Time to Follow the Rays SP Theory

[sportsfan8703]

Bundy, Cashner, and Cobb, should be the “starters”, and we should cover the other two rotation spots with some form of Ramirez, Hess, Yacabonis, and Castro. These are guys that are right on the cusp of being serviceable SPs but they just can’t go 5 innings. I don’t know if we need an “opener”, but until the the guys in AA are ready, we should embrace the Rays’ strategy. 

We’d have to have an 8 man pen. A guy like Peterson that can play everywhere helps with this. That’s something that’s not going to show up in WAR, but a guy like Peterson can help the pitching by just providing positional flexibility. The pitching staff should look like,

SP 1-3: Bundy, Cashner, Cobb (the order doesn’t matter)

3 IP 4-7: Ramirez, Castro, Hess, Yacabonis

RP 8-13: Givens, Scott, Carroll, Phillips, Hart, Wright 

Here’s why you do it:

- Starting Pitching is so hard to develop(injuries, flame outs) and its really expensive/risky to buy (Cobb, Gallardo, Ubaldo).

- Why give up on guys just because they can’t go 5 innings?  Except that they’re 3IPs and that 90-100 IP a year at a sub 4.50ish ERA is valuable.  I think Ramirez and Castro could do that. Hess and Yacabonis not so much.

- Strategic Advantages.  Follow a “power” Pitcher up with a “finesse” Pitcher. Mix and match RHP and LHP. 

- More Opportunities:  Basically our prospects are in AA, and we just need to give guys auditions and see if who is a nugget. 

This probably won’t happen until September, but for all Buck’s heat he catches, he is willing to think outside the box. Since I did start the thread, my suggestion for an “opener” would be Wright. He’s already been broken. He has nothing to lose. Toss him out there and let him air it out for an inning. 

[Can_of_corn]

It isn't the Rays' theory.

It has been making the rounds for a number of years now.

[amdcpus]

I think they should do this, but I doubt they will.

[weams]

Openers are minimum wage pitchers that can only handle one time through the order. I don't care for the concept. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, weams said:

Openers are minimum wage pitchers that can only handle one time through the order. I don't care for the concept. 

Why not?

[sportsfan8703]

4 minutes ago, weams said:

Openers are minimum wage pitchers that can only handle one time through the order. I don't care for the concept. 

Maybe not if you’re good at it. Inning one of a game is always valuable(high leverage). How many high leverage IP does the standard reliever get in a season?  Definitely not a lot for a team that will lose a 100 games. 

What if a guy like Romo is more valuable than expensive “set up” men?  I’d have to defer to someone that knows analytics.

I don’t think an “opener” is a good fit for us with the current roster. But I do think the 3 IP thing could really help.

[weams]

8 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Why not?

I like starters that get lineups out three times. And I think the Orioles have stocked up on those types of pitching prospects. Even though they don't exist. And our three current starters are way too expensive for the gimmick stuff. Even Tampa does not believe in paying much for experimental starters.  

[weams]

9 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Maybe not if you’re good at it. Inning one of a game is always valuable(high leverage). How many high leverage IP does the standard reliever get in a season?  Definitely not a lot for a team that will lose a 100 games. 

What if a guy like Romo is more valuable than expensive “set up” men?  I’d have to defer to someone that knows analytics.

I don’t think an “opener” is a good fit for us with the current roster. But I do think the 3 IP thing could really help.

Oh, you are not alone. I am just not a gimmick guy. I'm a traditionalist. Pitching, defense. THREE run homers. 

[Aristotelian]

It could work if we had good relievers but we don't. 

[weams]

1 minute ago, Aristotelian said:

It could work if we had good relievers but we don't. 

I'm pretty sure we agree for different reasons.

[Malike]

I don't know. If your starter has a bad game, you are then forced to throw position players because your bullpen game the following day cannot be disrupted. I was embarrassed as a fan to watch the atrocity of Gomez balking runs in and Sucre throwing 60 MPH. It puts position players at risk to get hurt. I'm not saying there is no traction with the philosophy, but I think it's a ways away from being widespread in MLB.

[weams]

I think necessity is the mother of invention, and the Rays can't afford starters. And their pitching has been decimated with injury. It's a way that they limped by this season. 

[sportsfan8703]

15 minutes ago, weams said:

Oh, you are not alone. I am just not a gimmick guy. I'm a traditionalist. Pitching, defense. THREE run homers. 

The gimmick that keeps messing us up is that we keep giving FA SP big money and they are horrible. Like worst in the league horrible. The last three.  

WC game aside, Buck is one of the better, if not best, manager in baseball in terms of managing a pen. Our GM is really good at finding scrap heap relievers. An expanded bullpen role would play to our strengths. 

30-35 three IP stints gets you 90-105 IP a year. That’s valuable. 

Developing SP and buying FA SP is hard as hell. We haven’t been able to do it consistently. The three man bench isn’t a big deal. You have a guy like Peterson that can play everywhere. You make your Catchers take GBs at 1st and 3rd. Plus a guy like Givens has Professional experience in the IF. 

It’s a fun idea. We won’t see it exactly, but in September I see us having a lot of “bullpen” games. 

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, weams said:

I think necessity is the mother of invention, and the Rays can't afford starters. And their pitching has been decimated with injury. It's a way that they limped by this season. 

Limped.

56-54,  23 games ahead of the Orioles.

[weams]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Limped.

56-54,  23 games ahead of the Orioles.

Orioles are the worst team in baseball. Limped.