"not worthy of its own thread" offseason thread

[Jocephus]

ivan nova will be the pirates opening day starter

[CardsofSTL]

Bob Walk isn't available?

[TimeForGuinness]

The experiment probably won't work, but if the Rays actually find a way to maximize bullpen efficiency and slowly get rid of the "starting rotation" role like some have thought possible for years...it could be a big deal.

Given that bullpens / relievers are inherently volatile, I wonder why there is a shift to using them more, especially in a starting rotation role.

[InvincibleCakeEater]

The experiment probably won't work, but if the Rays actually find a way to maximize bullpen efficiency and slowly get rid of the "starting rotation" role like some have thought possible for years...it could be a big deal.

Given that bullpens / relievers are inherently volatile, I wonder why there is a shift to using them more, especially in a starting rotation role.

because they're replaceable for little money

[Jocephus]

Sonny
12:17
Does Jake Arrieta still play baseball? There's like 6 teams on the playoff bubble that should give him a job

Jay Jaffe
12:18
I agree. Still think the Cardinals and Brewers both really need him, in particular.

[Momo]

The experiment probably won't work, but if the Rays actually find a way to maximize bullpen efficiency and slowly get rid of the "starting rotation" role like some have thought possible for years...it could be a big deal.

Given that bullpens / relievers are inherently volatile, I wonder why there is a shift to using them more, especially in a starting rotation role.

As someone said, a major component is that they're replaceable for cheap.

It kind of seems like there's also a kind of analytical movement to figuring out some kind of way around the apparent inherent volatility. We see more and more failed (or average) starters moving to the bullpen and then just rocking the role. We saw great teams like the Dodgers and Astros both using "tandem starts" during the regular season, like the Dodgers pairing Ryu and Maeda for around half a game each.

I dunno. Starting pitching innings have been on the decline for decades. LaRussa tried the 3 man rotation already (3-3-3, one set of three per game) back in the 90s and it didn't work at all. But many someone will find something different that does work.

[Popeye_Card]

The experiment probably won't work, but if the Rays actually find a way to maximize bullpen efficiency and slowly get rid of the "starting rotation" role like some have thought possible for years...it could be a big deal.

Given that bullpens / relievers are inherently volatile, I wonder why there is a shift to using them more, especially in a starting rotation role.

As someone said, a major component is that they're replaceable for cheap.

It kind of seems like there's also a kind of analytical movement to figuring out some kind of way around the apparent inherent volatility. We see more and more failed (or average) starters moving to the bullpen and then just rocking the role. We saw great teams like the Dodgers and Astros both using "tandem starts" during the regular season, like the Dodgers pairing Ryu and Maeda for around half a game each.

I dunno. Starting pitching innings have been on the decline for decades. LaRussa tried the 3 man rotation already (3-3-3, one set of three per game) back in the 90s and it didn't work at all. But many someone will find something different that does work.

Postseason strategy has certainly shifted that way in recent years, including the Cardinals' run in 2011. Have one or two strong starters, and see if the bullpen can steal wins for you.

I can see why teams would want to experiment with that during the regular season too. To do it every 5th day, I think you would drain your bullpen over the course of 162 games. For months where you have a lot of off days, and want to do a bullpen start only occasionally? I think it is a viable strategy.

[Hoot45]

As with most things in baseball, it isn't quite fair to make sweeping statements about strategies because everything is personnel dependent. If you have a starting rotation that is effective through multiple turns of the lineup, that's great for you. But if you have a lot of guys who are solid for a turn or two before falling off, then splitting the load in a non-traditional way could be a smart approach. Over the years I have gained a deeper appreciation for starters that can sustain success through multiple turns of the batting order. I had taken for granted how hard that is to do.

I think bullpens are so important in the playoffs because you might be playing 7 games in a tight window of time with 2-3 starters carrying the load. Batters are getting a lot of looks at the same few pitchers, which makes it more difficult for pitchers to keep batters uncomfortable. Having a deep bullpen helps keep batters off balance.

[TimeForGuinness]

I can see why they'd want to do that, but I don't know if it's going to be any cheaper. The bullpen will have to cover more day-to-day work for the entire season, which will require bullpen stability (better pitchers)...it's still going to cost you a good chunk of change.

I can see the strategy of keeping a lineup off balance...but at some point over 162 games with set rosters, I would think you'd run out of rope implementing a larger bullpen role.

[Momo]

"Personnel dependent" is probably the correct way to view it. If you have a sterling rotation 1-5, you're not going to try bullpen shenanigans.

I still wonder though if that's what any clubs will target their personnel acquisitions towards, rather than looking to set up a traditional 1-5 rotation.