M AAV RPs.

[Mike Sixel]

1) Berrios

2) Pineda

3) FA... Dallas Kuechel

4) Dobnak's spot to lose in-season

5) Graterol's spot to lose in ST (Sign FA Drew Pomeranz- add some "Wes Magic") "Loser" of the 3 goes to the pen/AAA.

 

QO for Odo (he declines)

 

7th Inning- May/Duffey

8th Inning- Trade for Ken Giles

9th Inning- Rogers

Who makes the first eight starts for Pineda?

 

As for Gaterol, there is no everyone for the verducci effect. None. I think it's clear he can be a great reliever, less clear he can be a good starter. Two pitches is probably not enough....

 

But, given their lack of willingness to spend big, or draft pitchers in round one, they need to start him in AAA next year, imo. If he doesn't develop another pitch by June, call him up as a reliever

[Riverbrian]

Great post. It's coming. The crazy economics and pitching arm fragility demands it.

 

Tampa Bay and MN are the #1 and #2 teams in RP fWAR since August 1.

I'd wager that their RP budgets are some of the lowest in MLB.

 

14 pitchers likely on most MLB active rosters in 2020. (The Twins, via SP injury, illness and suspension are already more than halfway there- they might become the first playoff team that logs more RP than SP innings during the post-season).

Milwaukee Brewers 2018?

 

It’s here. Now we wait for the other clubs to notice or consider it may not be a fluke.

[Mike Sixel]

14 active roster pitchers and 6 more on the AAA shuttle- that's 20 MLB-capable arms- now put pencil to paper and project and "manage" the ~1600 innings needed in 2020.

 

Apply an econometric model- you can probably produce a more effective outcome than signing two $18-25M AAV SPs and another two $8-12M AAV RPs.

Which I've been arguing for here for three years.... But the Twins aren't really using piggybacking. Next year they may have little choice Edited September 21, 2019 by Mike Sixel

[ChiefsKid]

Other than the one really, really good outing against the Indians, I haven't seen enough from Graterol to make me want to have him pitch in the playoffs.

 

 

Yeah, he throws 101. But he hasn't located his "offspeed" stuff enough yet, and everybody's sitting fastball. Teams like the Yankees and Astros can all catch up to it if they know that's the only thing he can consistently throw for a strike.

 

 

He is, however, a *huge* piece of the puzzle in 2020 and beyond. Because whether we start implementing the pitching by commitee model or not, we really need him with Odorizzi, Pineda and Gibson all becoming FAs.

 

 

Ultimately I think he makes the postseason roster, because it's hard to leave someone out with his natural stuff.

[stringer bell]

Honestly, I don't think Graterol has earned a postseason spot and I don't know if he will get one. I do think he will get a few more chances in the coming eight days. The raw numbers aren't great, perhaps the front office sees metrics beyond the 100+ velocity that tell them that he will succeed in the glare of postseason. 

[jorgenswest]

They may carry two starters and 10 relievers into the playoffs with bullpen games 2 and 4. Graterol is one of my 10 or even 9 if they keep a third starter. Even with a start from Perez they still need a lot of relievers behind him. I don’t think Gibson will be healthy enough to start.

[jokin]

 

They may carry two starters and 10 relievers into the playoffs with bullpen games 2 and 4. Graterol is one of my 10 or even 9 if they keep a third starter. Even with a start from Perez they still need a lot of relievers behind him. I don’t think Gibson will be healthy enough to start.

 

This would have been crazy talk to even consider a scenario like this even just 5-6 years ago, but now, given the Twins current circumstances, it makes perfect sense. Perez as a long RP, maybe in a still-winnable game where the SP goes bust?

 

People are (justifiably) questioning Graterol's results thus far. translating to post-season. But I have an inkling that this guy's a sponge, and his learning curve is steep. And seriously, why not roll the dice with Graterol? You can feature Duffey, then May, then Graterol- Fast/Faster/Fastest- with Graterol maybe getting one or two tough outs and then handing it over to Rogers.

Edited September 21, 2019 by jokin

[jokin]

 

 

Who makes the first eight starts for Pineda?

As for Gaterol, there is no everyone for the verducci effect. None. I think it's clear he can be a great reliever, less clear he can be a good starter. Two pitches is probably not enough....

But, given their lack of willingness to spend big, or draft pitchers in round one, they need to start him in AAA next year, imo. If he doesn't develop another pitch by June, call him up as a reliever

 

Fair points, all.

 

On Pineda, the Twins have a bevy of SP hopefuls hanging around. Thorpe the most obvious, Goncalves if healthy, Smeltzer if necessary. I think giving them each a "tryout" or two will suffice until Pineda is elgible.

 

My impression is that Pomeranz would kill to get another legit shot at starting, the Twins have put themselves in the position to hand him just that opportunity- with a team that hits better than the Brew Crew- he just might rise to the occasion.

 

On Graterol, I think he will have a 3rd pitch in the works by next April. The kid is as good looking a young fireballing prospect as anyone I've seen this side of Strasburg or even Nolan Ryan. That easy motion and delivery should be most amenable to teaching an effective 3rd pitch if he's willing to put in the time.

Edited September 21, 2019 by jokin

[Crackedfungo]

Graterol in for the playoffs, but in lower leverage situations (not 0 or 1 run differential).  Next year, he must start for most of the year, and IN THE MAJORS.  If they want to ease him in with long relief early, a'la Santana, I am OK with that; particularly in April where 4 SPs may be fine.  No Romero crap - full change to reliever - how did that work out?  (He is now neither a SP or RP).  Sign Odo and Pineda to add to Berrios - they have earned it, and start Dobnak/Smeltzer/Thorpe race for early season #4, May/June and onward for #5.  Gibson should be gone, and Perez should have his option picked up cheaply and forced to earn any starts (and/or cut him loose early season).

 

We have plenty of other hard throwers like Acala or Romero, and Thorpe/Smeltzer/Dobnak 5 spot losers that can be added to current relievers mid/late year 2020 (Rogers and May can close from each side).  Also, NO to Dallas Kuechel and anyone like him added to SP next year.  Spend on new contracts for Sano and Rosario and maybe another year for Cruz - do it this winter.  Work in Dobnak, Smeltzer, and others in 5 spot until you are sure they are not the answer throughout 2020 - we need to get rid of blockage.  Very soon, you may have Balazovic, Doan, Colina (all in 2020); Sands, Valimont, Ober, and maybe Centerino (in 2021 to 2022) to work in or move to RP.

 

Graterol needs to be handled correctly.  He is TOO important to the future.  Wasting those bullets in the minors at SP or at RP in the minors is what I said - a WASTE.  He should spend the winter working on his change and refining difference between 2 seam and 4 seam and be ready for 1-4 innings in April per outing (perhaps paired with runner-up for early #4 and later #5 spot.  I am also very excited about Balazovic in 2020, and maybe Doan.  Exciting times for Twins with young SPs

 

Those are my thoughts.....fire away

[SteelDodo]

 

I seem to be in the minority of opinion but I would groom Graterol as the Big Bad Bull in the back of the pen. The Twins version of Mariano Rivera. The guy that trots out there at the end of the game and the opponent KNOWS it's the end of the game. To get there he needs to be on this year's post season roster.

I agree with TNT assessment about strain on his arm/shoulder with his throwing motion and lack of leg push. Look at clips of the ultimate hard thrower, Nolan Ryan, he used his legs extensively.

Nice choice of decisions to have to make.

I agree with this. I do not pretend to be in ANY way a pitching mechanics guru, but when I look at this case objectively, there seems to be a pretty high likelihood of injury with Graterol if he stays as a SP.

 

(I'm making up arbitrary numbers here, but...) If his outlook is an 80% chance that he will have the career of Aroldis Chapman or 30% that he will be an ace, I would err on the side of caution and make him a BP guy.

 

I'm fine with trying him out at Spring Training next year as a starter, or even allowing him to try to be a SP for AAA for a while to see if he can handle it. Though, I think his ultimate best fit would be as a rock star in our bull pen.

[Only Here in Negative]

 

If there are numerous studies, then it shouldn't be hard for you to link just one of them. Because I've heard this theory a thousand times, but have never seen any hard data to back it up. And I've looked.

 

I'm not going crazy looking but these from the first page of a Google search allude to it:

 

https://www.nfhs.org/articles/reducing-pitching-injuries-count-pitches-don-t-count-on-surgery/

https://www.dukehealth.org/blog/prevent-overuse-injuries-baseball-pitchers

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21098816

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29861301 (against the correlation here!)

 

I also think that the fact that all that most of the analytically minded teams concentrate on this is pretty strong evidence that they believe this theory (and I'll emphasize that I've been clear this is not proven, just influential). It does seem to be something that will develop over time and be more nuanced, which seems to be the issue with blanket concepts like innings limits. 

[Riverbrian]

If the manager does not trust a pitcher for high leverage situations. That pitcher should not be on the playoff roster. End of Story. 

 

Every inning is high leverage come playoff time. 

 

 

[Mr. Brooks]

I'm not going crazy looking but these from the first page of a Google search allude to it:

 

https://www.nfhs.org/articles/reducing-pitching-injuries-count-pitches-don-t-count-on-surgery/

https://www.dukehealth.org/blog/prevent-overuse-injuries-baseball-pitchers

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21098816

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29861301 (against the correlation here!)

 

I also think that the fact that all that most of the analytically minded teams concentrate on this is pretty strong evidence that they believe this theory (and I'll emphasize that I've been clear this is not proven, just influential). It does seem to be something that will develop over time and be more nuanced, which seems to be the issue with blanket concepts like innings limits.

Only one of the links you provided deal with innings increases year over year, and that study finds no evidence that increasing innings too quickly causes injury.

 

The relevant findings:

 

"RESULTS:

A total of 161 starting MLB pitchers met the inclusion criteria. With the exception of total innings pitched from 2010-2011 being significantly associated with DL placement in 2012 (no DL, 310.5 ± 97.5 innings; DL, 344.7 ± 85.9 innings; P = .040), no other finding for starts, pitch counts, innings, or pitches per start in the cumulative years from 2010-2014 had a significant association with pitcher placement on the DL for any musculoskeletal reason or for an upper extremity reason between 2011 and 2015.

 

CONCLUSIONS:

In this study, we demonstrate that there is no association between preceding years of cumulative pitches, starts, innings pitched, or average pitches per start and being placed on the DL for any musculoskeletal reason."

 

 

Again, as far as I'm aware of, and I've looked, there are no studies that show that arbitrary limits on inning increases year over year have any bearing on preventing injury.

If Graterol is healthy, he should be allowed to throw as many innings as he is able to until his body tells him it's enough. Not some arbitrary number they decide on beforehand.

[Mike Sixel]

Only one of the links you provided deal with innings increases year over year, and that study finds no evidence that increasing innings too quickly causes injury.

 

The relevant findings:

 

"RESULTS:

A total of 161 starting MLB pitchers met the inclusion criteria. With the exception of total innings pitched from 2010-2011 being significantly associated with DL placement in 2012 (no DL, 310.5 ± 97.5 innings; DL, 344.7 ± 85.9 innings; P = .040), no other finding for starts, pitch counts, innings, or pitches per start in the cumulative years from 2010-2014 had a significant association with pitcher placement on the DL for any musculoskeletal reason or for an upper extremity reason between 2011 and 2015.

 

CONCLUSIONS:

In this study, we demonstrate that there is no association between preceding years of cumulative pitches, starts, innings pitched, or average pitches per start and being placed on the DL for any musculoskeletal reason."

 

 

Again, as far as I'm aware of, and I've looked, there are no studies that show that arbitrary limits on inning increases year over year have any bearing on preventing injury.

If Graterol is healthy, he should be allowed to throw as many innings as he is able to until his body tells him it's enough. Not some arbitrary number they decide on beforehand.

Correct. No study exists to show the effect, because there is none that can be shown.

 

That said, it might not be showable because the sample size of those currently allowed to increase their innings that much is tiny.

Edited September 23, 2019 by Mike Sixel

[nokomismod]

Yes to the post season roster. Between him, DuffMan, Romo, Rogers, and May the Twins could have a really tough BP. Which is good, because the first five or six innings are pretty scary.

Also yes to treating 2020 as an opportunity to limit innings but stretch him a bit in the bull pen. The Twins are bound to have a bad start in 2020 at least every fifth go around (unless Dobnak, Smeltzer, and Thorpe are really good), and he could be a guy that could go three innings every 4 days. 

[stringer bell]

Earlier in this thread, I expressed my doubts about Graterol making the postseason roster and deserving a slot. Less than a week later, I will say I'm in on Brusdar. This is mostly because of the ineffectiveness of starters Gibson and Pérez, but yesterday's inning from Graterol also showed what he can bring to the table. 

 

I will let true pitching gurus decide what his future will be, but there are plenty of starting slots available for next year.

[Only Here in Negative]

 

Only one of the links you provided deal with innings increases year over year, and that study finds no evidence that increasing innings too quickly causes injury.

The relevant findings:

"RESULTS:
A total of 161 starting MLB pitchers met the inclusion criteria. With the exception of total innings pitched from 2010-2011 being significantly associated with DL placement in 2012 (no DL, 310.5 ± 97.5 innings; DL, 344.7 ± 85.9 innings; P = .040), no other finding for starts, pitch counts, innings, or pitches per start in the cumulative years from 2010-2014 had a significant association with pitcher placement on the DL for any musculoskeletal reason or for an upper extremity reason between 2011 and 2015.

CONCLUSIONS:
In this study, we demonstrate that there is no association between preceding years of cumulative pitches, starts, innings pitched, or average pitches per start and being placed on the DL for any musculoskeletal reason."


Again, as far as I'm aware of, and I've looked, there are no studies that show that arbitrary limits on inning increases year over year have any bearing on preventing injury.
If Graterol is healthy, he should be allowed to throw as many innings as he is able to until his body tells him it's enough. Not some arbitrary number they decide on beforehand.

 

I never said that I believe this is key, just that most MLB teams do.  

 

The Twins have repeatedly referenced this during the development of pitchers, shutting guys down when they get close to big innings jumps (Romero last year if I recall?). That makes me think that they have some sort of evidence of this, whether its a study or something internal (teams guard stuff like this pretty tightly). I'd be surprised if they were willing to throw Graterol for 30+ MLB starts next year as it would be not in tune with how they've handled it in the past. That could mean aggressively skipping him, using six starters/bullpen games regularly with the 26 man roster, or starting him out as a reliever.

[diehardtwinsfan]

2020 will be interesting. I do hope they go out and get some help. I'm not sure how much I like the idea of staffing the rotation mostly internally. Too may spots for rookies in my mind.

 

With Graterol, I want him starting until he shows he cannot (which if he keeps getting hurt, then this should be obvious). He's going to have an innings limit though, so whether they're letting him get some seasoning in Rochester or stretching him out in the ML pen for the first half of the season before handing him a rotation spot, I'm not sure.

[Mr. Brooks]

I never said that I believe this is key, just that most MLB teams do.

 

The Twins have repeatedly referenced this during the development of pitchers, shutting guys down when they get close to big innings jumps (Romero last year if I recall?). That makes me think that they have some sort of evidence of this, whether its a study or something internal (teams guard stuff like this pretty tightly). I'd be surprised if they were willing to throw Graterol for 30+ MLB starts next year as it would be not in tune with how they've handled it in the past. That could mean aggressively skipping him, using six starters/bullpen games regularly with the 26 man roster, or starting him out as a reliever.

In your post that I originally responded to, you made the following claim:

 

"There have been numerous studies that show that when guys make drastic jumps in the number of innings pitched, they strain their arms and get injured."

 

Are you saying that what you meant is that you don't actually know if there are any such studies, but you just assume there are because of how teams operate?

[Only Here in Negative]

 

In your post that I originally responded to, you made the following claim:

"There have been numerous studies that show that when guys make drastic jumps in the number of innings pitched, they strain their arms and get injured."

Are you saying that what you meant is that you don't actually know if there are any such studies, but you just assume there are because of how teams operate?

 

Yeah. It was in response to someone who was honestly asking why innings pitched would matter. All I was saying was that this is a relatively standard practice for analytically minded teams so there must be something definitive that impacts this. I agree with you that there's not a lot of independent reviews that prove that but there also aren't a lot of independent reviews that disprove it either (the ones you see tend to be either small samples or not have access to a lot of close information). That's likely because teams study it internally since they're the ones with the incentive to do so. 

 

In my opinion, innings pitched is too facile to be relied upon. I think teams are probably including it is as a factor but not a sole factor. For instance, the Twins this year seem to be using the pitches per inning thing more in the minors, which makes some sense. I also think it probably depends on the arm - a guy who relies on finesse and not power might get a longer leash. Unfortunately, that doesn't help Graterol much. His arm motion is relatively violent from what I've read and he throws so hard that I think some caution is a good idea. A lot will depend what the Twins do this offseason but I'd be fine with him in some sort of a hybrid role next year before being a full-time starter in 2021.

[Mr. Brooks]

Yeah. It was in response to someone who was honestly asking why innings pitched would matter. All I was saying was that this is a relatively standard practice for analytically minded teams so there must be something definitive that impacts this. I agree with you that there's not a lot of independent reviews that prove that but there also aren't a lot of independent reviews that disprove it either (the ones you see tend to be either small samples or not have access to a lot of close information). That's likely because teams study it internally since they're the ones with the incentive to do so.

 

In my opinion, innings pitched is too facile to be relied upon. I think teams are probably including it is as a factor but not a sole factor. For instance, the Twins this year seem to be using the pitches per inning thing more in the minors, which makes some sense. I also think it probably depends on the arm - a guy who relies on finesse and not power might get a longer leash. Unfortunately, that doesn't help Graterol much. His arm motion is relatively violent from what I've read and he throws so hard that I think some caution is a good idea. A lot will depend what the Twins do this offseason but I'd be fine with him in some sort of a hybrid role next year before being a full-time starter in 2021.

It's also standard practice for non analytical teams, so I'm not sure that argument has any meaning.

For all we know it's just one of those traditions that gets passed on in FO circles, for no actual analytical reason.

 

The opinions you express are fair and valid. I just get uncomfortable when they are stated with factual authority (numerous studies), because that is how misinformation spreads.

There are posters who will read what you originally stated, and it will stick in their mind as fact.

[Only Here in Negative]

 

It's also standard practice for non analytical teams, so I'm not sure that argument has any meaning.
For all we know it's just one of those traditions that gets passed on in FO circles, for no actual analytical reason.

The opinions you express are fair and valid. I just get uncomfortable when they are stated with factual authority (numerous studies), because that is how misinformation spreads.
There are posters who will read what you originally stated, and it will stick in their mind as fact.

 

That seems endemic to boards. Unless we institute a "sum up your back and forth" (which would get tough on some of these), its likely better for people to either read back for context or maybe not come in so hot when responding to something mid stream.

 

It seems odd that it would happen in an analytical age when we question everything though. The Twins have remade their entire MiLB pitching program and have top executives who are focused on it. Feels like there must be something to it. That's why I think its likely a "jumping off point" kind of thing, where teams start from an innings pitched thing but take into consideration things like the build of the player, their motion, velocity dips, spin rates etc. It also makes sense that wouldn't be public knowledge since it would give up a competitive advantage.

[ashbury]

Earlier in this thread, I expressed my doubts about Graterol making the postseason roster and deserving a slot. Less than a week later, I will say I'm in on Brusdar. This is mostly because of the ineffectiveness of starters Gibson and Pérez, but yesterday's inning from Graterol also showed what he can bring to the table.

I'd like more of a track record on him, facing major leaguers, but the decision has to be made on whatever record there is. I'm concerned about batters on bad teams going after pitches outside the strike zone, in case we're facing a team with patient batters with better pitch recognition. So I'm glad when he strikes out the side against the Royals, but I'm not convinced.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Yeah. It was in response to someone who was honestly asking why innings pitched would matter. All I was saying was that this is a relatively standard practice for analytically minded teams so there must be something definitive that impacts this. I agree with you that there's not a lot of independent reviews that prove that but there also aren't a lot of independent reviews that disprove it either (the ones you see tend to be either small samples or not have access to a lot of close information). That's likely because teams study it internally since they're the ones with the incentive to do so. 

 

In my opinion, innings pitched is too facile to be relied upon. I think teams are probably including it is as a factor but not a sole factor. For instance, the Twins this year seem to be using the pitches per inning thing more in the minors, which makes some sense. I also think it probably depends on the arm - a guy who relies on finesse and not power might get a longer leash. Unfortunately, that doesn't help Graterol much. His arm motion is relatively violent from what I've read and he throws so hard that I think some caution is a good idea. A lot will depend what the Twins do this offseason but I'd be fine with him in some sort of a hybrid role next year before being a full-time starter in 2021.

The most obvious problem with this debate is we're talking about something that all teams practice... so having a study at all is pretty hard because you cannot find any kind of sample. 

[dex8425]

 

I think there may be some usefulness to asking these guys to dial it back a little say 97 in Brusdar's case as Dante suggested but I'm not sure it will happen. Look at Dyson. He pressed through pain for two years in apparent silence. There i$ much on the line and the lure of 100 mph and the riches that come with it will be too much to resist. As this era plays out we will aquire the data and learn the answers to these questions.

 

 

There is a correlation to max pitch speed and average pitch speed and tommy john surgeries/innings pitched. Basically, the higher the delta between a pitcher's avg fastball and his fastest fastball, the healthier that pitcher is likely to be. The best example is Verlander, who can throw 101 but seldom does and has not had TJ. Obviously JV has been incredibly durable and will be in the HOF.  

 

https://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/05/tommy-john-surgery-james-andrews-amsi-recommendations-mlb

[Mr. Brooks]

That seems endemic to boards. Unless we institute a "sum up your back and forth" (which would get tough on some of these), its likely better for people to either read back for context or maybe not come in so hot when responding to something mid stream.

 

It seems odd that it would happen in an analytical age when we question everything though. The Twins have remade their entire MiLB pitching program and have top executives who are focused on it. Feels like there must be something to it. That's why I think its likely a "jumping off point" kind of thing, where teams start from an innings pitched thing but take into consideration things like the build of the player, their motion, velocity dips, spin rates etc. It also makes sense that wouldn't be public knowledge since it would give up a competitive advantage.

You are claiming context that wasn't there.

You specifically and explicitly claimed there were numerous studies that show that increasing innings too quickly causes injuries.

It wasn't until after I asked you to link one of these studies that you backtracked to say that what you really meant was that since teams limit innings increases, it must mean that they have studies to support it.

 

There is no context that I missed, and I didn't come in midstream.

[Only Here in Negative]

 

I'd like more of a track record on him, facing major leaguers, but the decision has to be made on whatever record there is. I'm concerned about batters on bad teams going after pitches outside the strike zone, in case we're facing a team with patient batters with better pitch recognition. So I'm glad when he strikes out the side against the Royals, but I'm not convinced.

 Dyson going down makes me more into Graterol because the options for that last pitching spot go down. Assuming they don't take Gibson, he's competing with guys like Stewart, Romero, Hildenberg, and Harper. Graterol has some warts but he's better than those guys. I will still be terrified when he comes into the 13th inning of a 23-23 Game 2 against the Yankees. 

Edited September 24, 2019 by Only Here in Negative