Thursday, August 29, 2013

The Short Reliever Solution

Sorry non-sports people, today I write about a Baseball idea. I have kicked this around with several people and decided its time to write it out.

Currently a 25 man roster has either 12 or 13 pitchers on it. Five of them are usually "starters", that is they begin the games and are supposed to be trying to finish them. Six or Seven of them are "relievers" they enter the game after the "starters" either due to matchups, injury, performance or fatigue. The last guy is the "closer" he is usually tasked with finishing games which are within a run or two of being tied. Usually he enters for a "save chance" which is either the last 3 innings of the game, the last out of a game which is within 4 runs or the final outs as long as the he entered when the game was within 4 and faces the potential tying run and prevents the tie from occurring ending the game. These days, the "relievers" are broken into two groups as well. "Specialists" and "long relievers." The specialists enter the game for one or two batters which they have a % advantage against. Such as a lefty with a good changeup against power hitting lefties. The long relievers are available for situations when a starter gets hurt or a game goes into extra innings and the team needs one guy to go 3 or more innings. The specialization has done several things for baseball. It has allowed for more turnover on rosters, as starters that can't sustain success and have scores of available talent either in the majors as relievers or in the minors that can replace them or in cases where the bullpen (the relief pitchers) is used as a training ground for young potential starters. It has only been this way for a little while. The great relievers of yesteryear typical threw close to 200 innings in their pursuit of saves and often were referred to as "relief aces" because they were the best pitchers on the team. Guys like Hoyt Wilhelm, Rollie Fingers and Goose Gossage were workhorse arms that would've started for any team today. Early on, complete games and shutouts happened constantly. Cy Young had a season in which he had 1 more walks allowed than shutouts. Read that a couple times, and then you will never wonder why they named the award after him.

I purpose a new change. Not returning to the old model, but forging a new one. Short Relievers. They exist, but they have the least important position on the roster (if we're counting by dollars spent). This change would need to start from the beginning, from the ground up. The organization would start by focusing their pitching scouting on "six out" arms. Guys that have ++ stuff despite possible troubles with stamina and control. Pitchers like Fernando Rodney, Johnny Venters, David Robertson, Mark Melancon, Luke Gregerson, Tyler Clippard etc, are examples of the guys that fit the system. They would hold 10 pitchers at each level, and in a perfect world use 4 each game. One of them would be tasked with 9 outs while the other 3 have 6. Right/Left matchups, Wins/Losses, Saves/Holds would all be unnecessary and outdated means of assessment. Bases Allowed versus Outs would be the key stat. Instead of focusing on pitch counts and getting through the 5th inning, the pitcher would be only focused on getting his 3 or 6 or 9 outs.

Right now they try to keep a pitcher from having to pitch more than 100-140 pitches every 5 days. A comfortable inning is usually around 20 pitches, an uncomfortable inning is closer to 30. That being said, a guy can usually pitch in 3 or 4 games in a row if called upon. That way 10 pitchers would be plenty, especially if an arbitrary pitch count, say 70, was placed on the relievers. That way you have the 4 guys for game 1, 4 guys for game 2 and 2 guys for emergencies. Not only could a pitcher throw in back to back games, but since he typically would only throw 45-50 pitches he would be available again after just a 2 or 3 game break.

Financially, if the rest of the league was slow on the upkeep, the pitching budget for a the Short Reliever System would be comfortably below the league average and allow for more spending on the offense. Also, the arbitration hearings would be based on commonly accepted achievements, again giving the organization an advantage. In the long run, however, if the system were to work, all pitchers would be paid the same, and most likely net salaries would go up.

The biggest problem is how the players would feel. Awards like the Cy Young and Reliever of the Year are usually given out based on stats. I already mentioned the pay would be lower for longer and of course deciding who is the "Ace" and "Closer" would be moot points. As far as team construction, this seems like a plus, but for the players themselves it could get tough.

Fire away.




Braves have won 23 of their last 30 and still have the best record in Baseball. The fact literally NO ONE is picking them to win the World Series is ridiculous. I admit, even as a ravenous Braves fan, I am very afraid of the Cardinals, Reds, Rays, Tigers and A's...Not so much of the Dodgers, Pirates, Red Sox and Rangers.

No comments:

Post a Comment