Rocco, Usage, and the Twins Bullpen

[KirbyDome89]

12 hours ago, ashbury said:

Even the best bullpen gives up some runs.  But now and then, elite arms do throw clean innings, i.e. start the inning, 3 batters faced, no runners. Put runners on, and over the long haul you won't dance out of trouble often enough.

Here's my count of relevant innings so far in 2022 (no credit for partial innings):

Duran: 6 chances, 2 clean innings

Smith: 2 chances, 0 clean innings

Thielbar: 4 chances, 0 clean innings

Coulomb: 2 chances, 0 clean innings

Duffey: 3 chances, 0 clean innings

Pagan: 3 chances, 2 clean innings

Romero: 3 chances, 0 clean innings

Jax: 3 chances, 0 clean innings

It's late, this was a very quick count and I could be missing a few.  Individually, it's all Small Sample Size.  Taken as a group, this bullpen is hittable, or else they walk batters.  Two guys, Duran and Pagan, have so far shown that they can take charge in the late innings.  Smith, maybe, but he's been given partial innings in the cases not mentioned that were clean.

Again, I'm looking at baserunners, not actual runs scored, because when you put runners on there will be variability.  It's the ability to keep the runners off that tracks, not the ability to somehow magically scatter those runners.

Rocco doesn't have the horses, not at this time.  It doesn't matter how you deploy your bullpen arms, when there are only two.  If things change for the better, later on, that's the time I'll look at how he deploys the resources.

 

 

This honestly isn't being talked about enough. The last clean inning was thrown by Winder Saturday, and it was his only one in 5 full innings of relief. They've gone three entire games now where at least one runner reached base every inning.

[chpettit19]

7 minutes ago, Mark G said:

Please, doctor, no........I don't want to rely on long relief and Piggy backing, and a reliance on the BP to carry the load.  I want to rely on the starters, with the PB as a plan B, not a plan A.  Go all the way back to little league, then high school, then college, then low level pro ball.  Who were your best pitchers?  The starters, or the relievers?  Where does that change?  In upper lever pro ball?  Why?  Your starters are still your best pitchers, so why not let them pitch?  Rotating AAA pitchers in so your best major league pitchers don't strain themselves...............how has that worked out so far?  

I think this is a debate mostly between older guys and younger guys who never saw starters own their games.  And I don't know if it will ever end.............but it sure is fun.    

Piggy backing would use more starters and fewer relievers. You'd piggy back the starters on top of each other. Archer for 4, Winder for 4. Bundy for 4, Paddack for 4. For example. Many variations could be used, but general idea is 2 starters should be able to handle 8 or 9 innings alone. As arms get stretched out you'd rely on it less. As guys separate themselves (Ryan was just very good for 6, as was Ober) you use the piggy backing less and send Winder back to AAA and pick a 5 man rotation. Many of us thought that was the plan for April as they kept 7 starters with Duran as another multi-inning guy. But instead they've gone heavy on the 1 inning guys to cover 4 innings a night and that hasn't gone so swell. As we move into May and they're capped at 13 pitchers it'll turn back into rotating AAA arms. The piggy backing made sense to some of us early, but the Twins clearly had some different ideas.

[USAFChief]

14 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

This honestly isn't being talked about enough. The last clean inning was thrown by Winder Saturday, and it was his only one in 5 full innings of relief. They've gone three entire games now where at least one runner reached base every inning.

Who was that crotchety old fart who made enemies all winter insisting the bullpen wasn't very talented or deep? And threw a fit when they traded away their best reliever for "roster management?"

 

 

[KirbyDome89]

If we're limiting Duran to one inning per appearance and also making Thielbar/Coulombe situational use only, i.e. LOOGYs, on top of Smith's short stints, who is filling that void? Stashak? Jax? Romero? I'll pass on all three. Also, if Emilio Pagan is being touted as a potential high leverage candidate, maybe it's time to rethink critiquing Rocco's usage, and instead question why this is what he's working with. 

[chpettit19]

4 minutes ago, KirbyDome89 said:

If we're limiting Duran to one inning per appearance and also making Thielbar/Coulombe situational use only, i.e. LOOGYs, on top of Smith's short stints, who is filling that void? Stashak? Jax? Romero? I'll pass on all three. Also, if Emilio Pagan is being touted as a potential high leverage candidate, maybe it's time to rethink critiquing Rocco's usage, and instead question why this is what he's working with. 

Do we know why Smith isn't being given more clean, late inning chances? All of the usage so far feels like the plan was to use April to figure out who should be what in the pen and go from there. And I don't like that at all. I've defended the FO about as much as anyone on here, and generally agree with not spending big on bullpen pieces, but the plan can't be to waste a month of the season figuring out who goes where.

I'd love to know the honest opinions of the relievers on whether they'd prefer set roles ("LOOGY," fireman, 7th inning guy, 8th inning guy, 9th inning guy) or if they're good with this "matchup" based process of throwing a different inning every day depending on how the opposing lineup is setup. I think the ideal situation is having set roles, but you need guys in each of those roles who excel at them. The FO seems to have handcuffed Rocco with a bunch of guys you have to try to setup with the ideal spot in the lineup and cross your fingers they're on that day. Wonder how drastically different this pen looks in June, or even May.

[KirbyDome89]

22 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Do we know why Smith isn't being given more clean, late inning chances? All of the usage so far feels like the plan was to use April to figure out who should be what in the pen and go from there. And I don't like that at all. I've defended the FO about as much as anyone on here, and generally agree with not spending big on bullpen pieces, but the plan can't be to waste a month of the season figuring out who goes where.

I'd love to know the honest opinions of the relievers on whether they'd prefer set roles ("LOOGY," fireman, 7th inning guy, 8th inning guy, 9th inning guy) or if they're good with this "matchup" based process of throwing a different inning every day depending on how the opposing lineup is setup. I think the ideal situation is having set roles, but you need guys in each of those roles who excel at them. The FO seems to have handcuffed Rocco with a bunch of guys you have to try to setup with the ideal spot in the lineup and cross your fingers they're on that day. Wonder how drastically different this pen looks in June, or even May.

Exactly. Games go off script and teams need to adjust; the Twins just don't seem to have that flexibility, at least right now. 

No idea, but they clearly see him as another 1 inning guy. I agree, there was always going to be some shuffling going on, but if the plan can't be to figure it all out on the fly. 

[ashbury]

5 hours ago, USAFChief said:

Who was that crotchety old fart who made enemies all winter insisting the bullpen wasn't very talented or deep? And threw a fit when they traded away their best reliever for "roster management?"

You.

[Mark G]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

Piggy backing would use more starters and fewer relievers. You'd piggy back the starters on top of each other. Archer for 4, Winder for 4. Bundy for 4, Paddack for 4. For example. Many variations could be used, but general idea is 2 starters should be able to handle 8 or 9 innings alone. As arms get stretched out you'd rely on it less. As guys separate themselves (Ryan was just very good for 6, as was Ober) you use the piggy backing less and send Winder back to AAA and pick a 5 man rotation. Many of us thought that was the plan for April as they kept 7 starters with Duran as another multi-inning guy. But instead they've gone heavy on the 1 inning guys to cover 4 innings a night and that hasn't gone so swell. As we move into May and they're capped at 13 pitchers it'll turn back into rotating AAA arms. The piggy backing made sense to some of us early, but the Twins clearly had some different ideas.

Now you have really lost me.  Exactly how many starters would it take to do this 4 and 4ish that you are talking about?  If we did this on a regular basis it would take.........8 starters?  10?  And that, apparently, means a shuttle bus from Target to St. Paul until they run out of options?  

What is so wrong with a starter going 6-8 innings?  When did that become so outlandish?  I will bid farewell to you all as I repeat one more time.........let the starters own their game.  Relievers relieve the starters, not take over the start.  When did we lose that concept?  

[Mike Sixel]

16 minutes ago, Mark G said:

Now you have really lost me.  Exactly how many starters would it take to do this 4 and 4ish that you are talking about?  If we did this on a regular basis it would take.........8 starters?  10?  And that, apparently, means a shuttle bus from Target to St. Paul until they run out of options?  

What is so wrong with a starter going 6-8 innings?  When did that become so outlandish?  I will bid farewell to you all as I repeat one more time.........let the starters own their game.  Relievers relieve the starters, not take over the start.  When did we lose that concept?  

Starters averaged 5.1 innings across MLB last year.....

And, I'd likely piggyback two starters, not four. 

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, Mark G said:

Now you have really lost me.  Exactly how many starters would it take to do this 4 and 4ish that you are talking about?  If we did this on a regular basis it would take.........8 starters?  10?  And that, apparently, means a shuttle bus from Target to St. Paul until they run out of options?  

What is so wrong with a starter going 6-8 innings?  When did that become so outlandish?  I will bid farewell to you all as I repeat one more time.........let the starters own their game.  Relievers relieve the starters, not take over the start.  When did we lose that concept?  

It depends on the mix of arms you have. Do you have 3 guys who can go 6 on a regular basis? Then you need 4 piggy back types to fill the other 2 rotation spots. Do you have 0 guys who can go 6 on a regular basis? Then you need 9 or 10 piggy backers and you're in a different sort of position. This doesn't have to be a full season thing (I expected it to be the April strategy this year, but was clearly wrong on that).

7 "starters" in that first example leaves you with 6 bullpen arms. If every other game is expected to have 8 or 9 innings handled by your 2 piggy back starters you have 6 arms to cover the 3 or so innings each of the days the other starters go. If you piggy back them all (10 "starters") you have 3 pen arms so your piggy back guys better cover at least 8 most nights or you'll be rotating those 3 arms as you wear them down. There's a lot of different ways you can go about it. The problem comes in by trying to mix 1 inning guys with starters who can't go more than 5 (what the Twins have been trying to do). That means all of your pen guys need to be pretty good cuz they're all being used quite often.

We lost that concept when starters started throwing 90-100% effort every pitch instead of 80-90% while throwing harder and harder from year to year. The human body can only do so much. There are still starters who go deeper into games, but teams have realized it's more efficient to have a lesser pitcher go max effort (or close to it) for fewer innings and back them up with 1 innings guys going max effort 100% of the time than trying to have a lesser pitcher finesse his way through 6 or 7 innings. The problem is getting caught in the middle. You can't use a "classic" bullpen setup of 1 inning only guys if none of your starters can go longer than 5. And the Twins seem to be in that spot now.

[Doctor Gast]

2 hours ago, Mark G said:

Please, doctor, no........I don't want to rely on long relief and Piggy backing, and a reliance on the BP to carry the load.  I want to rely on the starters, with the PB as a plan B, not a plan A.  Go all the way back to little league, then high school, then college, then low level pro ball.  Who were your best pitchers?  The starters, or the relievers?  Where does that change?  In upper lever pro ball?  Why?  Your starters are still your best pitchers, so why not let them pitch?  Rotating AAA pitchers in so your best major league pitchers don't strain themselves...............how has that worked out so far?  

I think this is a debate mostly between older guys and younger guys who never saw starters own their games.  And I don't know if it will ever end.............but it sure is fun.    

Mark, the main point that I wanted to stress is not relying so much on short relief, having 5 guys pitching 1 inning or less. If we have Winder, Smeltzer or some else who's hot pitch around 3 innings after each starter that'd take a lot burden off the short RPs, with the short RPs that are not burdened we don't have to rely on over extending our SPs, they can pitch the # innings they are comfortable with.

I think I'd love to have 5 SPs to pitch 6+ innings as much as you do, to watch a Johan Santana pitch a complete game. But what I'd love more is to see us advance in the post season. We had Berrios who could pitch well into a game but we don't have him any longer. I had hopes that Gray would step up and give us some good innings but now I have some doubts, Bundy is pitching well and in a short season he has pitched well but in a full season he hasn't been able to maintain his stuff, Ryan & Ober are rookies so I don't expect them to be able maintain their stuff throughout the season. Archer has pitched regularly 200 innings/ season in the past butt now he's still building up his endurance. Paddock is a big question mark.

With stress today for pitchers to pitch 100 mph and high spinn rate, pitchers can't maintain that stuff 6+ innings throughout the season. Santana should have been in the HOF but he blew out his arm because NYM over extended him. I'd love to be a romantic but with todays standards and my passion for the Twins to advance in the post season, I have to be a realist.

[USAFChief]

2 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

It depends on the mix of arms you have. Do you have 3 guys who can go 6 on a regular basis? Then you need 4 piggy back types to fill the other 2 rotation spots. Do you have 0 guys who can go 6 on a regular basis? Then you need 9 or 10 piggy backers and you're in a different sort of position. This doesn't have to be a full season thing (I expected it to be the April strategy this year, but was clearly wrong on that).

7 "starters" in that first example leaves you with 6 bullpen arms. If every other game is expected to have 8 or 9 innings handled by your 2 piggy back starters you have 6 arms to cover the 3 or so innings each of the days the other starters go. If you piggy back them all (10 "starters") you have 3 pen arms so your piggy back guys better cover at least 8 most nights or you'll be rotating those 3 arms as you wear them down. There's a lot of different ways you can go about it. The problem comes in by trying to mix 1 inning guys with starters who can't go more than 5 (what the Twins have been trying to do). That means all of your pen guys need to be pretty good cuz they're all being used quite often.

We lost that concept when starters started throwing 90-100% effort every pitch instead of 80-90% while throwing harder and harder from year to year. The human body can only do so much. There are still starters who go deeper into games, but teams have realized it's more efficient to have a lesser pitcher go max effort (or close to it) for fewer innings and back them up with 1 innings guys going max effort 100% of the time than trying to have a lesser pitcher finesse his way through 6 or 7 innings. The problem is getting caught in the middle. You can't use a "classic" bullpen setup of 1 inning only guys if none of your starters can go longer than 5. And the Twins seem to be in that spot now.

I guess with the 28 man roster, and 14 or 15 man staffs, you might be able to work some sort of "piggyback" schedule. But with a 13 man staff-already limiting yourself to 13 position players-it's really difficult to tie up 7 spots to starters. And that's what you're doing...7 spots for guys that only pitch every 5th day. That leaves you 6 relievers, to cover at minimum something like 11 innings those every 5 days. And that's if everything goes perfectly...you get 6 IP from the regular starters every day, and 8 from each of the 2 piggyback days. No extra innings games. You can save an inning on the road in losses, but in reality, we all know it won't work perfectly. You'll be asking for way more than 11 IP every five days from those 6 relievers. Way more.

And that ignores the simple truth...do we HAVE 7 guys capable of regular 4 or 5 inning stints? I'd question whether we have 5, much less 7.

There's just no way that works. I think it's near impossible, which is why nobody is doing it.

[ashbury]

3 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

Starters averaged 5.1 innings across MLB last year.....

That's across all starts, isn't it?

Some starts, the pitcher gets injured early and comes out.  Gray the other day for instance.

Some starts, the pitcher is doing badly and comes out after two or three or four innings.  Paddack for instance.  (We've actually been pretty free of such games.)

Some starts, the pitcher is clearly gassed and comes out, as might be said of Archer yesterday or Bundy the day before.

I wonder if you let out those games, what the average is when the pitcher is doing well?  I think those are the cases people are questioning. 

[ashbury]

1 hour ago, USAFChief said:

You can save an inning on the road in losses,

[Mike Sixel]

5 minutes ago, ashbury said:

That's across all starts, isn't it?

Some starts, the pitcher gets injured early and comes out.  Gray the other day for instance.

Some starts, the pitcher is doing badly and comes out after two or three or four innings.  Paddack for instance.  (We've actually been pretty free of such games.)

Some starts, the pitcher is clearly gassed and comes out, as might be said of Archer yesterday or Bundy the day before.

I wonder if you let out those games, what the average is when the pitcher is doing well?  I think those are the cases people are questioning. 

So, if we take out all the bad starts, how do pitchers do? That's not how the world works...

[ashbury]

3 minutes ago, Mike Sixel said:

So, if we take out all the bad starts, how do pitchers do? That's not how the world works...

The pitcher doesn't always do well.  That is true.

[chpettit19]

2 hours ago, USAFChief said:

I guess with the 28 man roster, and 14 or 15 man staffs, you might be able to work some sort of "piggyback" schedule. But with a 13 man staff-already limiting yourself to 13 position players-it's really difficult to tie up 7 spots to starters. And that's what you're doing...7 spots for guys that only pitch every 5th day. That leaves you 6 relievers, to cover at minimum something like 11 innings those every 5 days. And that's if everything goes perfectly...you get 6 IP from the regular starters every day, and 8 from each of the 2 piggyback days. No extra innings games. You can save an inning on the road in losses, but in reality, we all know it won't work perfectly. You'll be asking for way more than 11 IP every five days from those 6 relievers. Way more.

And that ignores the simple truth...do we HAVE 7 guys capable of regular 4 or 5 inning stints? I'd question whether we have 5, much less 7.

There's just no way that works. I think it's near impossible, which is why nobody is doing it.

I'd argue that the piggy back days would be off days for the pen. If you can't get 9 innings out of 2 starters (5 innings and 4 innings) you're in trouble. So you'd be looking at 9 innings every 5 days, with 2 off days mixed in which means you have all 6 bullpen arms ready for 2 of those "regular starter" games. Right now with starters only going 5 innings (league average is 5.1 innings per start I believe) you're asking 8 guys to go 20 innings (4 innings a day for 5 days) every 5 days. That's 2.5 innings per pen arm every 5 days on average. My way is 1.5 innings per pen guy every 5 days. Even if it's 11 innings per 5 days for 6 arms that's 1.83 innings per 5 days per pen pitcher. Still less than the 2.5 innings you're averaging by having a 5 man rotation of guys who can't go more than 5. If you have 5 guys who can go 6 innings (you don't think we even have 5 guys who can go 4 or 5 innings regularly so hard to imagine they have 5 who can go 6) you're leaving 15 innings for the pen to cover every 5 days. With 8 bullpen spots that's 1.875 innings per guy per 5 days which is still higher than even the 1.83 per 5 in the scenario of 11 innings for 6 guys that you suggested was unreasonable.

Not sure why you think it's impossible when it's fewer innings per pen arm with 7 starter types and 6 pen arms. And I'd argue Bundy, Gray, Archer, Ryan, Ober, Paddack, and Winder are 7 guys that could go 4 to 6 innings every 5 days. So there's your 7. All of which were on the major league roster on opening day (Gray obviously hurt now).

[USAFChief]

2 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

I'd argue that the piggy back days would be off days for the pen. If you can't get 9 innings out of 2 starters (5 innings and 4 innings) you're in trouble. So you'd be looking at 9 innings every 5 days, with 2 off days mixed in which means you have all 6 bullpen arms ready for 2 of those "regular starter" games. Right now with starters only going 5 innings (league average is 5.1 innings per start I believe) you're asking 8 guys to go 20 innings (4 innings a day for 5 days) every 5 days. That's 2.5 innings per pen arm every 5 days on average. My way is 1.5 innings per pen guy every 5 days. Even if it's 11 innings per 5 days for 6 arms that's 1.83 innings per 5 days per pen pitcher. Still less than the 2.5 innings you're averaging by having a 5 man rotation of guys who can't go more than 5. If you have 5 guys who can go 6 innings (you don't think we even have 5 guys who can go 4 or 5 innings regularly so hard to imagine they have 5 who can go 6) you're leaving 15 innings for the pen to cover every 5 days. With 8 bullpen spots that's 1.875 innings per guy per 5 days which is still higher than even the 1.83 per 5 in the scenario of 11 innings for 6 guys that you suggested was unreasonable.

Not sure why you think it's impossible when it's fewer innings per pen arm with 7 starter types and 6 pen arms. And I'd argue Bundy, Gray, Archer, Ryan, Ober, Paddack, and Winder are 7 guys that could go 4 to 6 innings every 5 days. So there's your 7. All of which were on the major league roster on opening day (Gray obviously hurt now).

I can't see any way to tie up 7 spots on starters. The math doesn't work. That's why it isn't being done. 

[Mark G]

9 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

It depends on the mix of arms you have. Do you have 3 guys who can go 6 on a regular basis? Then you need 4 piggy back types to fill the other 2 rotation spots. Do you have 0 guys who can go 6 on a regular basis? Then you need 9 or 10 piggy backers and you're in a different sort of position. This doesn't have to be a full season thing (I expected it to be the April strategy this year, but was clearly wrong on that).

7 "starters" in that first example leaves you with 6 bullpen arms. If every other game is expected to have 8 or 9 innings handled by your 2 piggy back starters you have 6 arms to cover the 3 or so innings each of the days the other starters go. If you piggy back them all (10 "starters") you have 3 pen arms so your piggy back guys better cover at least 8 most nights or you'll be rotating those 3 arms as you wear them down. There's a lot of different ways you can go about it. The problem comes in by trying to mix 1 inning guys with starters who can't go more than 5 (what the Twins have been trying to do). That means all of your pen guys need to be pretty good cuz they're all being used quite often.

We lost that concept when starters started throwing 90-100% effort every pitch instead of 80-90% while throwing harder and harder from year to year. The human body can only do so much. There are still starters who go deeper into games, but teams have realized it's more efficient to have a lesser pitcher go max effort (or close to it) for fewer innings and back them up with 1 innings guys going max effort 100% of the time than trying to have a lesser pitcher finesse his way through 6 or 7 innings. The problem is getting caught in the middle. You can't use a "classic" bullpen setup of 1 inning only guys if none of your starters can go longer than 5. And the Twins seem to be in that spot now.

If you have a couple of minutes, would you humor me in this area?

In my lifetime (I am in my 60's and have watched closely since the latter 1960's) baseball has gone from 20 teams to 30, from a 25 man roster to 26, from  4 man starting rotation to a 5 man, and from a 10 man pitching staff and a 6 man bench to a 13 man pitching staff and a 4 man bench.  And with minor league option available players in the minors, there is literally no end to the number of pitchers that will take a major league mound in a given season.  So.......50 or so years ago there were 200 major league roster spots set aside by most clubs for pitchers; teams valued a good bench as much as they did a bullpen because their starters pitched their games..............but I digress.    

We now hold 390 or so roster spots for pitchers with probably close to 100 more minor leaguers pitching at times for........I'm sorry, I don't know what.  Velo and spin rates?  To be able to say I have more than 10 strikeouts per 9 innings pitched, even though I have never pitched 9 innings at a time in my career?  And while I know this is purely anecdotal, the pitching overall has not improved much, if any, because there simply aren't 400-500 pitchers in the world who are of the caliber of the previous 200.  The top 200 today are as good or better pitchers as any other era, but they pitch less and less, leaving the bulk of the innings to the other 200-300 who would never have made a major league roster in the past.  And there are as many, or more, injuries today than at any other time.  And let us not forget that teams used to have scheduled double headers (not the day/night ones) several times a year.  They didn't get to call up extra pitchers just to play 2 games in one day.  

So why do we cling to the idea that this is good for the pitchers themselves, or the game in general?  Because the analytics tell us to?  Or have we become an all or nothing fan base that wants home runs and strikeouts, not ground balls, fly balls, and singles and doubles?  You know, old fashioned contact hitting.  

There is a reason that there are 7 players behind the pitcher to catch the ball (or track it down).  The game was designed to pitch, hit, and catch, not a game of catch between the pitcher and catcher until someone connects and hits a home run.  Trust me when I tell you, the game was a crap ton more fun to watch then, than it is today.  If you actually read this, thanks for humoring me.    

[old nurse]

On 4/20/2022 at 12:48 AM, ashbury said:

Even the best bullpen gives up some runs.  But now and then, elite arms do throw clean innings, i.e. start the inning, 3 batters faced, no runners. Put runners on, and over the long haul you won't dance out of trouble often enough.

Here's my count of relevant innings so far in 2022 (no credit for partial innings):

Duran: 6 chances, 2 clean innings

Smith: 2 chances, 0 clean innings

Thielbar: 4 chances, 0 clean innings

Coulomb: 2 chances, 0 clean innings

Duffey: 3 chances, 0 clean innings

Pagan: 3 chances, 2 clean innings

Romero: 3 chances, 0 clean innings

Jax: 3 chances, 0 clean innings

It's late, this was a very quick count and I could be missing a few.  Individually, it's all Small Sample Size.  Taken as a group, this bullpen is hittable, or else they walk batters.  Two guys, Duran and Pagan, have so far shown that they can take charge in the late innings.  Smith, maybe, but he's been given partial innings in the cases not mentioned that were clean.

Again, I'm looking at baserunners, not actual runs scored, because when you put runners on there will be variability.  It's the ability to keep the runners off that tracks, not the ability to somehow magically scatter those runners.

Rocco doesn't have the horses, not at this time.  It doesn't matter how you deploy your bullpen arms, when there are only two.  If things change for the better, later on, that's the time I'll look at how he deploys the resources.

 

 

If you consider  WHIP, throwing clean innings means at some point the piycher is going very bad. Very few atr less than 1

[old nurse]

18 hours ago, USAFChief said:

If MLB teams know what's best for their pitchers, why do we seemingly get less and less production with no reduction in injury? In fact, it's a guess, but MORE time lost to injury than any previous period in history?

As the average speed of pitches goes up so does the stress on the body to produce that level of speed. Tendons are not invincible.

[old nurse]

16 hours ago, USAFChief said:

Who was that crotchety old fart who made enemies all winter insisting the bullpen wasn't very talented or deep? And threw a fit when they traded away their best reliever for "roster management?"

 

 

Ok, you were correct at this point about the bullpen. Someone who is always pessimistic will be tight about as often as someone who is always optimistic.

[chpettit19]

8 hours ago, USAFChief said:

I can't see any way to tie up 7 spots on starters. The math doesn't work. That's why it isn't being done. 

I literally just did the math for you and show you that not only does it work it's better than the current 8 man situation unless your 5 starters are going 7 innings. Which they aren't. The math is not why they aren't doing it. You could have 6 guys covering 15 innings and still not be over 8 guys covering 20. And the shuttle between St Paul and Minneapolis already happens with an 8 man pen. There's no argument you can make that the math doesn't work. It does.

[Mark G]

I can make the math do anything I want it to if I bring up enough AAA (AA maybe?) players during a season.   The math doesn't work with a 13 man staff, only if you add numbers might be the argument.  ??  Just wondering.  

[chpettit19]

6 hours ago, Mark G said:

If you have a couple of minutes, would you humor me in this area?

In my lifetime (I am in my 60's and have watched closely since the latter 1960's) baseball has gone from 20 teams to 30, from a 25 man roster to 26, from  4 man starting rotation to a 5 man, and from a 10 man pitching staff and a 6 man bench to a 13 man pitching staff and a 4 man bench.  And with minor league option available players in the minors, there is literally no end to the number of pitchers that will take a major league mound in a given season.  So.......50 or so years ago there were 200 major league roster spots set aside by most clubs for pitchers; teams valued a good bench as much as they did a bullpen because their starters pitched their games..............but I digress.    

We now hold 390 or so roster spots for pitchers with probably close to 100 more minor leaguers pitching at times for........I'm sorry, I don't know what.  Velo and spin rates?  To be able to say I have more than 10 strikeouts per 9 innings pitched, even though I have never pitched 9 innings at a time in my career?  And while I know this is purely anecdotal, the pitching overall has not improved much, if any, because there simply aren't 400-500 pitchers in the world who are of the caliber of the previous 200.  The top 200 today are as good or better pitchers as any other era, but they pitch less and less, leaving the bulk of the innings to the other 200-300 who would never have made a major league roster in the past.  And there are as many, or more, injuries today than at any other time.  And let us not forget that teams used to have scheduled double headers (not the day/night ones) several times a year.  They didn't get to call up extra pitchers just to play 2 games in one day.  

So why do we cling to the idea that this is good for the pitchers themselves, or the game in general?  Because the analytics tell us to?  Or have we become an all or nothing fan base that wants home runs and strikeouts, not ground balls, fly balls, and singles and doubles?  You know, old fashioned contact hitting.  

There is a reason that there are 7 players behind the pitcher to catch the ball (or track it down).  The game was designed to pitch, hit, and catch, not a game of catch between the pitcher and catcher until someone connects and hits a home run.  Trust me when I tell you, the game was a crap ton more fun to watch then, than it is today.  If you actually read this, thanks for humoring me.    

To be fair, when you started watching baseball there was also no DH so benches needed to be bigger for that. But that's not really the point of this. There weren't 200 pitchers in the world who were all that high quality back then. Teams let inferior pitchers go longer in games "because that's just how baseball works." Bullpen usage used to be way different and that didn't change in the "analytics era" we're in now. That changed because Tony La Russa decided there was a better way to do things and he'd put a closer out there for just the 9th to shut things down. Baseball has been changing for generations. Every sport has. Football didn't used to use the forward pass. Then it used it a little. Now it uses it most of the time. Humans gain more info and adjust strategies. It's true in every matter of life. We used to ride horses now we have self driving cars. Change and advancement happens.

We've learned that the best strategy is to let really good pitchers (deGrom, Scherzer, Kershaw types) throw deep into games and back them up with 1 or 2 elite bullpen guys. But, as you point out, there's not that many great pitchers for starters or pen guys. So they've figured out that having the lesser pitchers max themselves out for shorter stints can have them perform better and thus improve your staff. If I can turn Liam Henricks into Kershaw for an inning why wouldn't I?

[Karbo]

22 hours ago, mikelink45 said:

Doesn't he have pitching coaches and an assistant pitching coach and a bullpen coach and a bench coach and an assistant bench coach and two bullpen catchers and an assistant coach (I don't know who he assists and a quality control coach and a "major league coach (what does he do?)?  An yet we cannot figure out how to use the pitchers?  Or set a lineup without Kepler batting fourth? Counting Rocco they have 17 coaches for 28 men?  Why not hire 11 more so no one has to sit alone?

yes he does and he still can't do a decent job of managing a bullpen. As the old saying goes "the buck stops here" and thats at Rocco.

[In My La Z boy]

Seems it is an organizational (Falvey) thesis to wing it in the bullpen. Maybe it was Addison Reed that did it to them? Just stupid to trade Rogers, especially considering we sent the Padres the money to pay him. WTH was that? Besides, if we stink we move him at the deadline if we aren't interested in re-signing him. 

Look for our closer to be Juan Minaya very soon I guess.

[ashbury]

4 hours ago, old nurse said:

If you consider  WHIP, throwing clean innings means at some point the piycher is going very bad. Very few atr less than 1

I acknowledged at the outset that every bullpen gives up runs.  I'm not holding them up to some unrealistic standard like a WHIP under 1.  And even a good WHIP will be a blend of clean innings and some stinkers over the course of the long season.

Someone can check my numbers, but starters' WHIP this year is 1.04.  Relievers have 1.55.  Normal fluctuation means that it's too soon to take seriously any individual pitcher's numbers (so I won't list the ones that for the moment are good, any more than I expect Duffey's 2.00 to remain that high), but overall, it's inescapable that our bullpen is currently giving us no peace.

[mikelink45]

From the Athletic's Jayson Stark - 

RELIEF APPEARANCES PER SEASON

2021: 16,686
2011: 13,894
2001: 12,767

As he commented - everyone knows there are too many pitching changes, but will they stop - no it is just to easy to keep picking up arms and plug and play! 

This makes me sad.