I'm not a fan of skipping the fifth starter early in the year due to off days. I think you need to take advantage of the off days for the added rest, and that it will pay off in the long run. But, clearly, no one has grabbed the fifth starter's spot by the horns. So, what would you guys think of this proposal (admittedly, I'm stealing this from someone at BD...don't know whom, but want to give credit where credit is due).
Teams piggy back starters all the time in the minors and in ST. What if Glasnow and Brault piggy-backed? You start the year planning to have TG get through four innings, and then giving way to SB, regardless of whether or not TG is throwing lights out that day. This would limit a team's ability to stack a bunch of lefties against him, as they would know that a lefty is coming in in the fifth inning regardless.
The down side would be that it would shrink your bullpen, since you'd effectively have six starters, but that would seem to be mitigated by the fact that the bullpen should get a rest on Glasnow/Brault days, as well as the next day (Cole).
This idea would give us a pitching staff of the following:
Cole
Taillon
Nova
Kuhl
Glasnow/Brault
Nicasio
Bastardo
Hudson
Rivero
Watson
With one open spot for Schugel, Hughes, Webb, Light, LeBlanc, Hutchison, Williams, whomever.
Thoughts?
An idea for the fifth starter
Moderators: SammyKhalifa, Doc, Bobster
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
An idea for the fifth starter
The team will be a short a bullpen arm. Would these two still be on a five day rest?
I think there is a reason why teams don't do this. It matters in the majors. Winning and losing in the minors is not that great of a deal.
I think there is a reason why teams don't do this. It matters in the majors. Winning and losing in the minors is not that great of a deal.
An idea for the fifth starter
The Rockies tried this a few years ago. As for leaving the team short a BP arm, I tried to address this point. The idea is that your long man/spot starter is underutilized anyway. He may go a week and not get in a game. This gets him regular work and you have a built in game every fifth day where, in theory at least, the BP won't be needed. It's also the day before Cole day, so in an ideal world, it would be two days off in a row for the bullpen, save for a guy or two at the back end.
I just feel like this could actually be a viable solution to the biggest problem facing our team right now. It prevents either Glasnow or Brault from going through the order a third time. Again, just a thought. Right now, I think one or the other will win the 5th starter's spot outright. I don't think they are going to just hand it to Hutchison. I just feel like this is a way to maximize our resources.
I just feel like this could actually be a viable solution to the biggest problem facing our team right now. It prevents either Glasnow or Brault from going through the order a third time. Again, just a thought. Right now, I think one or the other will win the 5th starter's spot outright. I don't think they are going to just hand it to Hutchison. I just feel like this is a way to maximize our resources.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
An idea for the fifth starter
You are also assuming that Glasnow and Brault can finish out the game. If they can do that, then why need to piggy back? Just use the bullpen as usual.
What if another starter gets in trouble right after that start? Now, you lost your long arm and will tax the bullpen even more just trying to finish a game that is already pretty much a loss.
What if another starter gets in trouble right after that start? Now, you lost your long arm and will tax the bullpen even more just trying to finish a game that is already pretty much a loss.
-
rucker59@gmail.com
An idea for the fifth starter
Unfortunately it's going to be Hutchson. I don't think there's any doubt.
An idea for the fifth starter
202731393720676B12353F333B3E7C313D3F520 wrote: Unfortunately it's going to be Hutchson. I don't think there's any doubt.
I disagree. I guess we'll have to wait and see, but I just don't see any way that they can put Hutchison in the rotation. Glasnow has all the upside, Williams has arguably pitched the best of the four, and Brault has been decent, plus is left handed in a rotation full of righties. The only reason Hutchison is even being considered is because of how he was acquired. And I just don't see the precedent with this FO of pushing a bad decision because of public perception. This is the same FO that not more than three months ago was trying to trade Andrew McCutchen. I really think that NH simply doesn't care what the public thinks, which is good.
Other examples...they didn't stick with Niese. They didn't stick with Jonathan Sanchez. They didn't stick with Jose Tabata in order to justify the Xavier Nady trade. They also didn't stick with any of the four guys acquired in the Bay trade in order to justify that debacle. Another example...they didn't stick with Wandy Rodriguez in 2014 but let him go after six starts, I believe. Personally, I HATED the Rodriguez trade. I always thought that we gave up too much (Rudy Owens, Robbie Grossman, and Colton Cain). Regardless, he was an established vet (as opposed to a guy like Hutchison) and fans recognized the name. Still, they realized he didn't have it anymore and cut bait.
I'm sure there are examples of them sticking with a player longer than they should (Jeff Locke), there are also examples of them sticking with players whom all of us thought were terrible and washed up (A.J. Burnett, Liriano, Russell Martin, Sean Rodriguez just to name a few).
Bottom line...I'm more than happy to give the FO the benefit of the doubt here. They haven't shown a propensity of giving a guy a spot just to justify an unpopular trade, and they have shown a propensity for seeing something that is there when we the fans don't see it.
I'll still be surprised if the 5th starter isn't Brault.
I disagree. I guess we'll have to wait and see, but I just don't see any way that they can put Hutchison in the rotation. Glasnow has all the upside, Williams has arguably pitched the best of the four, and Brault has been decent, plus is left handed in a rotation full of righties. The only reason Hutchison is even being considered is because of how he was acquired. And I just don't see the precedent with this FO of pushing a bad decision because of public perception. This is the same FO that not more than three months ago was trying to trade Andrew McCutchen. I really think that NH simply doesn't care what the public thinks, which is good.
Other examples...they didn't stick with Niese. They didn't stick with Jonathan Sanchez. They didn't stick with Jose Tabata in order to justify the Xavier Nady trade. They also didn't stick with any of the four guys acquired in the Bay trade in order to justify that debacle. Another example...they didn't stick with Wandy Rodriguez in 2014 but let him go after six starts, I believe. Personally, I HATED the Rodriguez trade. I always thought that we gave up too much (Rudy Owens, Robbie Grossman, and Colton Cain). Regardless, he was an established vet (as opposed to a guy like Hutchison) and fans recognized the name. Still, they realized he didn't have it anymore and cut bait.
I'm sure there are examples of them sticking with a player longer than they should (Jeff Locke), there are also examples of them sticking with players whom all of us thought were terrible and washed up (A.J. Burnett, Liriano, Russell Martin, Sean Rodriguez just to name a few).
Bottom line...I'm more than happy to give the FO the benefit of the doubt here. They haven't shown a propensity of giving a guy a spot just to justify an unpopular trade, and they have shown a propensity for seeing something that is there when we the fans don't see it.
I'll still be surprised if the 5th starter isn't Brault.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
An idea for the fifth starter
Good Post, IA.
You might get your wish, just with different players. If Hutchison isn't the 5th Starter, he will be in the bullpen as the long man. I really doubt he will be cut.
My prediction (if):
Hutchsion starts, Williams in the bullpen.
Brault starts, Hutchison in the bullpen.
Williams starts, Hutchison in the bullpen.
Glasnow in Triple A.
You might get your wish, just with different players. If Hutchison isn't the 5th Starter, he will be in the bullpen as the long man. I really doubt he will be cut.
My prediction (if):
Hutchsion starts, Williams in the bullpen.
Brault starts, Hutchison in the bullpen.
Williams starts, Hutchison in the bullpen.
Glasnow in Triple A.
An idea for the fifth starter
0D0506312702252A440 wrote: Unfortunately it's going to be Hutchson. I don't think there's any doubt.
I disagree. I guess we'll have to wait and see, but I just don't see any way that they can put Hutchison in the rotation. ... And I just don't see the precedent with this FO of pushing a bad decision because of public perception. ...
Other examples...they didn't stick with Niese. They didn't stick with Jonathan Sanchez. They didn't stick with Jose Tabata in order to justify the Xavier Nady trade.
...
Bottom line...I'm more than happy to give the FO the benefit of the doubt here. They haven't shown a propensity of giving a guy a spot just to justify an unpopular trade, and they have shown a propensity for seeing something that is there when we the fans don't see it.
I'll still be surprised if the 5th starter isn't Brault.
They also gave a shot to all (almost all?) of the guys they didn't eventually stick with. Hutchison is going to get his shot too at the start of the year so they can keep the extra year of control on Glasnow.
I disagree. I guess we'll have to wait and see, but I just don't see any way that they can put Hutchison in the rotation. ... And I just don't see the precedent with this FO of pushing a bad decision because of public perception. ...
Other examples...they didn't stick with Niese. They didn't stick with Jonathan Sanchez. They didn't stick with Jose Tabata in order to justify the Xavier Nady trade.
...
Bottom line...I'm more than happy to give the FO the benefit of the doubt here. They haven't shown a propensity of giving a guy a spot just to justify an unpopular trade, and they have shown a propensity for seeing something that is there when we the fans don't see it.
I'll still be surprised if the 5th starter isn't Brault.
They also gave a shot to all (almost all?) of the guys they didn't eventually stick with. Hutchison is going to get his shot too at the start of the year so they can keep the extra year of control on Glasnow.
-
JollyRoger
- Posts: 1469
- Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 8:31 pm
An idea for the fifth starter
444C4F786E4B6C630D0 wrote: I'm not a fan of skipping the fifth starter early in the year due to off days. I think you need to take advantage of the off days for the added rest, and that it will pay off in the long run. But, clearly, no one has grabbed the fifth starter's spot by the horns. So, what would you guys think of this proposal (admittedly, I'm stealing this from someone at BD...don't know whom, but want to give credit where credit is due).
Teams piggy back starters all the time in the minors and in ST. What if Glasnow and Brault piggy-backed? You start the year planning to have TG get through four innings, and then giving way to SB, regardless of whether or not TG is throwing lights out that day. This would limit a team's ability to stack a bunch of lefties against him, as they would know that a lefty is coming in in the fifth inning regardless.
The down side would be that it would shrink your bullpen, since you'd effectively have six starters, but that would seem to be mitigated by the fact that the bullpen should get a rest on Glasnow/Brault days, as well as the next day (Cole).
This idea would give us a pitching staff of the following:
Cole
Taillon
Nova
Kuhl
Glasnow/Brault
Nicasio
Bastardo
Hudson
Rivero
Watson
With one open spot for Schugel, Hughes, Webb, Light, LeBlanc, Hutchison, Williams, whomever.
Thoughts?
Interesting thought with logic behind it. To take it a step further; I have always wondered/fantasized if a team were to use a new pitcher every inning what would the outcome be. No starters or relievers. You would have 3 pitchers a game that would either be rested or used if there were extra innings. The 9 pitchers would be rotated on a daily basis. In theory, the pitcher would be able to go all out for one inning; and would only pitch about 120 innings a year saving wear and tear on the arm. The opposing team would see a new pitcher each inning which would be difficult to adjust to.
It will never happen because you would need the entire pitching staff to buy in as a team; which means historical stats would be out the window and that would disrupt the salary scale.
Teams piggy back starters all the time in the minors and in ST. What if Glasnow and Brault piggy-backed? You start the year planning to have TG get through four innings, and then giving way to SB, regardless of whether or not TG is throwing lights out that day. This would limit a team's ability to stack a bunch of lefties against him, as they would know that a lefty is coming in in the fifth inning regardless.
The down side would be that it would shrink your bullpen, since you'd effectively have six starters, but that would seem to be mitigated by the fact that the bullpen should get a rest on Glasnow/Brault days, as well as the next day (Cole).
This idea would give us a pitching staff of the following:
Cole
Taillon
Nova
Kuhl
Glasnow/Brault
Nicasio
Bastardo
Hudson
Rivero
Watson
With one open spot for Schugel, Hughes, Webb, Light, LeBlanc, Hutchison, Williams, whomever.
Thoughts?
Interesting thought with logic behind it. To take it a step further; I have always wondered/fantasized if a team were to use a new pitcher every inning what would the outcome be. No starters or relievers. You would have 3 pitchers a game that would either be rested or used if there were extra innings. The 9 pitchers would be rotated on a daily basis. In theory, the pitcher would be able to go all out for one inning; and would only pitch about 120 innings a year saving wear and tear on the arm. The opposing team would see a new pitcher each inning which would be difficult to adjust to.
It will never happen because you would need the entire pitching staff to buy in as a team; which means historical stats would be out the window and that would disrupt the salary scale.
-
dogknot17@yahoo.co
An idea for the fifth starter
That's interesting. In the NL too? Who bats in that 9th spot or do you go by the situation knowing you are pulling the guy anyway?
Or pitch until you have to bat?
Players might like it. They get millions for less work.
I do wish Cole threw 100 mph again. He could if he only had an inning.
Or pitch until you have to bat?
Players might like it. They get millions for less work.
I do wish Cole threw 100 mph again. He could if he only had an inning.