Odorizzi - 75 pitches and done.

[jorgenswest]

One split that stands out for Odorizzi in his splits is breaking down pitches 1-25, 26-50, ...

 

Last year matched his career numbers. He has solid splits for his career in the first three groups but there is a large drop off in the 76-100 set. This isn’t typical for a starter. Often the first 25 are the most difficult as they rarely occur against batters at the bottom of the order. It might not be that hitters are gaining an advantage the third look but rather his ability to perform drops off.

 

None of the current typical pitching roles fit a pitcher who is effective through abough 75 pitches or 4-5 innings. Starters stretch out towards 100, closers might max at 25 and other relievers maybe 40.

 

Are there other pitchers that would fall in the 50-75 pitch bucket? Is there a way to use them effectively on a pitching staff? Would a manager be willing to pull Odorizzi after 4 good innings and 70 pitches like they would pull a reliever after 2 good innings?

 

I think they can get a very solid 130 innings from Odorizzi if they pull him as he approaches 75. I am not starting a new inning with him after 65 pitches. How might this fit in the structure of a staff?

[Ben Noble]

I'd try stacking him with Mejia; let the right-handed Odorizzi throw the first 60-80 pitches and have lefty Mejia start the first clean inning after that. Or maybe vice versa, depending on opponent's L/R lineup construction.

[rdehring]

 

I'd try stacking him with Mejia; let the right-handed Odorizzi throw the first 60-80 pitches and have lefty Mejia start the first clean inning after that. Or maybe vice versa, depending on opponent's L/R lineup construction.

Have talked about this before.  I prefer to have Mejia as the fifth starter.  Because he also does best in 4-5 innings, I would stack him with Romero, who would come on and finish the game.  The hard throwing right handed Romero following a softer tossing lefty makes a lot of sense to me.  But what the H.. do I know about pitching.

[nicksaviking]

I'd like to see Odorizzi get a look as a new-age long-man in the pen. The kind that go in and try to shut it down for three innings, not the old blow-out mop-up guy.

 

But I agree, he shouldn't ever go back out for the 6th; the 5th might be pushing it. I'm interested in any new ideas though.

 

Pulling a young pitcher with no signs of distress after four or five innings never seemed to be an issue for Molitor or Gardenhire. That should probably have been the case with vets if they had splits like this as well.

[oregontwin]

I had the same thoughts watching him last year, but I don't know how you sell the idea to a veteran like Odorizzi. Maybe sell him instead and go with one of the younger guys who has already accepted the idea. Both Stewart and Gonsalves seemed to thrive with that arrangement.

[mikelink45]

Instead of the discussion on Romero going to the pen, Odorizzi is the real candidate.  

[diehardtwinsfan]

I'd be willing to bet most starters see a drop off at 76-100 pitches. Not sure if his are worse per se, but he was slightly below league average for a starter last season, so at that point, the opener strategy really does sound like the best option...

 

Now that said, he really turned it around towards the end of last season. I'd be curious to see if those changes were something he can sustain this year.

[nicksaviking]

 

I'd be willing to bet most starters see a drop off at 76-100 pitches. Not sure if his are worse per se, but he was slightly below league average for a starter last season, so at that point, the opener strategy really does sound like the best option...

 

Now that said, he really turned it around towards the end of last season. I'd be curious to see if those changes were something he can sustain this year.

 

He seemed pretty brutal most of the year when he'd go back out after five, more so than most pitchers I've watched. His game logs look like he did a bit better toward the end of the year, but by then everyone had turned off their TVs so I don't think those numbers count.

[IndianaTwin]

I've been on the pull-him-after-5 bandwagon, but I do see that the dropoff on the third time through the order or on pitches 76+ was MUCH more severe last year than his previous years. 

[Brandon]

Can we look at different pitch counts like 0-10 11-20 21-30.....This will let us see where the breakdown is occurring. He could be good for 70, 80 or 85 pitches before his pitching deteriorates. Its harder to pinpoint at 25 pitches per grouping.

[sweetmusicviola16]

I recall seeing that his career long outing is 7.1 IP. Yeah he's not good beyond 5.0. Good reasons why you don't extend this guy. He also emphasizes our need for a better pen when he is holding down a spot in the rotation. He's a 4-5 SP.

[Riverbrian]

Great Topic. This is what I’ve been talking about.

For decades... Everyone has to fit in a box. Starters throw 100 pitches... relievers throw 25.

Smash that box. Relievers can throw more than 1 inning and starters can throw less than 5. There is no reason to force something that isn’t working just to remain in an old box.

And we don’t have to create a new box to lock pitchers into either. Such as stacking Odorizzi and Mejia together.

Get 13 pitchers and give the ball to your best performers more often.

If Odorizzi has a 75 pitch shelf life and it’s been consistent. Why would you keep trying to get 25 more pitches out of him.

The only reason you would do that is because of the decades old box that requires a starter to go 100 and relievers go 25.

You want a new plan to incorporate what Jorganswest is smartly suggesting. You can start by removing the Starter and reliever labels. Just call them pitchers and simply smash the box.

A 5 man starting rotation. That’s for teams who have 5 guys to rotate and that’s like a 3 teams.

[jorgenswest]

The splits through 75 for his career all show an OPS below 700. After 75 and it is almost 900. Last year was very similar though I am not sure if the splits have enough sample to tell a different story than the career numbers.

 

I don’t think this indicates a reliever use. They don’t know how he would handle pitching on consecutive days.

 

It might indicate value in an opener role once a series or perhaps stacked with another pitcher.

 

He might be a source of around 100-130 good innings. Is it worth configuring the staff to get those innings?

[Riverbrian]

The splits through 75 for his career all show an OPS below 700. After 75 and it is almost 900. Last year was very similar though I am not sure if the splits have enough sample to tell a different story than the career numbers.

 

I don’t think this indicates a reliever use. They don’t know how he would handle pitching on consecutive days.

 

It might indicate value in an opener role once a series or perhaps stacked with another pitcher.

 

He might be a source of around 100-130 good innings. Is it worth configuring the staff to get those innings?

If you have a guy who is good for 75 and not good after that and you knew that.

 

Why wouldn’t you take the 75 good. The only reason you wouldn’t is if you cling to 100 or nothing.

 

Yes you reconfigure your staff. Reconfigure it all.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

The splits through 75 for his career all show an OPS below 700. After 75 and it is almost 900. Last year was very similar though I am not sure if the splits have enough sample to tell a different story than the career numbers.

 

I don’t think this indicates a reliever use. They don’t know how he would handle pitching on consecutive days.

 

It might indicate value in an opener role once a series or perhaps stacked with another pitcher.

 

He might be a source of around 100-130 good innings. Is it worth configuring the staff to get those innings?

The alternative to reconfiguring your staff to get the most quality innings with what you got, is get a new staff. It’s not just Odorizzi. Gibson and Berrios are the only two pitchers on the staff that have a shot at 190 innings in 2019.

 

So do you supplement, or blow it up?

 

Blowing it up is a long horizon. I’m with RB, forget the label, just find a way to get 1500 effective innings pitched. I’m on the supplement side of the fence.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Great observations. I am slowly warming to the idea of "stacking" much more than "openers" (if by "stacking" we mean two pitchers who throw 3-4-5 innings before turning it over to the traditional bullpen guys).

 

I still like the idea of starters like Berrios who you expect or hope will pitch deep into the game, every time. And the more of those you have, the better. Not sure that's ever going away. But in Odorizzi's case we see that 75 or so pitches is almost always as far as he can go, so maybe you don't let him start an inning after 65 pitches, regardless. I'm on board with that. I do like how Odorizzi pitches high in the strike zone. Will be interesting to see how it plays out knowing this information. With the emphasis on data nowadays, and so much happening in the dugout as always, I'm not even sure Baldelli will be making the final call in certain cases like this (what inning to lift a guy like Odorizzi).

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

I was just thinking of something else too. Sometimes your starter (stacker) will need to be relieved mid-inning, and I really like how Molitor brought in Rodney in the 5th inning in a game last summer, it was by necessity, but still. We might finally see more stuff like that this year.

 

Good for the team, but bad for the guy who wants to rack up Saves and hit a contract in free agency. But, good for the team.

[jorgenswest]

Would stacking drive a need for a larger staff?

 

If it is the same two then they are both unavailable on other days. You could look at it as a way to give your own a regular breather and count on 8 from Mejia and Odorizzi. I don’t think that would happen though. I think you would get to the 7th inning and be really tempted to play matchups late in a close game.

 

The opener strategy wouldn’t commit two pitchers. The opener goes two and the Odorizzi is in for 4 or maybe 5. The opener is available in the pen with a day of rest and it can be a different opener for his next “start” depending on match up.

 

I am not sold on either but I am intrigued how to better utilize pitchers that can be effective 3-5 innings.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

Would stacking drive a need for a larger staff?

 

If it is the same two then they are both unavailable on other days. You could look at it as a way to give your own a regular breather and count on 8 from Mejia and Odorizzi. I don’t think that would happen though. I think you would get to the 7th inning and be really tempted to play matchups late in a close game.

 

The opener strategy wouldn’t commit two pitchers. The opener goes two and the Odorizzi is in for 4 or maybe 5. The opener is available in the pen with a day of rest and it can be a different opener for his next “start” depending on match up.

 

I am not sold on either but I am intrigued how to better utilize pitchers that can be effective 3-5 innings.

if you have two 6-7 inning pitchers Gibson and Berrios and 3, 4-5 inning pitchers, alternate them. #1 starter means nothing

 

A 5 game stretch could look something like this in innings pitched:

 

1) Odorizzi 4-5, Mejia 3-4, May 1-2

2) Gibson 6-7, Romero 1-2, Rogers 1-2

3) Pineda 4-5, Gonsalves 3-4, May 1-2

4) Berrios 6-7, Reed 1-2, Rogers, 1-2

5) Stewart 4-5, Moya .1, Magill 2.2, Hildenberger 1, Romero 1-2

 

Gibson, or Berrios (or any of them) could toss up a clunker and there are still plenty of arms to cover innings if you have 3 guys capable of going 2-4 innings

 

Now need to find improvements on Magill, Stewart, and Gonsalves so Magill can be released and Stewart/Gonsalves can be stashed in AAA

[jorgenswest]

I would like to configure a staff that will be 12 pitchers the majority of the year. Does either stacking or the opener help make that more likely than a traditional configuration?

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Are there other pitchers that would fall in the 50-75 pitch bucket? Is there a way to use them effectively on a pitching staff? Would a manager be willing to pull Odorizzi after 4 good innings and 70 pitches like they would pull a reliever after 2 good innings?

I think you're getting to the point that I'd like to see: a bunch of Odorizzis, Mays, Gonsalves, etc. leaned on to throw 40-80 pitches every 3-4 days. Eliminate the starters except for the best of the bunch (obviously, let those guys throw their 5-8 innings every five days). Outside of those days, lean on a bunch of long-inning guys to go 2-5 innings at a turn and then rest.

 

Ultimately, I think you could actually see fewer pitching changes and smaller pitching staffs as a result.

[Riverbrian]

 

I still like the idea of starters like Berrios who you expect or hope will pitch deep into the game, every time. And the more of those you have, the better. Not sure that's ever going away. 

 

It won't go away. If you have Max Scherzer and he can throw 220 great innings. You will let him throw 220 great innings.

 

But... here's a question... Does Max enter the game in the 1st inning every time?

 

Probably... but I bring that up to point out how robotic baseball has become and this locked in 5 man rotation routine that managers just blindly faithfully execute has led to 4th and 5th spots in that rotation producing 180 plus innings of 6.00 ERA or worse and the managers just keep going like they are trapped on a Ferris Wheel. 

 

You let Scherzer throw 220 innings but you really shouldn't be giving Shields 204 innings. 

 

Get out of the box... get off the Ferris Wheel. 

[Riverbrian]

 

I was just thinking of something else too. Sometimes your starter (stacker) will need to be relieved mid-inning, and I really like how Molitor brought in Rodney in the 5th inning in a game last summer, it was by necessity, but still. We might finally see more stuff like that this year.

Good for the team, but bad for the guy who wants to rack up Saves and hit a contract in free agency. But, good for the team.

 

Resistance to change comes in many forms. Sometimes the resistance is just simple comfort zone resistance that will evolve away over time. 

 

But, what we are talking about here is something that is baked deep into the walls, nooks and crannies. 

 

As long as Dellin Betances loses his Arb case because of USAGE, it will force players to want traditional saves, wins, all those things that the Arbitrators attach dollar signs to. 

 

As long as the press, fans and social media stays around to slap anybody who steps out of the box with something new (like an opener)... it just keeps James Shields on the mound for 200 plus innings... trapped on the Ferris wheel.   

 

 

[Riverbrian]

 

I think you're getting to the point that I'd like to see: a bunch of Odorizzis, Mays, Gonsalves, etc. leaned on to throw 40-80 pitches every 3-4 days. Eliminate the starters except for the best of the bunch (obviously, let those guys throw their 5-8 innings every five days). Outside of those days, lean on a bunch of long-inning guys to go 2-5 innings at a turn and then rest.

 

Ultimately, I think you could actually see fewer pitching changes and smaller pitching staffs as a result.

 

Team context will dictate the answer.

 

In the Twins case... we have extra starters hanging around. So yeah... on paper... you can try to roll with a 12 man pitching staff. 

 

In the Rays case... they had Blake Snell as the only starter for a long stretch. They are going to need 13 pitchers to get through the season.  

 

The Rays context would be more typical for most teams because starters are the hardest thing to find so staffs would naturally evolve to 13. 

 

But Yeah... The Twins... they could try to get it done with 12 because they have Gibson, Odorizzi, Berrios, Pineda, Mejia, Stewart, Gonsalves, Romero and DeJong. 

[rv78]

All the starters will be able to go 8 or 9 innings next year now that the Twins have mashers, Cron, Schoop and Cruz in the lineup. They'll be ahead by 10 runs in the 5th inning and should be able to coast to the 8th or 9th.

[ashbury]

All the starters will be able to go 8 or 9 innings next year now that the Twins have mashers, Cron, Schoop and Cruz in the lineup. They'll be ahead by 10 runs in the 5th inning and should be able to coast to the 8th or 9th.

 

[howieramone2]

 

He seemed pretty brutal most of the year when he'd go back out after five, more so than most pitchers I've watched. His game logs look like he did a bit better toward the end of the year, but by then everyone had turned off their TVs so I don't think those numbers count.

He was slightly below average. A teams 4th and 5th starters are usually below average. There is no need to over analyse this. What Nick missed in his recent article was, for most of 2017, he was bothered by a chronic back issue. He'll be fine next season and has a fair amount of trade value. We took the Rays to the cleaners last season.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

trapped on the Ferris wheel

 

You keep saying that like its a bad thing

 

But you make a good point above. #5 starters deliver terrible numbers, traditionally. But I still see drawbacks to both opener-primary and stacking as a substitute for the #5 starter. If the Twins try something new to replace the #5 starter in 2019 and it doesn’t work out, are you prepared to stick with it in 2020?

[Riverbrian]

 

You keep saying that like its a bad thing

But you make a good point above. #5 starters deliver terrible numbers, traditionally. But I still see drawbacks to both opener-primary and stacking as a substitute for the #5 starter. If the Twins try something new to replace the #5 starter in 2019 and it doesn’t work out, are you prepared to stick with it in 2020?

 

That depends. 

 

How badly does it not work out?

 

Team ERA rise upward? It triggers a Lake Superior Tsunami that levels Duluth?  

[Vanimal46]

Talent still wins out. If the #5 starter isn't MLB caliber, and most have not over the last decade of Twins baseball, they're still going to deliver bad results. With the opener or stacker approach, they'll just provide 80 innings of 6 ERA ball instead of 160 innings of 6 ERA ball.