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

K

Knucksie

Called Up to the Major Leagues
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
PawPawMaxwell said:
It should not have affected any of our pitchers. None of them ever started a game on short rest IIRC.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Knucksie said:
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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
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?
 
nsacpi said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.

PawPawMaxwell said:
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?
Click to expand...

Yep. Like playing the backup goalie against the chump team in hockey.
 
Knucksie said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
nsacpi said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
KB21 said:
I felt like Brandon Beachy having to shut it down had a bigger impact.
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top