Posts
13 Relievers (pronounced: closers) and 12 position players.
It's a crazy idea that you've probably thought about, but no team has the guts to try it. Nine closers every night instead of a conventional 5 man rotation with a closer, a setup man or two, a long reliever, a mop-up guy, or whatever combination of the above you're going with now.
The Braves currently carry 12 pitchers and 13 position players, so you do sacrifice one bat off the bench, and for the sake of resting pitchers, you might prefer to go with a 14 reliever, 11 position player active roster, further limiting your utility options, but lets explore this and figure out if it might just be worth the sacrifice.
Let's pretend we committed to this 5 years ago and our elite young relievers we drafted in that time are making their way to the big leagues. You'll recognize some names here, but most you won't. We were able to get these guys because we drafted them higher than other teams because they fit our strategy better than the conventional one.
Based on first-half numbers lets say these are our 13 guys:
1. Aroldis Chapman
2. Ernesto Frieri
3. Kenley Jansen
4. Craig Stammen
5. Tom Wilhelmsen
6. Vinnie Pestano
7. Jason Grilli
8. Josh Roenicke
9. Craig Kimbrel
10. Ryan Cook
11. Pedro Strop
12. Tim Collins
13. Fernando Rodney
Carrying 13 pitchers you will have to use one guy 3 days in a row before he gets rest, but everyone else will get a day off 1 out of 3 days. Carrying 14 pitchers you wouldn't have to use anyone 3 days in a row.
For the most part these are young guys, and therefore inexpensive. You get a lot of innings per dollar here. There is also an expensive veteran thrown in for leadership in Fernando Rodney. I chose him because he is expensive and having a good year. A guy with an attitude like Papelbon could be more beneficial for the leadership role, but Rodney is having a better year right now.
Now, this is a collection of some of the best players so far this year, so I won't compare them to the Braves pitching staff. I'll compare them to the team that has given up the fewest runs this year, the Washington Nationals. (Braves are ranked 12th) The Nats have some elite starters, middle relief, and a closer, so their performance this year is about as good as you can get from a conventional pitching staff.
INNINGS PITCHED:
All-reliever rotation 505.2
Nats pitching staff: 745
This is the biggest issue with this strategy. Few relievers are actually throwing the 112 and 2/3 innings (assuming no extra innings) per year it would take to finish a season with 13 relievers. But, all of these guys do throw every day as part of their conditioning, it's just not always in a game. With the right conditioning, the right personnel, and a deep minor league system, this can be done successfully.
ERA:
All-reliever rotation 1.89 = 157 derived total allowed (1.89 ERA x (745 innings / 9)
Nats pitching staff: 3.19 = 264 total allowed (3.19 ERA x (745 innings / 9)
This is the biggest attraction to the strategy. Assuming you can condition these guys to perform at the same high level while pitching more often, you will give up a lot fewer runs, 1.32 per game in this case. Want to win those 1 run games? Try giving up 1.32 fewer every single game. Relievers always say they'd rather pitch more often than less often anyway, and since we've stockpiled all these young arms, our guys can handle it. This is arguably a big part of Venters' struggles this year. Last year he was everyday Jonny and he was lights out. This year Freddy is trying to save him for September/October, and he sucks.
MONEY:
All-reliever rotation = $9.8M
Nats pitching staff = $34.5M
If ERA is the biggest attraction, this is attraction 1A. This frees up $24.7M to spend on offense.
Here are some examples of what $24.7M can get you on offense in terms of 2012 salaries:
Prince Fielder = $23M
Matt Holliday = $17M
Jose Bautista = $14M
Robinson Cano = $14M
Josh Hamilton = $13.75M
Joey Votto = $9.5M
Ryan Braun = $6M
Carlos Gonazalez = $5M
Andrew McCutchen = $500K (this kid is in for a payday)
The game has been moving in this direction as starters go 5 to 6 innings max and relievers are brought in for matchups between the 6th and 9th innings. This would allow you to play matchups every single inning based on the 3 hitters you know are about to come up against you.
You have to commit to this strategy as an entire organization, from the draft throughout the minors. You draft pitchers with the best stuff, even if they don't have stamina or 4 solid pitches. You're looking for young Mariano Riveras who have one pitch that is so disgusting they can pitch an inning at a time almost every day and no one can hit it. You use the off-season and spring training to condition your pitchers to throw 20 pitches at a time at maximum effort, two days in a row, with a day off after that.
You also have to have a huge pipeline flowing, as you'll see guys like Jonny Venters dominate in 2011 and can't get anybody out in 2012. Good relievers, other than Rivera, are mostly flash in a pan type guys. You also want to let them go when they get to the point in their careers where they're not cheap anymore.
I think within the next 50 years a team will try this, and when they do, they'll win the World Series. Then everyone will adopt the same strategy, and the economic advantage will disappear. That's why I say we all pool our money, buy the Braves, and be the first movers on this. Who's with me?
The idea is practical and seems like a good one being able to pitch matchups/keep hitters off balance with new pitchers every 1-2 innings. You essentially avoid any unfavorable matchups throughout the game. The trick is you'd have to have a complete organizational change to make this possible. I'm not sure MLBPA would go for this either because it would drive down pitchers' salaries since a great starters makes significantly more than a great reliever.
ReplyDeleteLet's start small: have a specialist start the game. Baseball stats require the starting pitcher to go 5 innings, which leads us to this "starting pitchers go 5 to 6 innings" thing. It's all about that W for the starting pitcher. What if you had Eric O'Flaherty pitch the first inning against a batting order top heavy with lefties (i.e. Cleveland)? You have him pitch an inning and change, then take him out when he's out of gas. Bring in your starer (i.e. Tommy Hanson) to pitch through the 7th or 8th and close it down with Kimbrel? It offers a way to maximize your matchups and throw off the rhythm of the other's teams batters. Think of it as the pitching equivalent of batting Constanza in the 9 hole.
ReplyDeleteI like that too. Maybe the first step in the evolution.
ReplyDeleteIt would be interesting to see how the statisticians would award the W in a perfect game thrown by 9 different pitchers.
I think wins as a stat is irrelevant. For instance, take two guys: Felix Hernandez and Justin Verlander. I'm not arguing who is a better pitcher, but I'm stating the fact that JV's offense is much better which leads to more wins. It's practically a worthless stat, especially when it comes to deciding whether a pitcher should be HOF-worthy. I think in the end, if baseball moved towards this, the W would fade away and wins would not be assigned to pitchers anymore.
ReplyDeleteAny advantage you garner in match-ups and avoiding second and third time through the order situation is mitigated by a short bench. You can't carry 11 position players, because you'd essentially have to have a backup catcher and a shortstop who can also play center field as your uber utility guy, and as much as he sucks, players with Emilio Bonifacio's versatility don't grow on trees. So you're looking at 12 position players minimum. Now you have multiple relievers throwing 3 days in a row which is far from ideal. You're then looking at three players who are, in all likelihood, light hitting position players since you need a backup catcher, an IF who can cover SS, and an OF who can cover CF. So you've limited yourself to terrible options at the plate in the late innings, and limited options at that, plus you've begun to erode the effectiveness of the pen by stacking days.
ReplyDelete