I'd be very interested to see the results of that.
I'd be very interested to see the results of that.
it would be hard in this day in age, when players are paid because of dumb stats like Saves. A player is going to want to convert 40 of 41 saves so they can get paid. if you have 3 guys who get 15 saves, then they don't stand out as much. Of course, Saves are a horrible stat. A save is anytime a pitcher comes in and protects a lead. Kimbrell would get a few saves where he pitched to the 6/7/8 hitter.. when Carp or Walden just blew away the 3/4/5 hitters with a guy on second in a one run lead. Many times your 7th inning guys get called on with runners on..Their jobs are to 'Save' the game just as much as pitching a 9th inning. IMO..Originally Posted by Julio3000
How about this.. 12 man staff..
you have 3 pitchers slotted per game. each is to go 3 innings. then those 3 pitchers are given 2 full days of rest..
game 1 Pitcher 1, pitcher 2, pitcher 3
game 2 Pitcher 4, pitcher 5, pitcher 6
game 3 Pitcher 7, pitcher 8, pitcher 9
game 4 Pitcher 1, pitcher 2, pitcher 3
so on....
then you have 3 additional pitchers that are there for extra inning games and insurance incase one guy doesn't have his stuff. No pitcher would have more than 165 inning.. A staff like the Braves would be perfect for this set up. Julio/Norris/Chacin/Wisler/Folty/ManBan/Perez/Weber/Blair.. there are your 9 'Starters'.. Viz/Grilli/'battle' are your back up three..
praeceps93 (01-27-2016)
Viz and Simmons are the leading candidates. I don't expect Grilli back anytime soon but think eh'll get the job when he is back with the hopes of us trading him off.
Stockholm, more densely populated than NYC - sturg
I have been pushing this idea too. I think it will not only be more effective but keep pitchers healthier.
"Donald Trump will serve a second term as president of the United States.
It’s over."
Little Thethe Nov 19, 2020.
It would never get off the ground.. players are so stat driven now a days and the BP are so specialized..
I would be an interesting case study though..
Will absolutely NEVER happen IMO. I certainly love out of the box ideas, but that's so far off the reservation that it's beyond crazy.
Not only would it COMPLETELY waste the rebuilding process since it was entirely built around stockpiling high-ceiling starting pitching, it would destroy any value those arms have. No one's going to trade you anything of value if they never get to see Teheran et al go through a lineup more than once - these guys aren't Chapman, and you see what little he brought back.
None of the 9 guys you listed are "control artists" by any stretch of the imagination, and you can't use Vizcaino, Grilli, and Withrow/Simmons, etc. more than 3 days in a row (and that's only if they go ONE inning each day. None of your 9 will be stretched out enough to go more than 5 innings at the ABSOLUTE max.
You'd have to burn 2 of your 3 "extra" guys on those MANY days when Norris, Chacin, and Folty can't throw strikes to save their lives just to soak up their 3 innings.
Really don't mean to pick on you Matt, but that is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard.
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?
LOL.. I have had worse Ideas trust me. Also, if you keep reading, I said it would NEVER happen. It was just an out of the box thought to add levity to a boring part of the year. You need to take the serious meter down a few notches..
clvclv (01-26-2016)
I think there is a market opportunity to get pitchers that are talented enough to go through the line up once but not multiple times. Those guys can be tweener BP/5 starter guys.
I think you could have multi inning relievers and free up one roster spot for another hitter.
Maybe a hybrid of your system where you try to have 3-4 big time guys and then fill in the rest with 2-3 inning RPs.
But people love the power arms out of the pen.
I first thought about this when Mercker pitched his no hitter with Wholers and Pena assisting. You have 3 starters and then your 4th and 5th spots would be combo efforts. you would have to separate those spots to make it work.
again 12 man staff..
Game 1 pitcher 1 going
Game 2 combo with pitcher 5, 6 and 7
Game 3 pitcher 2
Game 4 pitcher 3
Game 5 combo with pitcher 8, 6 (if he didn't throw to much), 4
that still leaves you with pitcher 9,10,11,12 as setup guys and closers.. or a specialist or fill in guy.
The Royals were a team close to this.. They had Guthrie/ Young/ Duffy and even Medlen to an extent that pitched as a starter and middle relief guy.. They depended on a 'bullpen' that could go 6 innings if needed. By no means am I saying the Royals employed my model above.. so whoever likes to critize me.. don't.. But they did rely on team pitching approach more so than quality starts. to stat back my statement.. the Royals had 8 fewer QS than the Braves did and we know the difference in records.
Assuming we could eventually get the minimum we hope for out of Julio, Newcomb, and Blair (a true #1 or #1A, #2, and #3 with no innings caps), I definitely wouldn't be against a bit of a hybrid of the approach the Rays took last year - whoever the #4 and #5 starters are get cut off at 75-85 pitches OR the second time through the order (unless they're doing something really special like throwing a no-no or something). It didn't work "great" for Tampa since the only starter that was allowed to surpass the cut off limits was Archer - and that eventually wore their pen out - but if we had at least 3 guys that we could count on to go deeper, we could probably avoid that issue.
That would also help maximize the value of those guys (Perez and Weber) that we saw be pretty effective at times as starters last year even though they don't likely figure into the long-term rotation plans. If you could use each of them for 2 innings twice a week, you shouldn't need to use all the big guns too often - maybe eventually piggybacking the back end guys. In close games you have a chance to win, you use Johnson and Vizcaino one night and Withrow and Grilli the next (adding Simmons and Folty to the mix when Shae's healthy and if Folty eventually loses his rotation spot to Blair).
Game 1 - Julio, Weber (if needed), Johnson, Vizcaino
Game 2 - Newcomb, Perez (if needed), Withrow, Grilli
Game 3 - Blair, Weber (if needed), Folty, Simmons
Game 4 - Banuelos, Perez (if needed), Johnson, Vizcaino
Game 5 - Wisler, Weber (if needed), Withrow, Grilli
Game 6 - Teheran, Perez (if needed), Folty, Simmons
Game 7 - Newcomb, Weber (if needed) Johnson, Vizcaino
Game 8 - Blair, Perez (if needed), Withrow, Grilli
Game 9 - Banuelos, Weber (if needed), Folty, Simmons
On the nights you get 7 or more from the top 3 starters, you're able to push some of the back end guys back to give Perez and/or Weber extra rest. That would make for a 13 man staff and a bit short on the bench, but as long as you keep players capable of playing multiple positions like KJ, Peterson, an OF that can handle at least two (and preferably all three spots) around (until the DH is forced on the NL), a 4 man bench should be manageable. Once the DH is adopted, you really shouldn't need that extra bat. In the future, you've got guys like Ellis, Bird, Hursh, Thurman, Whalen, Gant, etc. that could fill the Weber/Perez roles.
(BTW Matt - the capitalization is just to stress the focus on those words so others can pick out what's going through my head, not to be misunderstood as yelling by any stretch.)
Last edited by clvclv; 01-26-2016 at 10:11 PM.
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?
Julio3000 (01-26-2016)
after a good cry and another viewing of the Notebook, I am better now.
But could you imagine Fredi trying to maintain a rotation like this..
clvclv (01-26-2016)
Well that's one way to start my nightmares...
That's a ton of detail. I like it.
I'm just saying that it's tough to find a TOR starter and even tougher to pay him.
So if you thought you could get 3 TOR guys (guys you'd be excited about starting a playoff game, esp when teams are only pitching 3-4 starters in playoffs anyway) out of Julio, Newcombe, Simms, Blair, and Touki then you've got something.
Guys like Byrd, Jenkins, Viz, Hursh, Wisler, Folty, Perez, guys we got from the Mets, etc......they could all be really good in 2-3 inning spurts.
And maybe you don't save that extra roster spot for a bat (DH or another reason). Maybe it's a defensive wiz for late innings. Maybe it's the other half of a platoon that lets you maximize match ups. Maybe you have a guy who if he pinch runs late is an automatic steal of 2B and a score on a single. You could do a lot.
I think here are a lot of 1 time through the lineup starters out there who could be maximized in this way. And I think there are a lot of 1 inning, low leverage relievers who stick around despite being bad b/c they can throw 95 for an inning.
clvclv (01-27-2016)
I think the Rays also started limiting a few of their starters to only face the lineup 2 times. Almost all pitchers allow a higher OPS as they turn the lineup over, something like .700, then .730, then .770 on average, but some pitchers REALLY start to get pounded the 3rd time through the lineup. So your studs are allowed to face the lineup 3 times, and your other guys are only allowed to face the lineup 2 times. But isn't that always how pitchers have been handled?
If you have studs, let them pitch. If you don't have studs, you have to build your BP up to support them. The problem with the 9-man rotation is it blindly assumes a team is full of "other guys" when in reality even a terrible team like the Braves has 1 Teheran that should be allowed to face the lineup 3 times.
IF (a big if, I understand) Fried comes back anywhere close to the ceiling he was projected to have (or Allard is what we think he is and gets fast-tracked), the staff could be incredibly nasty come 2018 - ESPECIALLY now that we have (or could soon be getting) young offensive talent in the pipeline (Inciarte, Mallex, Swanson, Albies, Riley, Maitan, the #3 pick if they go with a hitter, etc.)...
Game 1 - Newcomb, Wisler (if needed), Banuelos, Vizcaino
Game 2 - Teheran, Jenkins or Sims (if needed), Folty, Simmons
Game 3 - Fried/Allard, Wisler (if needed), Paco, Withrow
Game 4 - Blair, Jenkins or Sims (if needed), Banuelos, Vizcaino
Game 5 - Fried/Allard, Wisler (if needed), Folty, Simmons
Game 6 - Newcomb, Jenkins or Sims (if needed), Paco, Withrow
Game 7 - Teheran, Wisler (if needed), Banuelos, Vizcaino
Game 8 - Fried/Allard, Jenkins or Sims (if needed), Folty, Simmons
Game 9 - Blair, Wisler (if needed), Paco, Withrow
That would STILL leave you one of Sims or Jenkins, Toussaint, Ricardo Sanchez, Soroka, Ellis, Bird, and Gant to use as trade chips and depth.
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?
some of those guys are not going to be good and/or get hurt.
Scouting seems to suggest that Newcombe, Sims, Touki, Fried, and Allard have TOR potential. If we get 1 TOR guy and another useful guy out of that, then that's a decent return right? Then you have guys like Blair, Soroka, Sanchez, Ellis, Jenkins who have are probably the next tier.
So for your WS Braves team in 20 something...
TOR 1 (Newcombe, Sims, Touki, Fried, and Allard): 5-7 innings b/c all young and SO pitchers. Back up of Jenkins-2 innings, Viz 2 innings
TOR 2 ( someone from first group Blair, Soroka, Sanchez, Ellis). 5-7 innings b/c all young and SO pitchers. Back up of Winthrow-2 innings. Simmons 2 innings
Julio Tehran-5-8 innings. Hursh 2 innings, Folty 2 innings.
Wisler-3 innings, Gant 3 innings, Jenkins again
Banuelos-3 innings, Winthrow-3 innings, Folty
That's 12. You could probably tighten it up.
It might help you with young studs and innings limits too. You could slide an Allard into a 3 inning role to control innings.
Nobody is going to do it. It would have to be a team like the Rays and it would have to be wildly successful.
I think it would be more likely to see:
1-3 Best starters you can get and pay 4
4-Wiley vet for reasonable money or young stud
5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10-Six different pitchers who you feel good about going 2-3 innings
11-LOOGY
12-Closer
Use the 40 man to move out the 5-10 guys as needed if you have extra innings, starter go out early, etc.
Is there something about "IF" that no one here understands? Seriously???
NO ONE - including you - is capable of forecasting which (if any) of those Pitchers I listed will or won't make it. It's the way that you'd deploy the ones that do - IF you followed some hybrid of the approach the Rays tried in 2015. Don't get bogged down in the "who", because none of us have a clue who they might be. The point is, we currently have at least 10 arms with #3 or better upsides in the system WITHOUT counting one of Sims or Jenkins, Toussaint, Ricardo Sanchez, Soroka, Ellis, Bird, and Gant.
I simply just worked my way down my personal organizational depth chart with Pitchers under control through at least 2020, starting with the ones on the 40-Man Roster first.
FWIW...
1.) Teheran
2.) Wisler
3.) Folty
4.) Banuelos
5.) Jenkins
6.) Perez
7.) Weber
8.) Gant
Considering the presence of Norris, Chacin, and Casey Kelly, one could make the argument that there's absolutely no reason we should see Newcomb, Blair, Jenkins, Sims, or anyone else the organization thinks could be a starter long-term before 2017. Folty, Jenkins, Perez, and Weber all still have options remaining. A full season in Gwinnett or Mississippi can do nothing other than enhance the chances that more of those guys with the higher upsides actually do work out.
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?
ClvClv..I have started to think Folty needs AAA next year. He is young enough to not hurt his career.. He is recovering from that rib removal and probably hasn't got to work on some of his secondary pitches. I think a year in AAA might do wonders for a potential ace type pitcher.
"I simply just worked my way down my personal organizational depth chart with Pitchers under control through at least 2020, starting with the ones on the 40-Man Roster first."
Again, anyone's guess is as good as mine about who will be in the rotation. We know Julio and Norris will, and I'd assume it's safe to suppose that Banuelos will since he doesn't have any options left. JMO, but Folty "needs" a lot of things. I understand why people (and the Braves) don't want to give up on developing him as a starter too early, but there's a fine line between too soon and "wasting your time" for me, and the Braves have a pretty good track record of waiting too long IMO. Everybody keeps wanting to point to his age as a reason not to give up the ghost, but let's be honest he's had one good year (when he repeated A-ball in 2012 four seasons ago) - otherwise he's shown little improvement since he was drafted...
2010 (18 years old) Rookie - 1.37 WHIP
2011 (19 years old) A - 1.49 WHIP
2012 (20 years old) A - 1.36 WHIP
2013 (21 years old) A+/AA - 1.33 WHIP
2014 (22 years old) - 1.46 WHIP (plus a 1.60 WHIP when called up)
2015 (23 years old) - 1.38 WHIP (plus a 1.63 WHIP when called up)
His control just isn't getting any better, and we're not exactly dealing with a small sample size at this point (724.2 IP). Whether it's that his breaking ball just flattens out too much, his fastball location struggles, whatever, he's just been too easy to hit and doesn't appear to be any closer to fixing that through 5 professional seasons. He's a two-pitch Pitcher that doesn't show signs of getting by with just two a second time through the order (unlike Shelby Miller).
Would another year in the minors help? While I won't argue it couldn't hurt, that year would need to be completely spent on developing a third pitch, even if it's simply a cutter or sinker that he can throw for strikes for show (much like Miller's). He simply has to come up with SOMETHING to keep people off his fastball, and that's going to be much tougher as he faces more advanced hitters.
Just for comparison, Teheran's almost 10 months older and has had two seasons with a WHIP above 1.40 - the first was his first year of full-season ball in Rome (18 years old), and the other was when he was sent back down to Gwinnett to finish off his third pitch in 2012. Everything else has been 1.18 or below until his glitch last season, and even that was a good year for Folty.
Last edited by clvclv; 01-28-2016 at 10:32 AM.
Has there EVER been a statement and question a certain someone should absolutely never have made and asked publicly more than...
Kinda pathetic to see yourself as a message board knight in shining armor. How impotent does someone have to be in real life to resort to playing hero on a message board?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote