Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account
  • entries
    13
  • comments
    64
  • views
    31,268

My Pitching Profiling, Part 2- What's an ace?/ SP profiling


Doctor Gast

1,559 views

 Share

Twins Video

What qualifies to be an ace? How to profile SPs? I'd like to give you my take.

As was previously stated in part 1, a SP is a pitcher who can regularly give you at least 5 quality innings & sustain that, otherwise is better off in long relief. I'd like to categorize them as 5th, 4th, 3rd, 2nd & top SP, ace and workhorse. I will rate them accordingly by stuff & arm strength. Stuff= quality of pitch, # of quality pitches in his repertroire, command & location. Arm strength that's affected by genetics, conditioning, injury & building off previous year. Stuff & arm strength will dictate how many innings that pitcher is able to pitch and that is how I profile them thus.

A 5th starter that can pitch the minimum 5 quality innings on the avg. When his stuff is on & he's very economical with his pitches he can go 6 innings. when he's off he has trouble going 5. A 4th starter will pitch into the 6th inning with more regularity. A 3rd starter avg. around 6 quality innings, when he's on he can go 7 innings, a 2nd starter pitches more regularly into the 7th inning, a top starter avg. 7 quality innings and when he's on he'll go 8 innings.  An ace is a SP who regularly goes 8 innings, can at times complete a game or pitch a no-hitter. A work horse is a pitcher who has the arm strength that can regularly pitch 7+ innings, his stuff may vary depending how prolific his offense is that supports him.

This season, because of shortened spring training & short vamp up time, I'd have started Ryan, Gray, Bundy & Smeltzer at a 5th starter level. As the season progressed I'd graduate Ryan & Gray to 4th starter, later 3rd starter. I'd have kept Bundy at 5th starter through out the season, Because Smeltzer was the most vamped up SP is why I started him in the rotation as the season progressed, I'd stick him in long relief as long as he remains effective. I agree how they handled Archer as an "opener", later 5th starter. Ober, Winder & Paddack as long relief & spot starter (or in Paddack case "opener")

During the season, IMO a pitcher should pitch inside his profile, then his arm bounces back & he's able to give you quality innings. If he's extended for any period of time, his arm doesn't bounce back & he becomes less effective or becomes injured. This is what has happened for as long as I can remember to the Twins, even if the Twins limp across the finish line into the post season, our pitching is shot which explains our 18 straight PS losses. But if your rotation is weak (weak not as in bad but not giving you the desired quality innings) and poor BP, how do you cover the innings? The answer is long relief, long relief is our strongest pitching profile that should be exploited not ignored.

In 2020, Cash led TB to the World Series. In game 6, Snell was pitching into the 6th inning, leading 1-0 with 1 out and a runner at 1B with Betts coming to bat. Tough situation what do you do? Cash did what he normally does, he yanked Snell. Was it the right decision? It had worked through out the season, but still was it the right decision? The decision didn't work out but was staying w/ Snell would be better? It'd be easy in hind sight say yes  but would the out come be different? Snell is no ace but he was on & pysched, it was Snell last game, he could reach back & give that little extra, the BP is coming into the game cold. There is no way we can know for sure. But under these circumstances, you have to go with your gut not analytics.

 Share

7 Comments


Recommended Comments

A 5th starter that can pitch the minimum 5 quality innings on the avg. ...
 

Your standards are impossibly high in the present game. Only one pitcher, Alcantara, even meets your standard for a 2nd starter, as he's the only one who averaged even 7 innings per start.  The rest-of-the-best in the majors averaged in the 6s.

Link to comment

I pretty much agree with your ranking system. However, in todays game full of "snowflake" pitchers and the way they baby most of these guys, I think your payroll would be unsustainable unless you are the Yankees or Dodgers.

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Karbo said:

I pretty much agree with your ranking system. However, in todays game full of "snowflake" pitchers and the way they baby most of these guys, I think your payroll would be unsustainable unless you are the Yankees or Dodgers.

I have to admit to you guys that I'm out dated and haven't been following any front line pitchers in recent history plus we haven't really had any of them with Twins for awhile. So my profiling should be adjusted a little.

Link to comment
On 10/12/2022 at 12:54 PM, ashbury said:

A 5th starter that can pitch the minimum 5 quality innings on the avg. ...
 

Your standards are impossibly high in the present game. Only one pitcher, Alcantara, even meets your standard for a 2nd starter, as he's the only one who averaged even 7 innings per start.  The rest-of-the-best in the majors averaged in the 6s.

Alcantara is great, never missed a start except the last one they decided to spare him because there was nothing to play for. But still 32 starts / 224 innings pretty remarkable.

I was just wondering how you'd modify my profiling standard? If you like?

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Doctor Gast said:

Alcantara is great, never missed a start except the last one they decided to spare him because there was nothing to play for. But still 32 starts / 224 innings pretty remarkable.

I was just wondering how you'd modify my profiling standard? If you like?

Fair question but I don't really worry about the #1, #2 thing for starting rotation.  I just want good pitchers.

My only concept about the numbering is that there is no such thing as a #5.  That's a temporary spot - for aging players trying to demonstrate they still have value, young players trying to prove they belong in a major league starting rotation, and spot starters who will be DFA right after the game.  Signing someone like Dylan Bundy for several million and justifying it as solidifying the #5 is a waste of money in my book.

Link to comment

I thought Bundy did ok as a number five starter. The trouble is that Archer was their number five starter. But it seems like they could get that production from a younger player for a lot less money. Still I hate the way Rocco mishandles the staff. Imagine Morris, Viola, Santana, Verlander, or any 15-20 game winners being lifted after five innings because the manager doesn’t have confidence they can get three more outs. Who would want to be a starting pitcher for a guy who doesn’t believe in you?

Link to comment
On 10/14/2022 at 11:18 AM, ashbury said:

Fair question but I don't really worry about the #1, #2 thing for starting rotation.  I just want good pitchers.

My only concept about the numbering is that there is no such thing as a #5.  That's a temporary spot - for aging players trying to demonstrate they still have value, young players trying to prove they belong in a major league starting rotation, and spot starters who will be DFA right after the game.  Signing someone like Dylan Bundy for several million and justifying it as solidifying the #5 is a waste of money in my book.

I see your point and that's FO question. My point is the neccessity to profile pitchers (I think # of pitches thrown or times through the order could be more precise but I thought innings could be simpler) and not over extend them to keep them healthier, more effective & hungrier translating into more quality innings throughout the season.

Link to comment
Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...