Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email
Photo

Twins pitching piece to share

  • Please log in to reply
110 replies to this topic

#1 biggentleben

biggentleben

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,801 posts

Posted 03 November 2018 - 01:25 PM

After some discussion with people around the game on what the Twins may do at pitching coach, I came into a very good discussion with someone in the Marlins org, who believes the Twins could bring in Kyle Snyder and he and Baldelli would be very willing to try new things with how pitchers are used in Minnesota. I had my own thoughts, and I was told that they aren't insane...check them out!

https://calltothepen...ng-trend-2019/

  • Riverbrian, Oldgoat_MN, Hosken Bombo Disco and 1 other like this

Co-Editor at CallToThePen.com, covering Twins, Braves, minor leagues, and all other baseball!

 


#2 sampleSizeOfOne

sampleSizeOfOne

    ob's cure

  • Members
  • 7,085 posts

Posted 03 November 2018 - 10:15 PM

Thanks for the post.

Would stacking also work better by pairing contrasting styles of pitching? Intriguing, at least.

#3 jorgenswest

jorgenswest

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,837 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 07:50 AM

Does the stacking plan increase the likelihood of a 13th pitcher? An opener is available to pitch between “starts” and does not need to be the same reliever every time. Both pitchers in the stack will not be available in the few games after the start and likely need to be the same two when that spot in the rotation returns. That works with the large rosters of September. With a 25 man roster I think it limits flexibility to the point where a 13th pitcher becomes a fixture.

The trade off would probably be Tyler Austin. He is best suited to a role where his at bats are more limited against right handed pitching. A three man bench has space for a catcher, middle infielder and outfielder. There isn’t space for a bat. If Austin can be a regular than it could be a spot for a guy like Astudillo that gets sacrificed.

#4 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,523 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 08:03 AM

the issue of third time through the order is usually not with the bottom half of the order. That would be why teams went with openers rather than stacking.

With stacking are the pitchers you are stacking treated as long relievers or starters? Twice through the order is 70 pitches. Too many for a long reliever, too few for a starter. If the primary gets 5 more batters that puts it closer to 95-100 pitches and 6 innings out of the primary,

To make stacking work you would need to commit to a rotation being stacked and having them pitch every 4th game.That would be the only way you could get 160 or more innings out of your starters.The drawback is you would need 8 of them, not 5. Most teams have trouble finding 3-4.On the plus side would be a 4 man bullpen, If you have a great starter then it is every 4th day for 5 innings or 6 innings when they are lights out. .

  • Loosey and Minny505 like this

#5 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,813 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 November 2018 - 08:59 AM

 

Does the stacking plan increase the likelihood of a 13th pitcher? An opener is available to pitch between “starts” and does not need to be the same reliever every time. Both pitchers in the stack will not be available in the few games after the start and likely need to be the same two when that spot in the rotation returns. That works with the large rosters of September. With a 25 man roster I think it limits flexibility to the point where a 13th pitcher becomes a fixture.

The trade off would probably be Tyler Austin. He is best suited to a role where his at bats are more limited against right handed pitching. A three man bench has space for a catcher, middle infielder and outfielder. There isn’t space for a bat. If Austin can be a regular than it could be a spot for a guy like Astudillo that gets sacrificed.

 

I think 13 pitchers is an absolute necessity. 

 

If there are 13 pitchers on the roster... I don't believe a dedicated DH is possible. That will give you an extra catcher, middle IF, Corner IF and OF. 

 

 

  • Minny505 and MN_ExPat like this

A Skeleton walks into a bar and says... "Give me a beer... And a mop".

 

President of the "Baseball Player Positional Flexibility" Club 

Founded 4-23-16 

 

Strike Zone Automation Advocate


#6 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,813 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 November 2018 - 09:06 AM

 

the issue of third time through the order is usually not with the bottom half of the order. That would be why teams went with openers rather than stacking.

With stacking are the pitchers you are stacking treated as long relievers or starters? Twice through the order is 70 pitches. Too many for a long reliever, too few for a starter. If the primary gets 5 more batters that puts it closer to 95-100 pitches and 6 innings out of the primary,

To make stacking work you would need to commit to a rotation being stacked and having them pitch every 4th game.That would be the only way you could get 160 or more innings out of your starters.The drawback is you would need 8 of them, not 5. Most teams have trouble finding 3-4.On the plus side would be a 4 man bullpen, If you have a great starter then it is every 4th day for 5 innings or 6 innings when they are lights out. .

 

I think they have the opportunity to try multiple things. Traditional Starters, Openers, Stacking and Pure Bullpen games. 

 

It's quite possible that we will be saying goodbye to pre-packaged rotations of the past. 

  • Major Leauge Ready, Hosken Bombo Disco, Minny505 and 1 other like this

A Skeleton walks into a bar and says... "Give me a beer... And a mop".

 

President of the "Baseball Player Positional Flexibility" Club 

Founded 4-23-16 

 

Strike Zone Automation Advocate


#7 jorgenswest

jorgenswest

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,837 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 09:13 AM

I think 13 pitchers is an absolute necessity. 
 
If there are 13 pitchers on the roster... I don't believe a dedicated DH is possible. That will give you an extra catcher, middle IF, Corner IF and OF.


Necessity for stacking or any model?

#8 Hosken Bombo Disco

Hosken Bombo Disco

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 9,210 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 09:50 AM

I think they have the opportunity to try multiple things. Traditional Starters, Openers, Stacking and Pure Bullpen games. 
 
It's quite possible that we will be saying goodbye to pre-packaged rotations of the past.

I respectfully disagree. (I may also disrespectfully agree. We'll see how this goes. :) )

I've been trying to figure out how to say this. Basically, I think if all of those alternative pitching models had been the norm in baseball for a hundred years, some clever team by now would have decided it was better to have a small number of really good pitchers who can pitching 6 to 9 innings every time, and then have a few extra guys to come in to finish the game if the first guy had to come out. In other words, starters and relievers. Other teams would have followed suit, and that's where we would be today, with starters and relievers, a rotation and a bullpen.
  • rukavina, Tomj14, Strato Guy and 1 other like this

#9 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 12,748 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 09:56 AM

I’m for being the first to try anything to give the Twins a competitive advantage.

Of course the downside to this plan is that it would significantly hamper Odorizzi’s shot at joining the 300 win club.
  • BK432, Loosey, Riverbrian and 5 others like this

#10 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 12,748 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 10:05 AM

I respectfully disagree. (I may also disrespectfully agree. We'll see how this goes. :) )
I've been trying to figure out how to say this. Basically, I think if all of those alternative pitching models had been the norm in baseball for a hundred years, some clever team by now would have decided it was better to have a small number of really good pitchers who can pitching 6 to 9 innings every time, and then have a few extra guys to come in to finish the game if the first guy had to come out.

Great, so all the Twins have to do is get five really good starters who can pitch 6-9 innings every start? Hasn’t that basically been the goal forever with the team always failing to meet that standard? If you read the proposal you’ll notice that Berros’ and Gibson’s innings weren’t impacted.
  • Riverbrian, Hosken Bombo Disco, Minny505 and 1 other like this

#11 Hosken Bombo Disco

Hosken Bombo Disco

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 9,210 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 10:32 AM

Great, so all the Twins have to do is get five really good starters who can pitch 6-9 innings every start? Hasn’t that basically been the goal forever with the team always failing to meet that standard? If you read the proposal you’ll notice that Berros’ and Gibson’s innings weren’t impacted.

I think there are costs or cons (pros and cons) that will come with experimenting with the pitchers. Some costs we can anticipate, like the roster constraints mentioned above.

My blueprint would be to do the traditional five starters though it does seem like the Twins are going to continue experimenting with a couple of those starter spots. Heck, I'm not a Pineda fan, but I would even prefer "start Pineda when he's heathy, call someone up when he's not" to having too many rotation spots given over to experimentation. Although having Kohl Stewart as a "primary" did show limited success.
  • Minny505 and MN_ExPat like this

#12 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Opener Poster

  • Members
  • 10,705 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 04 November 2018 - 10:51 AM

Stacking and openers don't excite me at all as strategies. It may help win a couple more games in the regular season, but it will get exposed in the post season.

Don't get lost in the weeds. Starting pitching is still very important in the game and wins championships.
  • Tomj14 likes this

#13 Winston Smith

Winston Smith

    2 + 2 = 5

  • Members
  • 2,891 posts
  • LocationOceania

Posted 04 November 2018 - 11:06 AM

 

I think 13 pitchers is an absolute necessity. 

 

If there are 13 pitchers on the roster... I don't believe a dedicated DH is possible. That will give you an extra catcher, middle IF, Corner IF and OF. 

I disagree. If the bullpen is managed properly there shouldn't be a need for 8 relievers and it would give the Manager more FLEXABILITY if he has the extra bench player.

If you don't know where you are going, you might wind up someplace else.

 

Yogi Berra


#14 Kelly Vance

Kelly Vance

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 467 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 11:10 AM

I think openers and stacking etc is just silly. If it ain't broken, don't fix it.

 

 


#15 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,813 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 November 2018 - 11:12 AM

Necessity for stacking or any model?


Any model besides traditional 5 Man rotation... try to get 6 out of a starter and an inning here and there out of your bullpen.

Move away from that and I think you need the 13th guy always and I think we are moving away from that.
  • Jerr and MN_ExPat like this

A Skeleton walks into a bar and says... "Give me a beer... And a mop".

 

President of the "Baseball Player Positional Flexibility" Club 

Founded 4-23-16 

 

Strike Zone Automation Advocate


#16 nicksaviking

nicksaviking

    Billy G.O.A.T

  • Twins Mods
  • 12,748 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 11:22 AM

I think openers and stacking etc is just silly. If it ain't broken, don't fix it.


It looked broke to me.

How does anything ever improve without experimentation and those brave enough to try new things?
  • Riverbrian, Sconnie, kenbuddha and 2 others like this

#17 USAFChief

USAFChief

    Anyone got a smoke?

  • Twins Mods
  • 22,048 posts
  • LocationTucson

Posted 04 November 2018 - 11:25 AM

I respectfully disagree. (I may also disrespectfully agree. We'll see how this goes. :) )

I've been trying to figure out how to say this. Basically, I think if all of those alternative pitching models had been the norm in baseball for a hundred years, some clever team by now would have decided it was better to have a small number of really good pitchers who can pitching 6 to 9 innings every time, and then have a few extra guys to come in to finish the game if the first guy had to come out. In other words, starters and relievers. Other teams would have followed suit, and that's where we would be today, with starters and relievers, a rotation and a bullpen.

The problem with this is, some clever team already decided that 5 starters, instead of 4, works better...and everyone followed suit.

And before that, some clever team decided that three starters was too few...and everyone followed suit.

And before that, some clever team decided that one pitcher per game, who pitches the entire game come hell or high water, wasn't the best way to play the game...and everyone followed suit.

Pitching has been evolving since the second year of organized baseball. Just because everyone did it that way a couple years ago has never prevented experimentation. Not today, and not 100 years ago.

Pitchers pitch fewer innings. That's been a trend forever, and I dont see that changing. I think it's more likely we see roster expansion than a return to smaller staffs with 5 Traditional starters.
  • Carole Keller, Jerr, nicksaviking and 6 others like this

Cutting my carbs...with a pizza slicer.


#18 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Opener Poster

  • Members
  • 10,705 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 04 November 2018 - 11:44 AM

It looked broke to me.

How does anything ever improve without experimentation and those brave enough to try new things?


Until the old method is broken. The Red Sox steam rolled through the league, and it wasn't because of stacking pitchers or using openers.
  • Jerr and Tomj14 like this

#19 Dave The Dastardly

Dave The Dastardly

    Ft Myers

  • Members
  • 411 posts
  • LocationOne Foot Over the Line

Posted 04 November 2018 - 11:49 AM

I'm all for experimenting. There's always room for improvement no matter what you're doing and the only way to find improvements is through experimenting. Some experiments will fail, some will fail miserably and some might actually turn out to be revolutionary. And obviously the least risky times for experimentation is when you've sucked big time at what you're doing for a long time. You know, like the Twins.

 

It ain't like you can get rottener (I think I made that word up - kinda experimenting with my vocab) when you're already among the worst at what you're doing.

 

So bring on those experiments. Just have the brains to figure out which ones are improvements and which ones are failures and the balls (little play on words there since we're talking baseball) to change things accordingly.

  • Riverbrian, Minny505 and MN_ExPat like this

#20 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,813 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 November 2018 - 12:49 PM

 

I respectfully disagree. (I may also disrespectfully agree. We'll see how this goes. :) )

I've been trying to figure out how to say this. Basically, I think if all of those alternative pitching models had been the norm in baseball for a hundred years, some clever team by now would have decided it was better to have a small number of really good pitchers who can pitching 6 to 9 innings every time, and then have a few extra guys to come in to finish the game if the first guy had to come out. In other words, starters and relievers. Other teams would have followed suit, and that's where we would be today, with starters and relievers, a rotation and a bullpen.

 

I think I understand with what you are saying and I actually agree with you. If it was reversed and the new thing was the old thing. The old thing could become the new thing over time because new ideas happen naturally and the old thing would be a new idea.:)

 

So yeah... I agree with the exception that others would have followed suit. A few would have followed suit like today. 

 

It would take awhile for most to follow suit because Sons learn from their Fathers and the Sons that learn from the Fathers never invent the internet.:)

  • Hosken Bombo Disco and MN_ExPat like this

A Skeleton walks into a bar and says... "Give me a beer... And a mop".

 

President of the "Baseball Player Positional Flexibility" Club 

Founded 4-23-16 

 

Strike Zone Automation Advocate