Strikeout: 3 Long-Term Bullpen Problems for the Twins

Spot on. It is beyond me as to why there aren’t relievers pitching multiple innings to help manage workload.  That could take the form of Bundy/Archer piggybacking or relievers pitching 2 (or more) innings rather than 1 on each outing. For example, rather than having Jax and Fulmer pitch 1 inning each for 4 consecutive days (not gonna happen), have one pitch 2 innings on day 1 and 3 and the other do same on days 2 and 4. 

Assuming we continue on the overall plan of 5 starters and 8 bullpen guys, we should be seriously looking at who can pitch multiple innings, not just who can pitch multiple days in a row.  Starters pitching deeper is desirable, but is not likely to happen with this management team so long relief specialists and 2 inning guys would bridge the gap between the starters and the closers.  Having to have 4 or 5 pitchers on each and every game is just asking too much of most bullpens, ours very much included.  

If the organizations philosophy is to not let pitchers face batters a third time you better have a deep quality bullpen.  Twins don't have that and haven't in a few years.  Pagan has cost the team many wins this year yet they keep sending them out there in pressure situations because some analytics says he's pitching well.  Does anyone in the Twins actually see what's going on?  For decades baseball has used starters designed to go 7-9 innings.  This was baseballs heyday.  Imagine that pitchers for years pitched to batters 3 times and more per game.  Baseball not only survived but thrived.  Now we have all the baseball geeks telling us that their way is better.  It's better using 4-5 pitchers every game?  It's too bad because IMO these experts are ruining the game!  

Good article.  The Twins seem to be following the Tampa Bay approach to pitching, with short starts and a lot of bullpen usage. I am not a fan of this, but if that is their plan, they need an abundance of bullpen arms as you cannot continue to pitch the same guys over and over without wearing them down.  Tampa handles this by having a lot of extra arms in AAA that they bring up as needed.  The Twins don't have that depth, and also don't seem willing to pull the plug on relievers until they have cost them 3 or 4 games.  It made no sense to rely on Pagan as he has no success after his first year, and Duffey and Smith who were clearly in decline.  Yes, Alcala's injury hurt, but injuries have become a predictable part of baseball over the past few years  and teams have to plan for it.  Finally, how can we be into mid August with all these bullpen innings and still not realize we need a long man in the bullpen?  That amazes me.

29 minutes ago, Whitey333 said:

If the organizations philosophy is to not let pitchers face batters a third time you better have a deep quality bullpen.  Twins don't have that and haven't in a few years.  Pagan has cost the team many wins this year yet they keep sending them out there in pressure situations because some analytics says he's pitching well.  Does anyone in the Twins actually see what's going on?  For decades baseball has used starters designed to go 7-9 innings.  This was baseballs heyday.  Imagine that pitchers for years pitched to batters 3 times and more per game.  Baseball not only survived but thrived.  Now we have all the baseball geeks telling us that their way is better.  It's better using 4-5 pitchers every game?  It's too bad because IMO these experts are ruining the game!  

I see the smart run teams trying to use one relief pitcher for 2 innings if the starter goes less than 6. That sets up the bullpen better for the following days. You can look at the box scores the last few weeks and see this happening (Even with the Twins)

It's mind boggling how little attention this team gives to Pitching. Starters and the Pen. No team goes deep without an Ace and we somehow think we can for last 10 years. Nope. Look for a .500 Club without pitching. But at least they will be profitable inside that nice taxpayer funded stadium!! The Pohlads laugh all the way to their banks!!

I am pretty sure you can say this about just about every team.  Not sure where Twins rank in innings per start, but league wide teams are asking less of their starters.  I do feel Twins are on the little more extreme, but even our top starters average only 5 innings per start, not just Archer and Bundy.  

I also believe most teams will give their vets longer leashes based on prior track record.  If you cut a guy after one or two bad games, you will never have people to put out there.  I feel your article is a little off when it comes to Pagan, as he has not been in high leverage situation since the trade deadline, except for extra inning game where all the other guys where used already.  They are not throwing Pagan out there in late innings but using him in lower leverage early outings, like yesterday when we needed more innings from pen. I just want to point out Rogers who, had amazing first 20 games, but since has been not very good, following your argument he should be cut and a FA now, and no team should look to use him, but he will continue to get chances because he has shown success in past, even early in this season.

As it pertains to signing pen guys, they are more of a crap shoot than any other position.  As pointed out Rogers was amazing over 20 games, and if he was a FA signing people would have said amazing signing, but now he is doing poorly, so he would be a bad signing.  Look at Thielbar, early in year he had 2 terrible outings, and had about 2 or 3 bad outings since, but overall he has been pretty good.  I am just pointing out that it is hard to judge how a pen is doing unless you look across the whole body of work, and they can have good and bad runs, so hard to judge them at any given time. 

Agree with your evaluations except Strike 2: Short Starts Mean More Bullpen Innings. From the beginning they knew that Archer & Bundy wouldn't pitch much over 5 innings a game and that Ober, Ryan, Paddack and Winder would far pitch more innings. Many didn't think they'd last as long as they have yet they have pitched more innings than any of those mentioned.

Every single SP in this rotation has his share of short starts & will continue to have them, that's not the problem. The problem is the many years of absence of long relief and over dependence on short relief which puts too much stress on short relief which in turn puts too much strain on the rotation to pitch beyond their profile which in turn results in injuries & many ineffective innings. This is doubley a problem when you have too many poor short RPs.

This problem is easy to fix, establish a strong long relief corp and regularly use them. We have many well proven candidates in AAA. The rare times when long relief has been used, we have always had excellent results. You'd think that after these excellent results it'd dawn on them that this the way. But they quickly resort back to abandoning long relief & stay with using 4-5 short RPs to complete a game.

I do agree with you that the BP is over stretched but the problem isn't the rotations short starts (that is to be expected) but the abandonment of long relief.

People are creatures of habits and training. When pitchers are trained to throw 60-90 pitches they begin to lose their edge after that limit is reached. The physical aspect of pitching is quite strenuous and requires a recovery period for the body to rebound. Some pitchers are able to throw 10-20 nearly every day and from these guys we get the term "rubber arm". Other guys need several days once they are fully warmed up and actually appear in a game. Still other pitchers are effective for 10-30 pithes every other day. Griffin Jax seems to fit this mold. 

If the prospects are only throwing 40-80 pitches per start for several years as they push their way through the minor leagues, it is unlikely that they will be effective throwing more pitches once they reach the major leagues. 

Another aspect that comes into play for a starting pitcher is how they use their pitches in the first couple of innings. Most pitchers today use their entire arsenal of pitches in the first and second innings. This means that the batters have seen the whole repertoire of offerings and can plan off of that information. Pitchers also fire their bullets in the first inning, meaning a guy who throws 95 will unleash several 95 mph fastballs right away. Contrast this with Verlander who often saves his best speed for the late innings or crucial situations and often goes through a lineup once with just one or two pitches and you can see that the hitters have more of a challenge on their hands. Naturally talent (stuff) plays a big role but pitching has multiple layers to it and I don't see that the training is using length as an option. We saw Mahle throw nearly three innings of junk pretty effectively by scattering his offerings around the zone. Hopefully he is not injured and just has a tired arm, which is often helped with a few extra days off. Throwing 120 pitches will not break a pitcher if they are not abusing their arms with total max effort, but it does take time to build up and when a pitcher reaches their limit it usually is noticeable first by the pitcher themselves and also by those most familiar with the pitcher's norms. This is why Baldelli was concerned with Mahle almost immediately in the first inning. Mahle also was aware but stated that he felt fine and had no indications of anything untoward concerning his physical health.  It took until two were out in the third inning before Baldelli decided he needed to remove Mahle and we will soon learn what was wrong.

I would suggest that careful training of pitchers to build their stamina is  possible. I'm not sure that is a goal of current baseball organizations as we see quite a bit of maximum effort deliveries.

Sorry Doctor Gast but I think that fewer innings by the starters does wear out the bullpen.  I also think that the third time through the lineup theory might be a Catch 22 situation (or a set up for failure).  Why, you ask?  If the management philosophy (or the analytics department) have determined that the third time through the lineup has a declining positive impact, then the on-field management team no longer will spend time and energy on stretching out their starters - which, in turn, leads to a poorer performance by the starters if they ever face a lineup for a third time.  And that just reinforces their belief that facing a lineup for a third time is bad.  Catch 22.  I would really like to see a spring training where pitchers are truly stretched out and see if they can go 7 or 8 innings without a significant decline the third time through the lineup.  Back in the olden times (when I was just a fifty-year old), pitchers routinely went longer outings and they also seemed to have far fewer injuries.  I am in of the opinion that if you are programmed (i.e. stretched out) to perform at a high level for nine innings, you can maintain à high level of competence for at least 6 or 7 innings which greatly reduces the workload of the bullpen.

What is the latest report on Kenta  Maeda.  If he is ready in September, he could provide the 2 innings when necessary. But when is he ready?  

1 hour ago, RJA said:

Good article.  The Twins seem to be following the Tampa Bay approach to pitching, with short starts and a lot of bullpen usage. . . .

Except the "Opener" concept (as I understand it) envisions the first two guys going multiple innings, the idea being you're looking to have the first two guys go twice through the lineup before you bring in "bullpen guys" to close it out.

Seems our plan is

• Starter goes twice through the lineup; 
• Everyone after the starter goes 1 inning.

Which piles up "pitches thrown by the pen" in a hurry.

Pitching management needs to evolve. Twins have a few "STopeners" (starters who pitch longer than openers, but not as long as starters traditionally). With these guys pitching only 4-5 innings, why can't they pitch more often than every 5 days? The starters are just not covering enough innings over the course of a season to sustain a staff trying to stick with relievers pitching 1-2 innings. Not enough bodies. Give STopeners the ball every 4 days maybe. Couple relievers would be designated as 2-3 innings type guys.

I think we are where we are and it will be hard to totally change philosophies at this point in the season. I would like to see three tweaks though. First, give Jax, Megill, and maybe even Sands 2 inning assignments on a regular basis. That's starting to happen and they can be the "bridge" between the 4-6 inning starters and the short relievers - Fullmer, Duran, and Lopez. Theilbar is more of a fireman filling multiple roles and Pagan (rhymes with "should be gone") is the low leverage guy.  Second, bring up Aaron Sanchez (for Pagan) and piggyback 2 of the following 3 each time through the rotation - Sanchez, Bundy and Archer. Hopefully that gives us one start per rotation turn where 2 guys handle most or even all of the innings. Third, give Gray and maybe Ryan more rope to go into the 6th and 7th innings.  Same for Mahle if he's back soon. They're as built up as we're going to get; now is the time to stretch innings. 

Of course, my third thought is a lot easier to implement if we could score some runs. It's a lot easier to let guys keep going when you're up 4 or 5 runs.  That would help a lot. 

Just a quick note. It's not the pitchers fault for Bundy or archer. Archer pitched 5 games of 4 plus innings. Only winning the 5 innings game. That was because he had a 60 pitch limit. He went 80 plus pitches in the win they did same thing with Bundy for a few games. But early in the season we had a 6 man rotation. Now we can't find 6 healthy starters. We have at least 3 pitchers coming back in September. That doesn't help us now at all.

I think the strategy of building a rotation from young arms (who have strict innings limits) and inexpensive free agents (who are often coming off injuries or ineffectiveness) compounds the bullpen problem.

4 hours ago, RJA said:

The Twins seem to be following the Tampa Bay approach to pitching, with short starts and a lot of bullpen usage.

You say that like it is True, I would argue that they are the more opposite then the same of the Twins. McClanahan started last year (24 year old Roolie) almost exactly like the twins treat all their pitcher for 8 games, but since has averaged facing 6 innings and over 23 batters faced. Kluber has average 5 1/3 and 23 batters faced. Rasmussen is similiar to the Twins pitchers but then they go with a starter for when their starter isn't great.

I recall hearing veteran pitchers like Blyleven, Morris, and Viola saying that if you never let your starters work through tough innings and always take them out they never learn how to work through them.  I am betting that Gray is of that opinion also after his comments the other day.  He wants a longer leash.

That may be why pitchers cannot get through the order more than twice.  They've been conditioned that at the first sign of trouble they are gone.

I also hear as a reason to take them out after two times through the order that the batters review via their iPads between innings and make adjustments.  Are pitchers not allowed by MLB to review an iPad between innings and make the necessary adjustments?

6 hours ago, terrydactyls said:

Sorry Doctor Gast but I think that fewer innings by the starters does wear out the bullpen.  I also think that the third time through the lineup theory might be a Catch 22 situation (or a set up for failure).  Why, you ask?  If the management philosophy (or the analytics department) have determined that the third time through the lineup has a declining positive impact, then the on-field management team no longer will spend time and energy on stretching out their starters - which, in turn, leads to a poorer performance by the starters if they ever face a lineup for a third time.  And that just reinforces their belief that facing a lineup for a third time is bad.  Catch 22.  I would really like to see a spring training where pitchers are truly stretched out and see if they can go 7 or 8 innings without a significant decline the third time through the lineup.  Back in the olden times (when I was just a fifty-year old), pitchers routinely went longer outings and they also seemed to have far fewer injuries.  I am in of the opinion that if you are programmed (i.e. stretched out) to perform at a high level for nine innings, you can maintain à high level of competence for at least 6 or 7 innings which greatly reduces the workload of the bullpen.

I agree with you totally Terry that pitchers are programmed differently today. Earlier there were fewer teams and importance was put on SPs to pitch complete games. So SPs trained themselves to pace themselves so they can do that and they had a small BP. Jim Kaat is good example of this type, those who went all out for 9 innings had short careers example Sandy Kofax & more recent Johann Santana, Pitchers like Nolan Ryan are freaks, although he had alot of problems with injuries & wildness early, broke out after most pitchers are done.

Now emphasis is put on velo & alot of movement on the ball that's put a lot of strain on any arm. Very few pitchers can maintain that intensity (those are true aces), that's why many are converted to the BP. Most today pitchers today are 5 once in awhile 6 innings pitchers if you can find one workhorse that can give you 6+ innings you are fortunate. I thought we found one in Mahle but it turns out that he's human, that all those innings under that intensity paid a toll on his arm.

I agree with you that SPs short innings put a lot strain on the BP if the BP consists only with short RPs with many that are poor and overused as was the case early which multiplied the problem. But if the BP has suffient long RPs we have 1 SP/ 5 innings + 1 long RP/ 4 innings or 1 SP/ 5 innings + 1 long RP/ 3innings + closer. Takes a lot of strain off of every facet of pitching that allows for 2 headers & extra innings

My thoughts, FWIW:

1] There is a tightrope to walk in regard to veterans and sticking with them. For arguement sake only, let's say the Twins had Nathan, or equivalent, and he slumps. You stick with a guy like that and let him work it out. Not going to debate how long the Twins stuck with Colome in 2021. We know the results. But he was proven and coming off one of his best seasons ever. You give that guy a little time. Now, did they give him too much time? Well, we saw the results, although truth be told, he was pretty good from June on, too little way too late. Moving on from Duffey and Lewis was good. Should have already moved on from Pagan. You just can't stubbornly hold on to someone that long with such poor results!

2] Monitoring your SP IP is fine. Building them up is fine. But at some point you have to examine diminishing returns. Is a 6th IP, maybe an out or two more, worth the "risk" of facing a lineup a 3rd time actually worse than brining in a RP at that point? Well, it might be if you can trust all 8 guys most days. If you have a strong back end but nothing for middle relief, then you are inviting trouble no matter which way you turn. I do believe we have a couple of arms that can be trusted for a 6th IP at least some days. 

What I just can't understand is how we, as amateur GM's, have recognized all season the Twins needed at least one quality middle/long-ish guy. We had it briefly with Winder until injuries hit. (And let's be honest, they hit pretty hard at times). Rocco finally spoke up a few weeks ago regarding this need. Right now, for the most part, the Twins seem to have a solid back 5. But is Sands ready to be one of those bridge guys? Megill looks like a diamond in the rough. But can he go 2? And do we really trust Pagan to do anything other than just the occasional 1 IP without damage?? It's the middle 3 spots now and next year that really concern me.

3] If you are a mid market team with financial considerations that the big market teams don't have, the one place where you can cheat a little is the pen. But that doesn't mean you ignore it! This is where a couple really good arms are needed but you can use talented young arms like Duran and Jax and others to fill a void. You can build a good looking backend like the Twins seem to have NOW, post deadline additions and what's on hand. But again, you can't just ignore those middle inning transitional guys. 

The Twins have addressed the pen during their offseasons. They just haven't addressed it very well, too often banking on fliers to fill roles in the backend. Once in a while you need to sign an actual good arm, or two, and look at fliers who can find success as the bridge guys.

Right now, looking forward to 2023, I can see a pen that might not need a lot of help. Assuming Fulmer is back, I can see our final 5 looking the same and being damn good. Megill offers some potential. Moran does the same. There are a couple guys like Sisk and others who might provide depth. But they simply can't approach 2023, or any season again, without making sure the middle innings have a certain level of competency and ability regardless of your backend. 

Not sure why Romero was considered a bullpen arm. Will he be back in 2023?

Alcala would've been a multi-inning stud, much better, I would hope, than Cotton and the ilk.

Coulombe was coming into his own as a left-handed alternative. Moran has taken his place, if and when he can come back to stay in the majors.

I didn't know what to expect from Stashak. Will he get a third chance with the twins, or is he gone, gone, gone.

But, ultimately, the Twins didn't think of Rogers as a closer.

And if you are going to be a competitive team, you should have a closer, not a patchwork.

Maybe they thought Pagan was hungry again for success. That Duffey would pitch his heart out entering his free agent season (and the dream of a multi-year contract). 

In some ways I'm glad in the use of Duran and hope he holds up. Making a rookie the closer is a hard gamble. Hoping Duran can shine for the long-term (and beyond) as a Twin...closer of the future.

Short starts and a long pen is a good strategy but requires a deep bullpen. Otherwise it's like the Timberwolves saying the most efficient way to score points is with the 3-point shot, and leading the league in 3-point attempts, but missing them all because the roster has no shooters. The roster and the strategy have to mesh.

If the league-wide trend continues regarding starting pitchers not going a third time through the order I think that MLB and the player's union need to negotiate the number of players and number of pitchers on a team up to something higher than we have today.  There are just too many innings required of RP's when the starters are no longer eating up the innings that they used to.