Register now to remove this ad

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 67

Thread: 6 Inning Starts + 6 Man Roration = Fewer Arm Problems

  1. #31
    The thought of a manager giving extra rest or shutting down a healthy top of the line ace during the middle of a season because you fear his ability to get it done in the fall is nothing short of fan blat. It would be one thing if you were not in the middle of a pennant race but ridiculous if you are.

  2. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Cook View Post
    The six man rotation works if you go with 13 pitchers and have at least two holtís on the bench.

    I would instead propose that we go to a 13 pitcher squad, but every other cycle the Long reliever gets a start starting June 1st, and we stay on rotation even when we have a day off.

    It is so important to get these pitchers locked in and focused on throwing strikes and secondary pitches through the first couple of months of the season.

    I think we do not give our starters enough innings in spring training and they come out rusty to start each season.
    LOL now every theory has been covered I think.

  3. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by cp176 View Post
    The thought of a manager giving extra rest or shutting down a healthy top of the line ace during the middle of a season because you fear his ability to get it done in the fall is nothing short of fan blat. It would be one thing if you were not in the middle of a pennant race but ridiculous if you are.
    I hear ya cp.

  4. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Cook View Post

    I would instead propose that we go to a 13 pitcher squad, but every other cycle the Long reliever gets a start starting June 1st, and we stay on rotation even when we have a day off.
    This is a nice idea - until one thinks about the ramifications of it. What it does is give the #6 guy about 10 starts a year, all of them at the expense of five pitchers who are better than that #6.

    That would provide for a lot of fresh arms in October, which they won't need because they'll be playing golf.

    I'm as concerned as everyone is about the effect of multiple innings on Sale's arm but at the same time we need that guy out there starting games if we're going to qualify for the playoffs. I'd rather see him on a pitch count of.. say.. 90 and then turn the game over to the pen. Unfortunately even that is difficult to do because Sale isn't going to be happy about being pulled when he's cruisin', and an unhappy player may not be a productive player.

    It's a tough call and I don't have the solution, but I don't see limiting the starts of the 5 man rotation as being the answer.
    Any owners who sign previously suspended PED abusers to a big $$ contract are as guilty of perpetuating the PED problem as are the players.

  5. #35
    It's all basically armchair wizards trying to reinvent the wheel.

  6. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by S5Dewey View Post
    This is a nice idea - until one thinks about the ramifications of it. What it does is give the #6 guy about 10 starts a year, all of them at the expense of five pitchers who are better than that #6.

    That would provide for a lot of fresh arms in October, which they won't need because they'll be playing golf.

    I'm as concerned as everyone is about the effect of multiple innings on Sale's arm but at the same time we need that guy out there starting games if we're going to qualify for the playoffs. I'd rather see him on a pitch count of.. say.. 90 and then turn the game over to the pen. Unfortunately even that is difficult to do because Sale isn't going to be happy about being pulled when he's cruisin', and an unhappy player may not be a productive player.

    It's a tough call and I don't have the solution, but I don't see limiting the starts of the 5 man rotation as being the answer.
    This ^^^^^^
    This is what I was hinting at, you only won division by 2 games this season, the quality of a #6 starter and a #1 will be huge. Missing those starts could be the difference in making the Post-Season. Not counting wear and tear on Bullpen. 5 man rotation is already watering down the talent in Starters. Just have to see when a Starter needs to skip a Start, or even maybe 2, at right times in season. Blowouts both ways, get them out. Big problem is you don't have the quality of Starters in the Minors to give them a cup of coffee. 1 or 2 Starts by sat 2 Minor Leaguers, with a good lead in division, would be ideal.
    Last edited by OH FOY!; 10-21-2017 at 08:28 AM.

  7. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Bellhorn04 View Post
    It's all basically armchair wizards trying to reinvent the wheel.
    A couple years ago, both Tampa and KC tried to reinvent the wheel by limiting starters to 5 or 6 innings and going heavy on the bullpen.

    I don't recall how it ended, but in August those teams ranked 1-2 in team ERA.

    And I believe that was the year KC won the World Series. ..

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    Terrific?

    August 2017

    4.38 ERA worst of the season

    1.054 WHIP is pretty "terrific", but it was his second worst month.

    OPS against:
    .875 Sept
    .640 May
    .620 Aug
    .574June
    .500 July
    .433 April

    His K/BB ratio was 3rd worst in August and worst in September, so I'm not sure how his K rate and BB did not get worse at the end of the season. (1st half 8.09 & second half 6.19)

    Career 1st half/2nd half
    ERA: 2.74/ 3.28
    WHIP: 0.97/ 1.14
    OPS: .583/ .679
    tOPS+ 86/ 116
    K/BB: 5.34/4.90

    tOPS+ by month (career)
    87
    72
    90
    101
    105
    138
    His FIP in August was still 2.43 - plenty good. (close to Klubers) ... the walks went up to 5.6% which is still fine. He was still striking out tons of guys. Lower line drive rate than April-June. September and October were bad - although I can't imagine a 41% homerun/FB rate is built to last.

  9. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    A couple years ago, both Tampa and KC tried to reinvent the wheel by limiting starters to 5 or 6 innings and going heavy on the bullpen.

    I don't recall how it ended, but in August those teams ranked 1-2 in team ERA.

    And I believe that was the year KC won the World Series. ..
    Good point KC really didn't have a #1 that year in a way, and year before I believe. You can Manage it, if BP has quality arms.

  10. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by OH FOY! View Post
    Good point KC really didn't have a #1 that year in a way, and year before I believe. You can Manage it, if BP has quality arms.
    The way it was managed was about lineup turnover - some starters you might not trust a third time through the order. MOST starters you can't trust fourth time through (that includes true aces). What would help is having a couple of arms who can actually pitch more than one inning. You saw teams do this the entire postseason - although some teams might be overdoing it, emptying their bullpen is a gamble too.

  11. #41
    You don't need a 6th starter to get Sale more rest. Maybe all we need is a solid RP'er or two who can go 2-3 innings, instead of just 1.

    Maybe Beeks, Haley and/or Johnson could be groomed for that role. We could also use Kelly less often but for 2-3 innings per appearance. He was used for more than an inning several times last year and was a starter not long ago. Workman and Barnes could also be used that way a little more than this year.

    If we're talking about only limiting Sale's pitches, it should not entail a major roster reconstruction or any fancy 6-man rotation ideas. We may not even need to stretch any short guys into long guys. We could just add one more solid RP'er to the already deep mix we have.

    If we're talking Sale and Price, which maybe we should, then maybe we need to tweek a couple guys into middle relief 2-3 inning guys from the 1 to 2 IP guys they are now.
    Personally, I'd keep Kelly as a 1 or 1.1 IP guy and try to use Barnes and Workman as 2-3 IP guys with less appearances.

    I would not wait until June to start limiting IP'ed.

    Look, I realize Sale's late season numbers could just be bad luck or a fluke. He could pitch 220 IP next year and be bad in July and great in October. We could miss the playoffs or divisional title by resting Sale a few pitches each start. I get that. It's a gamble. We can argue whether it's small gamble vs a big gamble. We can argue whether it's even necessary, but to me his career numbers scream out for trying something different.

    I don't think taking 5-15 pitches off just about every start is going to keep us out of the playoffs in 2018, especially if we make a few key acquisitions. It would be bad to lose the division by a game or two, because we yanked Sale with the lead 2-3 times more than we could have. That would be awful, despite not really knowing what might have happened had we left him in.

    Having a strong Sale in October should be a priority- maybe not a top priority, but one nonetheless. JF and Dusty just got fired for not getting past round one. Obviously, just making the playoffs isn't the top goal for teams that spend like we do.

    Sale led the league in IP and pitched over 226 IP last year. It's not too much to ask for that not to happen in 2018. He pitched over 224 innings this year counting the playoffs.

    I'm not going to go back and look at every game he pitched this year and the score when they took him out, but with just a cursory look at his game logs, I see he pitched over 107 pitches in all but 8 starts. He pitched 97 or more in all but 3 and only had one start under 92 IP.

    He went 11 straight starts from May 30th to July 26th with 108+ pitches before letting up 7 ER in 5 IP on Aug 1st. Starting August first, he had 5 of his last 11 starts with less than 98 pitches. He let up 3 or more runs in 6 of those 11 starts (4 or more in 5 of 11). If you count his two playoff games, he never made it over 100 pitches in 7 of his last 13 games (one was in long relief). One might say, see he got some rest! I don't see it that way.

    I think we should be more proactive and not so reactive. I'm not talking an 85 pitch count either, but keeping him under 90 or 95 every few starts could be all it takes. Maybe that's 8-12 starts a year. Maybe we lose 2-3 of those games because we pulled him an inning earlier, but to me it could very well still be "worth it". With a strong pen that might be more than what is probable.

    Again, looking at his game logs, I feel we might not have lost any games had we done this (maybe not all these games, as I did not check what the score was when he was removed and what RP'er were available at the time):

    4/20 1 less IP (8IP to 7IP) we won 4-1
    5/7 1 less IP (6 to 5) we won 17-6
    5/24 1 less IP (8 to 7) we won 9-4
    5/30 1 less IP (5 to 4) we won 13-7
    6/4 1 less IP (6 to 5) we won 7-3
    6/10 less 2 IP (7 to 6) we won 11-3
    6/27-10 less 1.1 IP (8.1 to 7) we won 8-3
    6/26 less 1.1 IP (6.1 to 5) we won 4-1
    7/1 less 1 or 2 IP ( 7 to 6 or 5) we won
    7/21 less 1 IP (6 to 5) we won 6-2
    7/26 less 1 IP (7 to 6) we won 4-0
    9/20 less 2-3 IP (8 to 6 or 5) we won 9-0

    These are 12 possible games we could have taken away up to 17.2 IPoff his work load. My guess is some of these games were closer when we took him out, but maybe taking away 10-14 IP could have led to no more losses at all- maybe not.

    I'm not even sure limiting him by 14 IP would have made a difference in game 1 of the playoffs. I'm thinking it very well could have. It's just an opinion based on many moving speculative parts. I realize that.

    I think we should try limiting his pitches next year- maybe not very game. Maybe giving him an extra day (more than he got this year) 5 times, which would amount to 1 lost start over the full season might be better. Maybe losing 2 starts works much better.



  12. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    A couple years ago, both Tampa and KC tried to reinvent the wheel by limiting starters to 5 or 6 innings and going heavy on the bullpen.

    I don't recall how it ended, but in August those teams ranked 1-2 in team ERA.

    And I believe that was the year KC won the World Series. ..
    The 2015 world champion Royals had a phenomenal season from their bullpen, with a 2.72 ERA. In 2016 their bullpen had a 3.45 ERA.

    Lightning in a bottle...it happens, but you can't really count on it.

  13. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post

    Again, looking at his game logs, I feel we might not have lost any games had we done this (maybe not all these games, as I did not check what the score was when he was removed and what RP'er were available at the time):

    4/20 1 less IP (8IP to 7IP) we won 4-1
    5/7 1 less IP (6 to 5) we won 17-6
    5/24 1 less IP (8 to 7) we won 9-4
    5/30 1 less IP (5 to 4) we won 13-7
    6/4 1 less IP (6 to 5) we won 7-3
    6/10 less 2 IP (7 to 6) we won 11-3
    6/27-10 less 1.1 IP (8.1 to 7) we won 8-3
    6/26 less 1.1 IP (6.1 to 5) we won 4-1
    7/1 less 1 or 2 IP ( 7 to 6 or 5) we won
    7/21 less 1 IP (6 to 5) we won 6-2
    7/26 less 1 IP (7 to 6) we won 4-0
    9/20 less 2-3 IP (8 to 6 or 5) we won 9-0

    You do have to go through those game logs in more detail though. That June 10 11-3 game, for example, was tied 3-3 going to the bottom of the 7th.

    You also have to consider who would have pitched those innings when we took Sale out early.

    Probably Barnes, Hembree or Abad! Sound like fun?

  14. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by OH FOY! View Post
    Good point KC really didn't have a #1 that year in a way, and year before I believe. You can Manage it, if BP has quality arms.
    Including arms that can go 2-3 IP--very good arms.

    Look at CLE this year with Miller in long relief and still getting 57 appearances. They also had Otero and McAllister with more IP than games, and other RP'ers who went more than 1 IP several times.

  15. #45
    One thing to remember is - making the playoffs is good, and winning is good ... Sale allowed Farrell and the team to wallpaper over flaws with the rest of the rotation - and deploy the bullpen as effectively as they did all season.

    After all, Porcello was the only other pitcher who provided consistent bulk. Pomeranz provided consistent quality without depth. Rodriguez just did not pitch enough period - same with Price. Fister was decent for a #5.

    Sale's reliability allowed them to work around issues with the other 4 rotation spots. I mean yeah it'd be nice to manage Sale's workload a little bit more - but it is hard to say that they actually had that luxury.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •