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

#21 Dantes929

Dantes929

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,141 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 12:56 PM

 

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.

Every way works if you do it well. KC broke two huge trends when they won it.Last in the league in homers but tough to strike out and mediocre starters with lights out bull pen.San Fran in their every other season WS streak embraced pitch to contact but did it very well.Boston gave up over 4 runs per game to Houston and nearly that to the Dodgers. Many years that is not enough to get the job done but Boston also had a great offense.In fact, statistically, Price was 26th in the league in ERA and Porcello was 45th. Sale did not do great in the Division or World Series. Boston maybe doesn't win if Price doesn't pitch way beyond his past playoff performances. Home field advantage helps but basically, make the playoffs and get hot is the best formula. Of course, this is aided by having great starting pitchers.Every method works if you have good players playing well.

  • Riverbrian and MN_ExPat like this

 If you build a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.

If you set a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.


#22 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,804 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 November 2018 - 12:58 PM

 

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.

 

Under the traditional model yes... but it's going to get harder to manage the bullpen properly when the starters are not making it to 6 innings. 

  • Jerr, Physics Guy, Dave The Dastardly 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


#23 Major Leauge Ready

Major Leauge Ready

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,617 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 01:01 PM

 

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. .

 

You don't need to get 160 innings out of all the starters. It does not make sense to apply old metrics to a new approach and you would not need 8 of them. You need to cover roughly 1500 innings. If you only need 3 regular SPs we should be able to come up with 3 that average 180+. Let's say you get 186 and 2/3 that's 560 innings. If 4 "stacked" SPs give you another 500, you need 440 innings out of 6 RPs or 73 and 1/3 per RP.  

 

I think this concept has merit. We know that most SPs do considerably worse the 3rd time through the order. It sure makes sense to take an approach that mitigates this problem. 

Edited by Major Leauge Ready, 04 November 2018 - 01:03 PM.

  • birdwatcher, Riverbrian, Sconnie and 3 others like this

#24 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,804 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 November 2018 - 01:21 PM

 

You don't need to get 160 innings out of all the starters. It does not make sense to apply old metrics to a new approach and you would not need 8 of them. You need to cover roughly 1500 innings. If you only need 3 regular SPs we should be able to come up with 3 that average 180+. Let's say you get 186 and 2/3 that's 560 innings. If 4 "stacked" SPs give you another 500, you need 440 innings out of 6 RPs or 73 and 1/3 per RP.  

 

I think this concept has merit. We know that most SPs do considerably worse the 3rd time through the order. It sure makes sense to take an approach that mitigates this problem. 

 

You hit the nail on the head. 

 

I think people are missing the point. This really isn't about "The Opener" exclusively.  

 

What this is about... what Tampa Bay did... was take a new approach to the reallocation of innings. 

 

  • birdwatcher 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


#25 jorgenswest

jorgenswest

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,837 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 01:55 PM

My interest is finding a way to have a 12 man staff for the majority of the season.

I don’t think that is possible with the stacking strategy.

I wonder about the opener. I would like to look at the Rays opener starts and see how many pitchers were typically needed in those games and then compare that to the number of pitchers needed in starts by Twin fifth starters. Is the opener a greater burden on the bullpen?

While I do wonder about the opener strategy I am certain that the Twins need 5 good arms they can rely on in the bullpen or it doesn’t matter how they configure their rotation. I think they need to add 3 relievers.
  • Riverbrian and MN_ExPat like this

#26 biggentleben

biggentleben

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,800 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 01:58 PM

 

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.

 

The Twins will have a $200+ million payroll to cover that depth of starters?

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

 


#27 biggentleben

biggentleben

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,800 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 02:06 PM

Depending on how it's structured, the Twins could have a 12- or 13-man pitching staff with the proposal. You would have Berrios and Gibson, then three spots paired up, which would be another 6. If you thought the stacking could go 5/4 in two of those three spots, you could pretty easily hold 4 relievers on top of that.

 

Part of what would make it work is that the relievers the Twins have all have options left. They could shuffle through a group of 6-8 relievers for those 4 spots pretty well.

  • MN_ExPat likes this

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

 


#28 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Opener Poster

  • Members
  • 10,692 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 04 November 2018 - 02:13 PM

The Twins will have a $200+ million payroll to cover that depth of starters?


Their pitching staff alone costs $200 million? News to me! You said they have depth. Now they need to find a top end starter. Maybe they take on Grienke's salary. Maybe they sign someone. Starting pitching is still important in this crazy game.

#29 biggentleben

biggentleben

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,800 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 02:16 PM

 

Their pitching staff alone costs $200 million? News to me! You said they have depth. Now they need to find a top end starter. Maybe they take on Grienke's salary. Maybe they sign someone. Starting pitching is still important in this crazy game.

 

Read what I wrote. I said "a $200 million payroll to cover that depth" not that $200M was spent on the rotation.

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

 


#30 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,804 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 November 2018 - 02:44 PM

 

Depending on how it's structured, the Twins could have a 12- or 13-man pitching staff with the proposal. You would have Berrios and Gibson, then three spots paired up, which would be another 6. If you thought the stacking could go 5/4 in two of those three spots, you could pretty easily hold 4 relievers on top of that.

 

Part of what would make it work is that the relievers the Twins have all have options left. They could shuffle through a group of 6-8 relievers for those 4 spots pretty well.

 

I love the thinking however, there will be issues with Odorizzi and Pineda buying in if you limit it to Berrios and Gibson. 

 

The hardest part with the adjustment isn't the adjustment itself. A good manager can figure it out and just do it.

 

The Hardest part is going to be the thing that makes most adjustments hard. 

 

Money.

 

Starting Pitching makes a lot of money and bullpen pitching makes much less. This will be perhaps the biggest hurdle to player buy-in.

 

A front office can and should tear down the conventional walls if it improves your team... but once the wall comes down, there is another wall behind it and that wall (salary structure) is thick, entrenched and was based upon the model that has been removed.  

 

 

The analytic GM's are about to challenge that starting pitcher compensation model which will be added to the challenging of the free agent compensation model last off-season.

 

The next CBA negotiation is going to be horrible.:)

 

Change is the slow boring of hard boards.:)

 

 

  • tarheeltwinsfan 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


#31 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,804 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 November 2018 - 02:50 PM

 

My interest is finding a way to have a 12 man staff for the majority of the season.

I don’t think that is possible with the stacking strategy.

I wonder about the opener. I would like to look at the Rays opener starts and see how many pitchers were typically needed in those games and then compare that to the number of pitchers needed in starts by Twin fifth starters. Is the opener a greater burden on the bullpen?

While I do wonder about the opener strategy I am certain that the Twins need 5 good arms they can rely on in the bullpen or it doesn’t matter how they configure their rotation. I think they need to add 3 relievers.

 

If you do the research.. I'd be interesting in viewing it. 

 

  • MN_ExPat likes 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


#32 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,518 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 02:51 PM

 

You don't need to get 160 innings out of all the starters. It does not make sense to apply old metrics to a new approach and you would not need 8 of them. You need to cover roughly 1500 innings. If you only need 3 regular SPs we should be able to come up with 3 that average 180+. Let's say you get 186 and 2/3 that's 560 innings. If 4 "stacked" SPs give you another 500, you need 440 innings out of 6 RPs or 73 and 1/3 per RP.  

 

I think this concept has merit. We know that most SPs do considerably worse the 3rd time through the order. It sure makes sense to take an approach that mitigates this problem. 

The average baseball season is 1780, not 1500 innings . That would be 720 innings out of 6 RP.440 out of 6 would be a rarity, 720 is not happening. Even then, Hildenberger and Rodgers were called overused at pitching 73 and 69 innings

Having 2 SP average 180 innings is difficult enough, having 3 effective ones is a challenge.

  • Vanimal46 likes this

#33 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,889 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 02:54 PM

You don't need to get 160 innings out of all the starters. It does not make sense to apply old metrics to a new approach and you would not need 8 of them. You need to cover roughly 1500 innings. If you only need 3 regular SPs we should be able to come up with 3 that average 180+. Let's say you get 186 and 2/3 that's 560 innings. If 4 "stacked" SPs give you another 500, you need 440 innings out of 6 RPs or 73 and 1/3 per RP.

I think this concept has merit. We know that most SPs do considerably worse the 3rd time through the order. It sure makes sense to take an approach that mitigates this problem.


Only 35 pitchers pitched 180+ innings last year. Quite doubtful that the Twins are going to find 3 that can do that.
  • Tomj14 likes this

#34 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,804 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 November 2018 - 03:07 PM

 

Only 35 pitchers pitched 180+ innings last year. Quite doubtful that the Twins are going to find 3 that can do that.

 

MLR's numbers may be off a little bit... but the concept is spot on.

 

You are correct but only, if you look at each individual player and not the roster spot each player occupies.  

 

For Example, If Archer throws 96 innings and is traded to the Pirates for Glasnow who goes on to throw 55 innings. That is basically 151 innings for one spot on the roster.  

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


#35 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,518 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 03:16 PM

 

 

Depending on how it's structured, the Twins could have a 12- or 13-man pitching staff with the proposal. You would have Berrios and Gibson, then three spots paired up, which would be another 6. If you thought the stacking could go 5/4 in two of those three spots, you could pretty easily hold 4 relievers on top of that.

 

Part of what would make it work is that the relievers the Twins have all have options left. They could shuffle through a group of 6-8 relievers for those 4 spots pretty well.

The ideas is to have the starter go through the batting order twice. 18 batters faced.Perfect game, 6 innings. If your 3/4/5 pitchers become league averageon those 18 batters 1.5 will get a walk, there will be 4.5 hits.That is counting on 6 pitchers to be league average to get 4+ innings each out of them. Double plays and caught stealing average less than 2 a game total, hence the plus with the 4.Pitcher 3 and 4 could be league average or better, I would have doubts on 4-6 being league average


#36 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 5,889 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 03:16 PM

MLR's numbers may be off a little bit... but the concept is spot on.

You are correct but only, if you look at each individual player and not the roster spot each player occupies.

For Example, If Archer throws 96 innings and is traded to the Pirates for Glasnow who goes on to throw 55 innings. That is basically 151 innings for one spot on the roster.


The poster I quoted specifically said 3 individual starters get 180+ innings each, not combined innings for a spot.

#37 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,804 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 November 2018 - 03:17 PM

 

The average baseball season is 1780, not 1500 innings . That would be 720 innings out of 6 RP.440 out of 6 would be a rarity, 720 is not happening. Even then, Hildenberger and Rodgers were called overused at pitching 73 and 69 innings

Having 2 SP average 180 innings is difficult enough, having 3 effective ones is a challenge.

 

In 2018. MLB had an average of 1449 across baseball. The Twins were at 1443.1 innings. 

 

This makes sense because 162 X 9 is 1458. 

 

1780 divided by 162 is an 11 Innings per game average. 

 

TEAM IP
Chicago Cubs 1476.1
LA Dodgers 1476
Oakland 1465.2
Arizona 1463
San Francisco 1461.1
Milwaukee 1461
NY Mets 1460.2
Boston 1458.2
Cleveland 1457.1
San Diego 1457
Atlanta 1456.2
NY Yankees 1456.1
St. Louis 1455.1
Houston 1455
Colorado 1452.1
Seattle 1448.2
Tampa Bay 1448.1
Washington 1446
Philadelphia 1445.2
Minnesota 1443.1
Miami 1442
Cincinnati 1441
LA Angels 1437.1
Chicago Sox 1437
Pittsburgh 1434
Toronto 1433.2
Kansas City 1432
Baltimore 1431
Texas 1431
Detroit 1425.1
IP
Amer. Lea. 1444
Nat. Lea.1455
Baseball 1449

  • Major Leauge Ready 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


#38 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,804 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 November 2018 - 03:19 PM

 

The poster I quoted specifically said 3 individual starters get 180+ innings each, not combined innings for a spot.

 

Well... then you nailed him.:)

  • Tomj14 likes 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


#39 Riverbrian

Riverbrian

    Goofy Moderator

  • Twins Mods
  • 19,804 posts
  • LocationGrand Forks, ND

Posted 04 November 2018 - 03:26 PM

 

151is not close to 190 unless you are Vietnamese currency, aptly names the dong. So as to avoid trouble, other people can make the joke about https://www.greatame...namese-dong-vnd

 

My mistake... I forgot to include the 27 innings thrown by Wilmer Font.:)

  • scottz likes 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


#40 old nurse

old nurse

    Member

  • Members
  • 3,518 posts

Posted 04 November 2018 - 03:30 PM

 

 

In 2018. MLB had an average of 1449 across baseball. The Twins were at 1443.1 innings. 

 

This makes sense because 162 X 9 is 1458. 

 

1780 divided by 162 is an 11 Innings per game average. 

 

TEAM IP
Chicago Cubs 1476.1
LA Dodgers 1476
Oakland 1465.2
Arizona 1463
San Francisco 1461.1
Milwaukee 1461
NY Mets 1460.2
Boston 1458.2
Cleveland 1457.1
San Diego 1457
Atlanta 1456.2
NY Yankees 1456.1
St. Louis 1455.1
Houston 1455
Colorado 1452.1
Seattle 1448.2
Tampa Bay 1448.1
Washington 1446
Philadelphia 1445.2
Minnesota 1443.1
Miami 1442
Cincinnati 1441
LA Angels 1437.1
Chicago Sox 1437
Pittsburgh 1434
Toronto 1433.2
Kansas City 1432
Baltimore 1431
Texas 1431
Detroit 1425.1
IP
Amer. Lea. 1444
Nat. Lea.1455
Baseball 1449

Even at 1400 innings the maths shows it is not sustainable for the bullpen production. Find a team that had 6 relieverspitching360 inningsmuch less 440. Theory versus what has been done.