how much stress did losing Hudson place on the other starters?

[Knucksie]

OK, here's a thread that can get an opinion from every type of fan. It's also a challenge to those, who think that they're experts on stats ("advanced metrics"). Let's examine who kicked it up a notch and who regressed. Certainly, his presence benefitted the younger pitchers, since he was in uniform while on the DL.

Just off the top of my head, Medlen might've been a bit rattled at times (and maybe for different reasons). At this point in his career, Teheran was more suited to #5 but may or may not have been fatigued by the time of his NLDS start. If he had adequate rest between starts, there might've been some effect from Hudson's absence.

Obviously, we all know that the club was planning on a return from Beachy. So, they thought that the loss could've been absorbed better.

[zitothebrave]

Julio was skipped a few times in September IIRC.

Medlen kicked it into gear after Hudson went down. That said I think that if Huddy was available our PO rotation would have gone

1. Hudson
2. Minor
3. Medlen (I think he would have handled game 3 better which if our starter did handle game 3 we win that)
4. Julio
5. Hudson

I think we still lose 1 and 4. But we win 2 and 3 then it's a coin flip for 5.

[PawPawMaxwell]

It should not have affected any of our pitchers. None of them ever started a game on short rest IIRC. Now, had Simmons or Freeman gotten hurt the last week of the season, Im sure that would have put pressure on his replacement and other players who would have needed to pick it up.

[Knucksie]

It should not have affected any of our pitchers. None of them ever started a game on short rest IIRC.

It affects any rotation, because, even if rest is not a factor, it results in changes to their respective roles. Let me offer an example, from the other side, how adding a pitcher improves a staff.

Besides the fact that it was determined that Steve Avery was regressing, and there was a desire to have another ace LH starter, the Braves had other reasons for acquring Denny Neagle. John Schuerholz actually received inquiries immediately after the transaction. In Pittsburgh, Neagle had always face other teams's #1. By placing him behind Maddux, Glavine and Smoltz, he was the finest #4 starter in baseball, and was a 20 game winner, as a result.

Point is that, as some position players perform better in certain places in the batting order, some pitchers perform better in certain spots in the rotation.

[KB21]

I felt like Brandon Beachy having to shut it down had a bigger impact.

[nsacpi]

Point is that, as some position players perform better in certain places in the batting order, some pitchers perform better in certain spots in the rotation.

Didn't know that.

[zitothebrave]

I felt like Brandon Beachy having to shut it down had a bigger impact.

That had a bigger impact because of no Hudson.

[Knucksie]

Didn't know that.

Sure you did. Exaggeration for effect: regularly put your #5 against other team's staff aces, and what do you think it'd do for his record and confidence?

[nsacpi]

Sure you did. Exaggeration for effect: regularly put your #5 against other team's staff aces, and what do you think it'd do for his record and confidence?

Isn't it kind of random who goes up against whom in the regular season.

As for going up against an ace, it depends. For some the effect can be positive, for others negative. Was Medlen rattled going up against Kershaw? Did Garcia rise to the occasion? Hard to say. It is an interesting question which shouldn't be too hard to examine empirically. Look at how a set of pitchers pitched when the opponent was an ace and how they pitched otherwise.

[PawPawMaxwell]

Most managers tend to play their B lineup when the back of the rotation starters are pitching.. Fredi is a good example of this. Does the lesser lineup have an effect on pitchers performance?

[yeezus]

Obviously more than it did to the Cardinal's young pitching losing Carpenter.

[Knucksie]

Isn't it kind of random who goes up against whom in the regular season.

As for going up against an ace, it depends. For some the effect can be positive, for others negative. Was Medlen rattled going up against Kershaw? Did Garcia rise to the occasion? Hard to say. It is an interesting question which shouldn't be too hard to examine empirically. Look at how a set of pitchers pitched when the opponent was an ace and how they pitched otherwise.

Don't know why you're arguing about pitching matchups. People are posting here, all the time, about the need for a legitimate #1. So, this is a little more focused. Since you brought up the post-season, though, it clearly had an effect, because Teheran probably wouldn't have gotten a start if Hudson't ankle hadn't gotten run over.

How about somebody digging in to find out, for sure? It shouldn't be that difficult to determine if there was a difference in performance among the starters in important pitching categories (WP, ERA, WHIP, IP, even WAR).

It's presumptuous to suggest that Hudson's absence had little/no effect, because Wren was keeping his eyes/ears open on the trade and waiver market (ie, even if it was poor offer, the Rangers were trying to dangle Garza).

Definitely interested in the comments about Beachy, because they were absolutely anticipating his return, and figured that if he wasn't at last year's level, at least he could be effective mid-rotation. That figured into the thinking that the loss of Hudson could've been better sustained.

Most managers tend to play their B lineup when the back of the rotation starters are pitching.. Fredi is a good example of this. Does the lesser lineup have an effect on pitchers performance?

Yep. Like playing the backup goalie against the chump team in hockey.

[nsacpi]

Don't know why you're arguing about pitching matchups. People are posting here, all the time, about the need for a legitimate #1. So, this is a little more focused. Since you brought up the post-season, though, it clearly had an effect, because Teheran probably wouldn't have gotten a start if Hudson't ankle hadn't gotten run over.

The guy who would not have started if Hudson was there would be Garcia. Teheran would just have been bumped back to game 4 rather than game 3. Of course, he would have been much more relaxed knowing he was the #4 than the #3.

[Heyward]

Obviously more than it did to the Cardinal's young pitching losing Carpenter.

Not near the same, he wasnt supposed to pitch this year.

[Knucksie]

The guy who would not have started if Hudson was there would be Garcia. Teheran would just have been bumped back to game 4 rather than game 3. Of course, he would have been much more relaxed knowing he was the #4 than the #3.

Maybe they would've gone with a 3-man rotation to match the Dodgers. At this point, I really don't care about hypothetical possibilities, and it's way outside the scope of this thread. OK, you think Hudson being injured had no effect on the other starters. OK, got it.

[nsacpi]

Maybe they would've gone with a 3-man rotation to match the Dodgers.

says the man who in the next sentence declaims interest in hypothetical possibilities

[Knucksie]

says the man who in the next sentence declaims interest in hypothetical possibilities

Let's go back to worrying about what Simmons will cost in 5 years. Sorry this thread topic didn't meet with your approval.

[Runnin]

I felt like Brandon Beachy having to shut it down had a bigger impact.

It hurt but I don't know about bigger.

Hudson going down was probably good for our young staff. They had to step up. They performed better than we could've hoped for, but unfortunately had nothing left for October.