Here Comes the Injury Bug: Who Can Backfill in the Bullpen?

[bean5302]

Lots of comments about Matt Canterino's long term, repetitive and combinations of arm issues being related to "Rice University." What really happened is Canterino's violent and off balance delivery, which created major forces on his arm, worked okay while he was in his teens, but he started developing problems as he aged.

Canterino did not throw crazy innings at Rice. It's not uncommon to see innings in the 90s at colleges in the US.
Rice University didn't force Canterino to pitch in summer league in 2018.
Rice didn't force him to pitch an extra 25 innings for the Twins in Rookie/A-Ball in 2019. 
Canterino's first arm injury showed up two years after he last pitched at Rice after he had a full year off from competitive pitching (2020).
 

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, bean5302 said:

Yes, fWAR, the single best mainstream statistic which can be used today for relievers. Yes, low leverage relievers exist on every single team in MLB. I thought I just addressed that by showing the Guardians had them. 

The leverage index varies on relievers for teams. They have high/low leverage guys.

FWAR is complete **** for pitchers, particularly relievers.

It purports to measure what someone thinks should have happened.

I mean, come on.

As for "low leverage relievers," get back to me when the 8th guy in the pen is pitching a close game in the 7th. Because that will happen. More than once. 

 

[Doctor Gast]

8 hours ago, Jocko87 said:

Rice University.

Bingo! They screwed up his arm & maybe his mentality of going full bore. He usually land on the IL early. He had looked good in ST.

Not a lot of stock was put on Canterino was able to give the Twins many MLB innings. We dreamed that he could be our secret weapon come post season.

Varland looked even better than I expected. I've advocated for him to be a stable in the MLB BP & not waste his bullets in AAA.

[USAFChief]

5 hours ago, Mark G said:

I know this is not your typical black and white debate with no middle ground, it is entirely each persons opinion, but I have to go with Bean5302 on this one.  To say there is no such thing as a "low leverage reliever" is to say every one of them is a high to mid level reliever, and there simply aren't 240 pitchers on the planet that have that ability, hence the 30 shuttle busses to and from AAA using options on the border line 8th through 11th or 12th guys in your system.  The same goes for starters; there simply are not 150 guys around that you would call #1 through 3 starters.  Your 4th and 5th starters are not on the same level as the top 3.  Nor are your 6th, 7th, and 8th pen guys.  High leverage and low leverage are just slang terms for level of ability, but there are both levels on every team.  

Sure, with extra inning games and games that are tied or very tight throughout the entire game, each reliever is going to see a tense inning now and then throughout the year.  But when 45% of your games are decided by 4 runs or more, win or lose, your bottom end of the pen eats those innings predominately, not your top end guys, again, using the shuttle busses along the way.  It may be just a matter of semantics, but there are high leverage and low leverage, top end and bottom end, etc., relievers; just because they all see the same situations at some point is only a matter of necessity, not a matter of ability.  

It is a great debate.  Somehow I have a hunch I didn't change your mind, though, did I?  😉

You're confusing usage for ability. Ability isn't the point. Nobody wants their 8th best reliever pitching when it matters, but that doesn't mean they won't. Less often than your best relievers, sure. But not exclusively in mopup time, either. 

Same for starters. Your 5th best starter gets the ball every 5th day, score tied 0-0. His starts are every bit as important as your best starter's. Those games count the same in the W/L column. 

[DJL44]

13 hours ago, jorgenswest said:

If the plan is to exclusively use Castellano in low leverage they should return him now. There are no low leverage roles for a competing team.

There really aren’t long reliever roles either unless that player has an option so that they can be sent to AAA after an outing that will make them unavailable the next 2-3 games.

Castellano needs to show enough that he can be trusted on the occasions he is needed in higher leverage. If he isn’t ready they need to send him back. A competing team can’t devote a spot on the 26 to a player not ready to compete at the major league level.

Isn't ready when? If they think he can contribute by May then they should keep him. I think they should at least give him a shot to sink or swim before they decide to return him.

10 hours ago, bean5302 said:

Johan Santana wasn't worth a roster spot when the Twins took him in. Worked out okay for the Twins as I recall.

Exactly. Castellano is a long-term play who might be a bullpen contributor in June even if he struggles a little in April. People here keep hammering the front office for not trusting the talent of the rookies. Here is one instance where they're making a bet on the talent of a rookie and posters want to ship him back to the Phillies if he isn't a proven closer by the end of spring training.

10 hours ago, arby58 said:

The headliners are Duran, Jax, Sands

How has Sands looked this spring? His numbers are awful.

[Major League Ready]

31 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

Lots of comments about Matt Canterino's long term, repetitive and combinations of arm issues being related to "Rice University." What really happened is Canterino's violent and off balance delivery, which created major forces on his arm, worked okay while he was in his teens, but he started developing problems as he aged.

Canterino did not throw crazy innings at Rice. It's not uncommon to see innings in the 90s at colleges in the US.
Rice University didn't force Canterino to pitch in summer league in 2018.
Rice didn't force him to pitch an extra 25 innings for the Twins in Rookie/A-Ball in 2019. 
Canterino's first arm injury showed up two years after he last pitched at Rice after he had a full year off from competitive pitching (2020).
 

IDK about the impact of innings pitched.  However, from the first time I saw his violent pitching motion, I thought he looked like an injury waiting to happen.

[USAFChief]

11 hours ago, bean5302 said:

 

Games decided by x number of runs for the Twins in 2024
4+ = 73 games <--- this is where low leverage relievers get their innings
3 = 20 games <--- maybe here, too
2 = 27 games
1 = 42 games

There are absolutely going to be mediocre to questionably MLB worthy relievers who take the mound for the Twins (and every single other team in MLB) this year. Here are the names of the relievers who generated 0.0 or less WAR for Minnesota by innings pitched. There will be a plan to use several of their relievers exclusively in low leverage situations. That's standard MLB practice. It's also unavoidable relievers sometimes get used in situations you'd rather not deploy them if possible.

Steven Okert - 35 innings
Kody Funderburk - 34 innings
Jay Jackson - 26 innings
Louie Varland - 17 innings
Trevor Richards - 13 innings
Diego Castillo - 10 innings
7 other nameless relievers under 10 innings.

The very best bullpen in all of baseball last year, the Guardians, sent out Scott Barlow and Nick Sandlin to pitch 130 times for a total of 111.2 innings. Barlow produced 0.0 fWAR with a 4.25 ERA and a 4.02 FIP while Sandlin's 0.0 fWAR came with a very lucky 3.81 ERA despite the 5.23 FIP. 

Everybody understands the concept of not keeping a pitcher who isn't of MLB caliber or potential. Johan Santana wasn't worth a roster spot when the Twins took him in. Worked out okay for the Twins as I recall.

Let's just take Steven Okert as an example. 

One of your  "low leverage" reliever examples. He's unimportant, because he only pitches when it doesn't matter. I used him because he's your first example listed.

Below are his game logs from April and May last season. A few highlights from Just two months:

5 blown saves (he entered with a lead and gave it up), all of which ended up as Twins losses. 

3 holds ( 2 in 1 run wins and 1 in a 2 run win).

1 save (finished a 3-2 win.)

1 Win (in a 3-2 game, BTW.)

That's in just the 1st 2 months of last season. 10 usages that directly influenced winning or losing games. 

Now tell us again Okert only pitched when it didn't matter.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=okertst01&t=p&year=2024

 

Scott Barlow you say?

April 2024: 7 holds, 2 Wins, 2 losses, a save and a blown save.

Just in one month..

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=barlosc01&t=p&year=2024

I'm too lazy to do more, but I assure you, EVERY pitcher whonspent much time in a big league bullpen last year had multiple opportunities in games where their performance mattered. 

[Fire Dan Gladden]

BP injuries are part of the game.  It is a good thing we have <insert pitchers name here> to step in and fill that role.  The coaching staff knew that <insert pitchers name here> would be ready to step up and that the staff would not lose a step.  Rocco expects that <insert pitchers name here> will be able to handle high leverage situations and be a boon for this team.  Everyone be ready for great things from <insert pitchers name here>.

[Riverbrian]

6 hours ago, Mark G said:

But when 45% of your games are decided by 4 runs or more, win or lose, your bottom end of the pen eats those innings predominately, not your top end guys

45% of the games might be decided by 4 runs or more. That's the final result of games.

What is the percentage of those 45% of games... that are actually 4 runs or more when the starting pitcher is removed and the bullpen activated? 

Once you find that percentage... the next question would be this:

When the starting pitcher is yanked from the game in the 2nd inning down 5 to 1.. Is the game over? You still need that guy who many are placing the low level tag on to post zero's on the scoreboard so the offense has a chance to come back. 

The Guardians had the best bullpen in baseball last year. Scott Barlow was probably the worst performer in that bullpen. He was 6th in appearances with 63. The only member of the bullpen with an ERA over 4.00 at 4.25. Last in WHIP with a 1.36.

33 of those 63 appearances by Barlow were considered high leverage by baseball ref. 

If Barlow produced those same numbers with the Twins last year. He would have been 2nd in appearances. 5th best ERA. 5th in WHIP. Cleveland didn't have anyone performing like Thielbar, Okert or Jackson last year.

You can build a bullpen with talent from top to bottom and in order to do that... it starts by not thinking you can roster a guy that you don't want to use when it matters.    

[Riverbrian]

4 hours ago, DJL44 said:

Isn't ready when? If they think he can contribute by May then they should keep him. I think they should at least give him a shot to sink or swim before they decide to return him.

I don't believe that Jorgenswest is saying he shouldn't get a chance. 

I think he is saying that if the thought is that he is just going to get game action when the score is 8 to 0... that's not what will happen... So just return him. 

Personally... I'm OK with him getting a shot... I'm even Ok living with some consequences that may come with getting that shot. If they believe he's a future Ryan Pressly. Give him a job and let's start down that path.

But... I agree with Jorgenswest.  If they think they can shelter him and burn a roster spot to avoid the potential consequences of his utilization... Sheltering him is just going to put more stress on the other members of the bullpen... just return him. 

[bean5302]

1 hour ago, USAFChief said:

FWAR is complete **** for pitchers, particularly relievers.

It purports to measure what someone thinks should have happened...

 

Yes, it tells you what would probably, usually, have happened. So when 10 soft liners that would be caught 90% of the time drop in for a hit because Manny Margot is playing CF and 10 runs score as a result, FIP says that shouldn't have happened. Maybe only 5 runs should have scored according to FIP, and the pitcher shouldn't be judged on the fact Rocco Baldelli and Derek Falvey don't value defense. I like xFIP much more for relievers, myself, because an unlucky home run can wreck FIP (and ERA), but there are relievers who are just homer prone (Emilio Pagan). Just because fWAR isn't perfect doesn't mean it's not fair.

Again, there are low leverage relievers and you can see a massive difference between reliever leverage indexes when they enter games. It's just a fact some relievers get used in high leverage situations on a regular basis where some relievers rarely see that scenario. Just like a screwdriver might be used as a prybar sometimes. Not "intended," but it happens. A low leverage, mop up reliever is still expected to be an MLB caliber pitcher (Michael Tonkin type). They're just not an elite arm. Nobody is advocating for an 8.00 ERA/FIP/xFIP/SIERA/xERA guy in the bullpen just because, and no team in baseball has a bullpen full of all elite arms.

If you're evaluating relief pitchers on wins and losses, there's nothing more for us to debate.

[karcherd]

Why are we counting on Topa and Stewart.  Topa has had one good season, is 34 and has only pitched over 40 innings once.  Stewart has never pitched over 34 innings in his career.  To build a bullpen with them as cornerstones is not good management.  Use them when available, but take what you can get, which will be minimal based on history.

 

[USAFChief]

16 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

If you're evaluating relief pitchers on wins and losses, there's nothing more for us to debate.

If a reliever is charged with a Loss, he by definition pitched in a high leverage situation,  no? Same for a save? A blown save?

Which is what we are discussing: leverage.

Not fWAR. Which, BTW, is complete ****. But unrelated to our discussion. FWAR could be the greatest indication of effectiveness ever, but tells us nothing about whether or not Steven Okert is a "low leverage reliever."

Or whether Castellano will be.

He won't. Because there are no such animals. 

[NYCTK]

2 hours ago, USAFChief said:

FWAR is complete **** for pitchers, particularly relievers.

It purports to measure what someone thinks should have happened.

I mean, come on.

As for "low leverage relievers," get back to me when the 8th guy in the pen is pitching a close game in the 7th. Because that will happen. More than once. 

 

The thing with relievers is they're hard to evaluate due to the fact that the always pitch in small samples. FIP is far more indicative than ERA, and fWAR is derived from FIP as you know. MLB relievers don't hardly even look at their own ERA, they know it's basically worthless. They also don't really look at W-L. Saves and Holds, sure, but cause they know those mean money, not necessarily because they're measures of skill. 

WHIP, (x)FIP, WPA (w/LI). Everything else is noise.  

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, NYCTK said:

The thing with relievers is they're hard to evaluate due to the fact that the always pitch in small samples. FIP is far more indicative than ERA, and fWAR is derived from FIP as you know. MLB relievers don't hardly even look at their own ERA, they know it's basically worthless. They also don't really look at W-L. Saves and Holds, sure, but cause they know those mean money, not necessarily because they're measures of skill. 

WHIP, (x)FIP, WPA (w/LI). Everything else is noise.  

I disagree with most of this, but that's beside the point.

What does any of the above have to do with the question of whether or not Castellano will be a "low leverage reliever?"

That's the discussion point.

 

 

[gman]

I think the truly low leverage pitchers this year will be Castro and Vazguez. Maybe a surprise guest appearance comes in. Castellano is just a rookie who is not primed for any particular role so mostly relief of mutiple innings.

[Mark G]

3 hours ago, USAFChief said:

You're confusing usage for ability. Ability isn't the point. Nobody wants their 8th best reliever pitching when it matters, but that doesn't mean they won't. Less often than your best relievers, sure. But not exclusively in mopup time, either. 

Same for starters. Your 5th best starter gets the ball every 5th day, score tied 0-0. His starts are every bit as important as your best starter's. Those games count the same in the W/L column. 

Oh contraire, my well intentioned friend, I am "confusing" nothing.  I am differentiating "high leverage" pitchers in general, from "low leverage" pitchers.  And, yes, there is a difference, regardless of the situations they may find themselves in as the season goes along.  Your TWELFTH man, from AAA, might find themselves on a MLB mound in an extra inning game where there is really no one else to turn to......does that make him anything other than a "low leverage" reliever?  

Again, if there is no such thing as a "low leverage" reliever, then they are ALL high or mid level.  And that is just not reality.  I am not debating the fact that all relievers come into games in all types of situations, I am simply agreeing that there are differences in levels of ability which separates "low level relievers" from the better ones.  If that is a distinction of debate, then.........I guess I better not debate it.  I guess it is, again, just a matter of opinion.  

And, a quick aside, yes the 5th best starter will pitch almost as many games as your best starter, but how many innings in each start will each pitcher pitch?  A quick check of innings pitched in the season stats will probably be the answer.  Again, just one mans opinion.  No better or worse than yours.  😌

I always appreciate the give and take.  

[Fatbat]

Anyone who thinks Castellano will just be “stashed” and only get low leverage innings doesn’t understand how MLB works. He got picked in rule 5 because he has great potential to be a long term asset and he was essentially stolen from Philly.  
He wont be given back due to anything he does in spring training, he will be given back only if he fails at his job in the regular season.  His job is to get MLB batters out.  He doesn’t have to be an allstar, he just needs to not fail and continue to show improvement as he develops with experience.  He is here. Get used to seeing him on the mound whenever Rocco believes he will be successful at his job. 

[Linus]

4 hours ago, Riverbrian said:

45% of the games might be decided by 4 runs or more. That's the final result of games.

What is the percentage of those 45% of games... that are actually 4 runs or more when the starting pitcher is removed and the bullpen activated? 

Once you find that percentage... the next question would be this:

When the starting pitcher is yanked from the game in the 2nd inning down 5 to 1.. Is the game over? You still need that guy who many are placing the low level tag on to post zero's on the scoreboard so the offense has a chance to come back. 

The Guardians had the best bullpen in baseball last year. Scott Barlow was probably the worst performer in that bullpen. He was 6th in appearances with 63. The only member of the bullpen with an ERA over 4.00 at 4.25. Last in WHIP with a 1.36.

33 of those 63 appearances by Barlow were considered high leverage by baseball ref. 

If Barlow produced those same numbers with the Twins last year. He would have been 2nd in appearances. 5th best ERA. 5th in WHIP. Cleveland didn't have anyone performing like Thielbar, Okert or Jackson last year.

You can build a bullpen with talent from top to bottom and in order to do that... it starts by not thinking you can roster a guy that you don't want to use when it matters.    

This.  The final score comparison doesn’t matter because they could could be pitching in a one run run or tie game but the final score ends up with a four run differential.  Plus if you play lots of close games which the Twins did last year you go through your pen more quickly and everyone gets used regardless of score.

[DJL44]

2 hours ago, NYCTK said:

WHIP, (x)FIP, WPA (w/LI). Everything else is noise.  

WPA is also noise for relievers. It only measures when the manager brought them into the game.

Even WHIP, K/9, and HR/9 take a while to stabilize. Stuff+ might be better than using xFIP.

[NYCTK]

1 hour ago, USAFChief said:

I disagree with most of this, but that's beside the point.

What does any of the above have to do with the question of whether or not Castellano will be a "low leverage reliever?"

That's the discussion point.

 

 

A well managed bullpen can absolutely have a low leverage guy or two. But I think you and I are in agreement that the Twins are not well managed, particularly in the bullpen decisions. 

[NYCTK]

14 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

WPA is also noise for relievers. It only measures when the manager brought them into the game.

Even WHIP, K/9, and HR/9 take a while to stabilize. Stuff+ might be better than using xFIP.

bah, stuff+ is just that. I don't care about your stuff if you don't know how to pitch. 

[bean5302]

It seems like the sticking point is a low leverage reliever who rounds out a bullpen could technically, rarely, be asked to pitch in a tight game or outside of an arbitrary definition of a purely low leverage situation. Therefore, there is no such thing as a low leverage reliever.

There are no left handed specialist pitchers in a bullpen because they will be asked to pitch against right handed pitchers. There are no starters because they might be asked to pitch in relief. There are no bench players because they might be asked to start a few games a year. Jhoan Duran isn't a high leverage reliever because he might be asked to pitch in a lower leverage game. He's also not a closer and Jax isn't a set up guy because sometimes they pitch outside those roles. Carlos Correa isn't a shortstop because he was asked to DH in 1 game last year. J.D. Martinez isn't a DH because a team might have him play a game in the outfield.

The argument roles don't exist because a person might be asked to do something outside of their primary role during their employment isn't realistic. Not on a baseball field or in any other job role for which I'm familiar.

[NYCTK]

2 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

There are no bench players because they might be asked to start a few games a year.

I've run into this criticism. I both understand that the catcher duty is fairly evenly split on the Twins, but also recognize that Jeffers is the "starter" and Vazquez is the "backup". Similarly, just because Bader is the 4th OF doesn't mean he'll never start in LF obviously, nor that he might even, at the end of the year, have the most games in the OF. Much like Margot did last season. That doesn't mean he isn't the 4th OF. 

All pedantry. 

[jorgenswest]

2 hours ago, bean5302 said:

It seems like the sticking point is a low leverage reliever who rounds out a bullpen could technically, rarely, be asked to pitch in a tight game or outside of an arbitrary definition of a purely low leverage situation. Therefore, there is no such thing as a low leverage reliever.

There are no left handed specialist pitchers in a bullpen because they will be asked to pitch against right handed pitchers. There are no starters because they might be asked to pitch in relief. There are no bench players because they might be asked to start a few games a year. Jhoan Duran isn't a high leverage reliever because he might be asked to pitch in a lower leverage game. He's also not a closer and Jax isn't a set up guy because sometimes they pitch outside those roles. Carlos Correa isn't a shortstop because he was asked to DH in 1 game last year. J.D. Martinez isn't a DH because a team might have him play a game in the outfield.

The argument roles don't exist because a person might be asked to do something outside of their primary role during their employment isn't realistic. Not on a baseball field or in any other job role for which I'm familiar.

Low leverage specialists shouldn’t be a role on a team like a left handed specialist or a shortstop.

I think it is very difficult for a player without options to be hidden from significant use in medium and high leverage games. 

I looked at the 6 division winners and looked for their reliever with the most low leverage batters faced. I wondered how many games they saw in medium or high leverage. I will report them separately since it is possible that they saw both leverages in the same game. 

Quote

 

Yankees - Michael Tonkin (18 high leverage, 20 medium leverage)

His data are his 2024 totals. He was DFA’d four times during the season.

Guardians - Pedro Avila (10/18)

His data also reflects time with Padres before he was DFA’d. He was an effective reliever with the Guardians.

Astros - Tayler Scott (22/28)

He was a 32 year old minor league free agent that was very effective.

Dodgers - Michael Grove (18/21)

He was optioned three times during the season shuttling between the majors and AAA.

Brewers - Hoby Milner (20/31)

The Brewers used 36 pitchers last year and the back of the bullpen was in constant flux. Their low leverage leader was an aggregate of many. Milner was the lefty specialist and like Thielbar led his team in relief low leverage batters faced. It was an ineffective season for him and I suspect that he pitched himself into some of those low leverage plate appearances like Thielbar did. I should add Bryce Wilson (17/23) who had 9 starts so I could not parse his relief data.

Phillies - Jose Ruiz (11/20)

Like Scott he was a minor league free agent. He didn’t start the year with the team but was needed in May, He pitched well enough to stay with the team.

 

Competing teams need flexibility in the bullpen. Teams need to be willing to lose that 8th pitcher by DFA (Tonkin, Avila, Scott, Ruiz, Brewers) or put him on the option shuttle (Grove).

That brings me back to my statement that a low leverage relief role doesn’t exist. The last spot in the bullpen of a competing team needs the flexibility that Castellano can’t provide. If he is effective he will be the 6th or 7th man in the pen. If he is not effective the Twins must return him to the Phillies. They can’t use a bullpen spot to develop a pitcher that isn’t ready for the major leagues. He needs to be ready now.

[stringer bell]

I mostly agree with the idea that a reliever is very hard to  hide in the bullpen in today's game. However, in 2023 Cole Sands was almost completely a low-leverage relief pitcher. In the entire season, he pitched in one high-leverage situation--faced three batters, struck out one, walked one and yielded a homer. He pitched one inning of medium leverage (scoreless inning) and the rest of his appearances were low leverage. Sands was optioned twice and went on the IL once, but spent a large majority of the season active on the major league team. 

It might take some roster manipulation and it would require a starting staff that is among the the league leaders in innings pitched (as in 2023), but it is possible to pretty much protect someone if they really want to keep Castellano. 

If they decide to keep the Rule V guy, I would hope that he is closer to a finished product than Johan was. Rule V is a unique situation for players. The teams are better at protecting prospects from being claimed and the game has changed so that it is harder to carry someone for an entire year if they aren't ready to help a club. Teams not trying to contend have a lot more latitude, of course. 

[ashbury]

7 hours ago, NYCTK said:

All pedantry. 

Came across to me more as RandBalls Stu style of satire.  Exaggeration to make a point.

Not that satire can't be pedantic, I suppose.

[bean5302]

14 hours ago, jorgenswest said:

Low leverage specialists shouldn’t be a role on a team like a left handed specialist or a shortstop.

I think it is very difficult for a player without options to be hidden from significant use in medium and high leverage games. 

I looked at the 6 division winners and looked for their reliever with the most low leverage batters faced. I wondered how many games they saw in medium or high leverage. I will report them separately since it is possible that they saw both leverages in the same game. 

Competing teams need flexibility in the bullpen. Teams need to be willing to lose that 8th pitcher by DFA (Tonkin, Avila, Scott, Ruiz, Brewers) or put him on the option shuttle (Grove).

That brings me back to my statement that a low leverage relief role doesn’t exist. The last spot in the bullpen of a competing team needs the flexibility that Castellano can’t provide. If he is effective he will be the 6th or 7th man in the pen. If he is not effective the Twins must return him to the Phillies. They can’t use a bullpen spot to develop a pitcher that isn’t ready for the major leagues. He needs to be ready now.

So now the sticking point is the term "low-leverage reliever" you just don't like. Okay.

"Reliever who isn't expected to be as good as the best guys in the bullpen so you don't use them in critical situations when you can avoid it." Seems like a long role name, but if it makes you happier... Every single team. All. of. them. Have relievers they prefer entering games in non-critical situations because they're not as reliable or dominant as the best arms in their bullpen. There is no ground for debating this. It is established fact with literally thousands of examples over recent seasons and that is what a "low-leverage reliever" is.

Depending on what happens during the reliever being on the mound, leverage indexes change for every single reliever in the game so that information is not valuable.

As far as Castellano's versatility the Twins have plenty of versatility with him. It's called letting him go back to the Phillies if he's not good enough. They can ditch Castellano any time they want. They could also arrange a trade for him, but expect the cost to be similar to a guy like Andrew Morris or another top 10 prospect. You're taking an extremely rigid position here. 

[jorgenswest]

19 hours ago, bean5302 said:

It seems like the sticking point is a low leverage reliever who rounds out a bullpen could technically, rarely, be asked to pitch in a tight game or outside of an arbitrary definition of a purely low leverage situation. Therefore, there is no such thing as a low leverage reliever.

There are no left handed specialist pitchers in a bullpen because they will be asked to pitch against right handed pitchers. There are no starters because they might be asked to pitch in relief. There are no bench players because they might be asked to start a few games a year. Jhoan Duran isn't a high leverage reliever because he might be asked to pitch in a lower leverage game. He's also not a closer and Jax isn't a set up guy because sometimes they pitch outside those roles. Carlos Correa isn't a shortstop because he was asked to DH in 1 game last year. J.D. Martinez isn't a DH because a team might have him play a game in the outfield.

The argument roles don't exist because a person might be asked to do something outside of their primary role during their employment isn't realistic. Not on a baseball field or in any other job role for which I'm familiar.

My position copied from the start of the discussion

Quote

Castellano needs to show enough that he can be trusted on the occasions he is needed in higher leverage. If he isn’t ready they need to send him back. A competing team can’t devote a spot on the 26 to a player not ready to compete at the major league level.

Rigid. I suppose. “Can’t devote a spot” is definitely rigid. We apparently disagree but I always appreciate the debate.

[bean5302]

1 hour ago, jorgenswest said:

My position copied from the start of the discussion

Rigid. I suppose. “Can’t devote a spot” is definitely rigid. We apparently disagree but I always appreciate the debate.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but the rigid structure I'm understanding is:
Castellano isn't good enough to be in the bullpen.
The Twins have no options but to keep him on the roster the entire year if he makes it out of camp.
The Twins must deploy Castellano in scenarios they don't want to use him.
Castellano will therefore result in the Twins losing games they should have won.

My argument would be:
Castellano's peripherals in AA last year were better than any Twins prospect not named Zebby Matthews.
Castellano has multiple potential plus pitches which could make him a potent weapon out of the bullpen (or possibly even the rotation) even out of camp.
The Twins can evaluate Castellano for his current and future value before offering him a roster spot during Spring Training.
The Twins can give Castellano work in reliever work in blowout games to see him in action early in the season before the bullpen gets worn down and they can shuffle #7 bullpen arms back and forth in AAA to keep relievers fresh.
The Twins can work out a trade or send Castellano back to the Phillies if they feel he's not worthy of the 8th spot in an MLB bullpen (or better).

There are many guys in the rotation or bullpen which are suspect where it would be awfully hard for me to argue they're going to increase the winning percentage of the team in a way that elevates the teams status at the end of the season vs. a small sample of Castellano.

Matt Canterino - shoulder strain (serious)
Michael Tonkin - shoulder strain (will miss at least a couple weeks)
Justin Topa - shoulder tightness (testing)
Zebby Matthews - right hip strain (not serious)
and we've got a few weeks to go.

Who do you trust more? Kody Funderburk or Eiberson Castellano and if that's Funderburk, is that by enough to lose a probable #10 org prospect?