2018 Starting Rotation

[KeithStone53151]

 

I think the superior strategy thing came up more out of necessity than it being superior.

 

If it addressed that necessity, then it's a superior strategy. There's no reason to believe starters are regularly going to go 7 innings because people have figured out that the more complicated strategy of selective bullpen use and specialists has worked better. Those that understand it will implement it and be successful. Those that are stuck in their ways who can't understand or accept that the standards have changed will survive only as long as their bosses don't understand the changes either (see: Baker, Dusty).

 

I guess what I was primarily getting at is you are still better off having the Kershaw/Bumgarner caliber pitcher and having them go 7-8 innings than having a worse starter and 2 good bullpen arms cover those same 7-8 innings. It's just those pitchers are becoming less and less common...and more evenly spread amongst all 30 teams. Hence, teams adapted and learned bullpen arms will be more effective than a starter his 3rd time through an order.

[bill hAll Star]

 

I think the superior strategy thing came up more out of necessity than it being superior.

 

If it addressed that necessity, then it's a superior strategy. There's no reason to believe starters are regularly going to go 7 innings because people have figured out that the more complicated strategy of selective bullpen use and specialists has worked better. Those that understand it will implement it and be successful. Those that are stuck in their ways who can't understand or accept that the standards have changed will survive only as long as their bosses don't understand the changes either (see: Baker, Dusty).

 

I guess what I was primarily getting at is you are still better off having the Kershaw/Bumgarner caliber pitcher and having them go 7-8 innings than having a worse starter and 2 good bullpen arms cover those same 7-8 innings. It's just those pitchers are becoming less and less common...and more evenly spread amongst all 30 teams. Hence, teams adapted and learned bullpen arms will be more effective than a starter his 3rd time through an order.

 

I think those pitchers are becoming less and less common because technology, scouting, and matchups have improved for hitters making the pitchers need to throw more sliders and more velocity to survive.

 

I'd also have to believe that there were only 10-15 aces in those days anyways. They just pitched more guys 7 or 8 innings because that's what you did.

[coolhandluke121]

 

I think those pitchers are becoming less and less common because technology, scouting, and matchups have improved for hitters making the pitchers need to throw more sliders and more velocity to survive.

 

I'd also have to believe that there were only 10-15 aces in those days anyways. They just pitched more guys 7 or 8 innings because that's what you did.

 

The latter part is what I thought he was implying. As long as everyone else is using their starters 7+ innings, you can't be blamed for not realizing more creative use of your pen gives you a competitive advantage. But once someone else starts doing it and being successful, you have to do it too. There's no reason to assume that the way they used pitchers 30 years ago was the right way. At minimum, bullpen use has evolved, but saying it's evolved is kind of conservative because it evades the question of whether it has merely changed or whether it has actually improved (I think it has dramatically).

 

And the point about having to improve to keep up with changes that favor offenses is crucial as well. It's not that there are fewer great pitchers; it's just that you have to work harder at using them judiciously to maximize their effectiveness.

[ClosetBrewerFan]

Obviously if we have the Kershaw's, Sale, etc then that is the way to build a rotation. But if we are going to try to make Arrieta or Lance Lynn that #1 starter and pay through the teeth, then I'd rather try something different. Those guys just scream Garza all over again.

 

Say we go with Hader, F. Peralta, T. Williams in multi inning roles with SP's that give us 4-5 solid innings. Assuming those relievers are effective, that could be the type of thing a small market team is going to need to do to be successful.

 

There is a lot of IF's in that and probably asking for too much for all those guys to be effective right away, but it would be interesting to try. The Brewers have a ton of pitchers that fall under the "#4 SP or really good reliever" label. This may be the time to try this out.

[TJseven7]

I see i kinda opened a gate here but to clear up. I see a lot of posts about getting that big ace and i feel its way too cost prohibative to do it. Quintana isnt even an ace and he commanded a lot. I'd aim for many above average guys over an ace. Im not calling for the starters to go 4-5 inseason. Saying if we can collect guys in the 3-3.75 range like anderson nelson (was) davies (not far off) maybe woodruff burnes ortiz or a fa redemption gem? We can send them out there hoping to get 6-7 inseason and keep our young controlable big arms (knebel hader williams peralta kodi? Houser?) to take over when ever needed in season. Have a number we trust at any leverage knowing full well that our starters wont see batting rotation 3 in the playoffs when we can lean on that bullpen because we ate innings with solid starters in the regular season and win with the fresh-ish pen in the post. I'd love it if suter went bp long loogy and threw 3-4 innings every 6-7 days. Let him loogy a lh batter in a 1/3 ip between uses on a throw day. Can't start if he can not go 6 ip without taxing the pen so let him untax the pen.

 

I just look back at last year and think how many games we wrecked with a bad and tired pen because garza peralta even suter went 5 or less... and then torres would face 5 retire none and let the blood letting begin. This team has pitching talent for once in the minors and when everyone seems concerned about finding an ace I want a guy who comes cheap and hits 4era and eats innings and i want a charlie morton type add. Anderson morton type davies another inning eater 4 era and woodruff. Fix the damn pen and keep knebel swarzak hader suter and push Fperalta and kodi and houser that way too making jeffress and barnes the 7 or 8.

 

People want an ace... I want 5 of anderson 2 hader 1 peralta 1 knebel... 3 davies 3 suter 1 swarzak 1 peralta 1 knebel... 2-0 series lead. Its awe inspiring to see verlander go complete game but its not nessicary. 1 group has to lift your staff in the playoffs... starters or pen. This team would compete for the playoffs now if not for the black hole that guerra garza peralta torres feliz drake created last year.

[monty57]

If you could find someone who can go 7+ every time out, that's a Godsend for your bullpen, but those guys are extremely rare and we're not going to afford one in free agency. I'm interested in getting five guys who can go 5-6 innings every time out, with an occasional push into 7-8 innings on their good nights. A bullpen can stay fresh on 3-4 innings/night when they occasionally get a night off when one of the guys goes 7+.

 

The way we ran things late in the season was only possibly because of the expanded roster. There's no way a bullpen holds up when several of your starters are going less than five innings regularly through a full season. It is good that we have a number of guys who could go multiple innings in the bullpen, and the depth of our talent is a big plus. That said, with Woodruff and Hader likely getting two spots in the rotation, I'm most comfortable finding a guy from outside the organization who has the capability of going 5-6 innings most times out, and keeping Suter and maybe even another guy like Guerra as guys in the pen who will get a lot of multiple inning stints.

[clancyphile]

If you could find someone who can go 7+ every time out, that's a Godsend for your bullpen, but those guys are extremely rare and we're not going to afford one in free agency. I'm interested in getting five guys who can go 5-6 innings every time out, with an occasional push into 7-8 innings on their good nights. A bullpen can stay fresh on 3-4 innings/night when they occasionally get a night off when one of the guys goes 7+.

 

The way we ran things late in the season was only possibly because of the expanded roster. There's no way a bullpen holds up when several of your starters are going less than five innings regularly through a full season. It is good that we have a number of guys who could go multiple innings in the bullpen, and the depth of our talent is a big plus. That said, with Woodruff and Hader likely getting two spots in the rotation, I'm most comfortable finding a guy from outside the organization who has the capability of going 5-6 innings most times out, and keeping Suter and maybe even another guy like Guerra as guys in the pen who will get a lot of multiple inning stints.

 

Flip Suter and Hader, and I think you're right for 2018. That said, I think if Suter doesn't do the dual-shuttle he did in 2016/2017 (Milwaukee to AAA to Milwaukee/starter to bullpen and back), I think he could stretch out and be a quality pitcher. He had some flashes before that rotator cuff strain. He averaged six innings a start in the month of July, and against the Cubs on the 28th, he went seven innings on 82 pitches.

[KeithStone53151]

If you could find someone who can go 7+ every time out, that's a Godsend for your bullpen, but those guys are extremely rare and we're not going to afford one in free agency. I'm interested in getting five guys who can go 5-6 innings every time out, with an occasional push into 7-8 innings on their good nights. A bullpen can stay fresh on 3-4 innings/night when they occasionally get a night off when one of the guys goes 7+.

 

The way we ran things late in the season was only possibly because of the expanded roster. There's no way a bullpen holds up when several of your starters are going less than five innings regularly through a full season. It is good that we have a number of guys who could go multiple innings in the bullpen, and the depth of our talent is a big plus. That said, with Woodruff and Hader likely getting two spots in the rotation, I'm most comfortable finding a guy from outside the organization who has the capability of going 5-6 innings most times out, and keeping Suter and maybe even another guy like Guerra as guys in the pen who will get a lot of multiple inning stints.

 

Flip Suter and Hader, and I think you're right for 2018. That said, I think if Suter doesn't do the dual-shuttle he did in 2016/2017 (Milwaukee to AAA to Milwaukee/starter to bullpen and back), I think he could stretch out and be a quality pitcher. He had some flashes before that rotator cuff strain. He averaged six innings a start in the month of July, and against the Cubs on the 28th, he went seven innings on 82 pitches.

 

Josh Hader has light years more upside than Suter. I can't imagine them not giving him a look in the rotation. Suter makes way more sense in the marco estrada role than a rotation spot. He gets it done with smoke and mirrors, along with plus command. I'm not sure he has a single pitch that would grade out as even average. That only works until guys have seen it enough and figure out how to crush his soft stuff.

[monty57]

Clancy, I'd prefer Hader to Suter in the rotation based on upside. Suter's ceiling as a starter is probably a #4/5 guy, while Hader could be a #1.

 

Hader could be valuable out of the pen in the "Andrew Miller" role, but he has the potential to be one of the better starting pitchers in the game, which would be infinitely more valuable than any role he could have as a reliever.

 

I think Suter will be very valuable to the 2018 Brewers, but I like him as the "swing man," kind of like how the Cubs have used Montgomery. Suter can act as a LOOGY, go multiple innings, go one inning, and make spot starts when needed.

 

Hader is better (higher upside) than Suter, so put Hader in the more valuable role (starter) and Suter in the role of "swing man."

[TJseven7]

I hope both Hader and Suter are in the pen. Hader in high leverage multi-inning door closing appearences. Suter as a true long man who we look to get 4ip-5ip a week. 3ip-4ip and 1ip. Starter leaves with a solid lead... plug in suter and let him go as long as he can keep them off balance. People talk about not tiring out the pen and I agree. Lets say Anderson goes 6 strong and exits with a lead. Up 1 hader 2 ip knebel ip... up a few... see if suter can close it out and get some run support along the way. He's perfect as a long man... he can easily go 3-4ip. It suits him. We didn't use anyone like that last year. It seems like a nice luxury to have.

 

We have 3 starters. Id rather add 2 short term redemption type contracts that could be flipped when if Burnes Ortiz arrive then push Hader into the starting role before his pitch count per inning drops, his walks drop, and his secondary stuff is thrown for strikes. He's living well on raw stuff. Its hard to do that for more than 5 innings. Moving him takes away a bullpen ace and adds more demand on the pen with short starts. That's a lot of stress added to a pen that can't take it unless it gets a few big additions.

[monty57]

If Hader stays in the 'pen and gets 70-80 IP, he will likely never be a starter, and we will have passed up on our best shot at a home grown ace in a long time.

 

As it stands right now, he'd probably need to be the #5 starter so he could be skipped every now and then, or he'd need to be shut down when he hits around 150 IP. Keep him in the pen all year, and I don't see him becoming a starter in the future. If he does, it would be just in time for us to prep him to be a solid starter so we could trade him off before losing him to free agency.

 

I understand that relievers have become more valuable in "today's game," but a dominant reliever is still far less valuable than a dominant starter.

[Warning Track Power]

If Hader stays in the 'pen and gets 70-80 IP, he will likely never be a starter, and we will have passed up on our best shot at a home grown ace in a long time.

As it stands right now, he'd probably need to be the #5 starter so he could be skipped every now and then, or he'd need to be shut down when he hits around 150 IP. Keep him in the pen all year, and I don't see him becoming a starter in the future. If he does, it would be just in time for us to prep him to be a solid starter so we could trade him off before losing him to free agency.

 

I understand that relievers have become more valuable in "today's game," but a dominant reliever is still far less valuable than a dominant starter.

I agree with this. The Brewers know that should Hader fail as a SP, they have an elite RP in the Andrew Miller model. There is always the option to move him back to the bullpen. The Brewers need to put Hader in the rotation to at least see if he can be an SP.

[NievesNoNO]

I think Hader should get a shot at the rotation. We pretty much already know he can be a valuable bullpen arm, but I agree with Monty. If he can transition into a starter that has a good deal of additional value over being a reliever. I'm increasingly leaning towards really finding out what the Brewers have with some of these young guys. The only FA starter I'd really consider at this point is Chatwood.

 

In the back of my mind I'm thinking, what if:

Hader becomes similar to Robbie Ray

Woodruff makes a couple adjustments and becomes a Michael Fulmer type

Suter is able to but up similar number as Davies and can be a reliable back end starter

 

Anderson

Davies

Hader

Woodruff

Suter

Nelson possibly coming back late season

 

I hate to shell out important pieces of the farm to get a guy that we already have. There's a lot of question marks in waiting on guys to develop but this is kind of what the goal was in rebuilding, correct?

[DR28]

I think Hader should get a shot at the rotation. We pretty much already know he can be a valuable bullpen arm, but I agree with Monty. If he can transition into a starter that has a good deal of additional value over being a reliever. I'm increasingly leaning towards really finding out what the Brewers have with some of these young guys. The only FA starter I'd really consider at this point is Chatwood.

 

In the back of my mind I'm thinking, what if:

Hader becomes similar to Robbie Ray

Woodruff makes a couple adjustments and becomes a Michael Fulmer type

Suter is able to but up similar number as Davies and can be a reliable back end starter

 

Anderson

Davies

Hader

Woodruff

Suter

Nelson possibly coming back late season

 

I hate to shell out important pieces of the farm to get a guy that we already have. There's a lot of question marks in waiting on guys to develop but this is kind of what the goal was in rebuilding, correct?

 

Hell yes! I would love Hader in the rotation and sign Chatwood.

 

Anderson

Davies

Hader

Chatwood

Woodruff

With Nelson possibly coming back

 

And it still would leave enough money to add a couple guys to the pen... Im looking at Reed to take Hader's spot and maybe sign another lefty (Watson or McGee).

 

Knebel

Reed

Watson

Barnes

Jeffress

Williams

Suter

 

I WOULD LOVE THIS PITCHING STAFF!

[clancyphile]

If the Crew can't get a Sabathia/Otani type for the rotation, then perhaps both Suter and Hader go in the rotation. Best case, both do well, and the Crew has plenty of options.

 

Suter's got that Doug Davis vibe.

[pacopete4]

tions.

 

Suter's got that Doug Davis vibe.

 

Is that a good thing? Don't get me wrong. I'm pulling for a guy like Suter because he's just a fireball of energy and spirit but Doug Davis was just a meh pitcher. He had a nice long career but looking through his numbers it's a shock he lasted so long. Must be that left-handed thing again.

[clancyphile]

tions.

 

Suter's got that Doug Davis vibe.

 

Is that a good thing? Don't get me wrong. I'm pulling for a guy like Suter because he's just a fireball of energy and spirit but Doug Davis was just a meh pitcher. He had a nice long career but looking through his numbers it's a shock he lasted so long. Must be that left-handed thing again.

 

Suter flashed some real signs last summer, before the rotator cuff thing. I think that having a spot in the rotation, and being stretched out - and not doing the bullpen/rotation and Milwaukee/AAA shuffles might help in that regard. Why knows, maybe he can learn a cutter.

 

But I think Suter, for the next two to four years, is at worst, a nice back-end of the rotation guy at worst.

[bill hAll Star]

I personally don't have much use for Doug Davis in this rotation, though.

 

The only teams that had guys with a mid 4s ERA (yeah, Davis had 2 years where he was better than that in his long career) in the playoffs traded to fill those slots in the rotation...and those teams probably had higher-end pitchers carrying their rotation as well. Of the guys that were at the back of those rotations like Porcello, Fiers, Tanaka, most had pedigree of being better pitchers.

 

Point being, I know we're not dead set on winning a title this year. That said, I'd rather aim higher and overpay a pitcher and have Suter as my 7th option rather than my 4th or 5th.

 

If Suter is actually lefty Kyle Hendricks instead of Doug Davis, then we can admit we're wrong and either trade the free agent pitcher or literally just turn Arrieta or Lynn into a $15-25 million dollar reliever as they begin to decline 3 years from now for all I care.

 

It's been rehashed a lot, but I'd rather throw 8 or 9 things against the wall to to see if we can get a 5 man rotation that is all good pitchers. Right now people are too comfortable with exactly 5 options and "if not, we've got a few prospects coming in the future." I would absolutely love to have too many pitchers.

[monty57]

I would absolutely love to have too many pitchers.

 

Me too. I'm cautiously optimistic that we could be there in a couple of years, but we're not there yet. Signing an MLB starter who can be a middle-of-the-rotation or better guy to a shorter-term contract makes a lot of sense to me.

 

Don't break the bank, don't sign a 30-something to a long-term deal, just make a relatively low-risk signing to bridge the gap to what I hope will be a bright future for Brewer pitching.

[coolhandluke121]

Obviously if we have the Kershaw's, Sale, etc then that is the way to build a rotation. But if we are going to try to make Arrieta or Lance Lynn that #1 starter and pay through the teeth, then I'd rather try something different. Those guys just scream Garza all over again.

 

Say we go with Hader, F. Peralta, T. Williams in multi inning roles with SP's that give us 4-5 solid innings. Assuming those relievers are effective, that could be the type of thing a small market team is going to need to do to be successful.

 

There is a lot of IF's in that and probably asking for too much for all those guys to be effective right away, but it would be interesting to try. The Brewers have a ton of pitchers that fall under the "#4 SP or really good reliever" label. This may be the time to try this out.

 

I have been clamoring for this forever. This is an innovation that is long overdue. The evidence about starters going 3 times through the order is overwhelming, and has been as long as analytics have been a thing. Furthermore, relievers are under-utilized. The balance between starter IP's and reliever IP's is extreme. You couldn't get as many games of out relievers if you used them in long relief, but you could get more innings out of them. You'd just have to plan more carefully. Current orthopraxy is too obsessed with using relievers to micromanage matchups, which doesn't outweigh the importance of avoiding that last time through the order, not to mention having one less pa from your starting pitcher.

 

The downside would be having to rest relievers more days, but it solves more problems than it creates. Heck, you might even be able to use just 4 starters regularly if you have enough relievers with options, mind your off-days, and use long relievers more. Another issue is that if your first long reliever bombs, you're in some trouble, but you're in trouble when a starter bombs anyway. We've seen this work in the playoffs so I don't understand why nobody has had the guts to try it. I know you don't get as many rest days in the regular season, but you can also cycle through more relievers during the regular season, whereas you're trying to stick with your 4-5 best relievers in the playoffs.

 

Ironically, it would also allow you to micromanage matchups a little more in some cases. For example, if you have lhp long relievers and a team started all their lhb's against your rhp, you can pull your starter before his second pa and all of a sudden you've created a big matchup headache for the other manager. You can even plan to have your long relievers rested according to the rhb vs. lhb splits of the lineups you'll be facing in a given series, macro-managing those matchups instead of micro-managing them. I always thought it was incredibly weird to have lhp starters and then be stuck starting them against a dominant rhb lineup just because it was their turn in the rotation.

 

Just get more innings out of relievers and stop putting starters through the order 3 times so often. The stats are pretty convincing. This notion that a starter is "rolling" so you can't pull him is stupid. Chances are pretty good that he'll stop "rolling" when he gets to the top of the order for the 3rd time - not to mention the fact that you probably wasted another pa to keep him in the game that long.

[coolhandluke121]

tions.

 

Suter's got that Doug Davis vibe.

 

Is that a good thing? Don't get me wrong. I'm pulling for a guy like Suter because he's just a fireball of energy and spirit but Doug Davis was just a meh pitcher. He had a nice long career but looking through his numbers it's a shock he lasted so long. Must be that left-handed thing again.

 

It would be a great thing. Considering how little they have invested in him, that would be a huge win. Doug Davis is a terrific #5 starter for a team that lost an ace to injury and has to be careful about free agency.

 

Another small but noteworthy factor is Suter's glove and bat. That adds up over the course of a season, and the Brewers should be able to have enough long relievers to limit Suter to ~5 IP per start.

[pacopete4]

tions.

 

Suter's got that Doug Davis vibe.

 

Is that a good thing? Don't get me wrong. I'm pulling for a guy like Suter because he's just a fireball of energy and spirit but Doug Davis was just a meh pitcher. He had a nice long career but looking through his numbers it's a shock he lasted so long. Must be that left-handed thing again.

 

It would be a great thing. Considering how little they have invested in him, that would be a huge win. Doug Davis is a terrific #5 starter for a team that lost an ace to injury and has to be careful about free agency.

 

Another small but noteworthy factor is Suter's glove and bat. That adds up over the course of a season, and the Brewers should be able to have enough long relievers to limit Suter to ~5 IP per start.

 

Eh, I just can't wrap my head around why we would want Suter to pan out to be a mid 4's ERA guy with a 1.5 WHIP, walking over 4 batters.

 

There were a couple outlier seasons in there for Davis but he really wasn't good. We might as well resign Wily Peralta if that were the case.

 

Career #'s for Peralta & Davis are strikingly similar. One just happens to throw with the "good" hand.

ERA: Peralta- 4.48 / Davis- 4.44

FIP: Peralta- 4.42 / Davis- 4.41

WHIP: Peralta- 1.449 / Davis- 1.513

SO9: Peralta- 6.5 / Davis- 6.7

BB9: Peralta- 3.3 / Davis- 4.1

H9: Peralta- 9.8 / Davis- 9.5

[KeithStone53151]

Eh, I just can't wrap my head around why we would want Suter to pan out to be a mid 4's ERA guy with a 1.5 WHIP, walking over 4 batters.

 

There were a couple outlier seasons in there for Davis but he really wasn't good. We might as well resign Wily Peralta if that were the case.

 

Career #'s for Peralta & Davis are strikingly similar. One just happens to throw with the "good" hand.

ERA: Peralta- 4.48 / Davis- 4.44

FIP: Peralta- 4.42 / Davis- 4.41

WHIP: Peralta- 1.449 / Davis- 1.513

SO9: Peralta- 6.5 / Davis- 6.7

BB9: Peralta- 3.3 / Davis- 4.1

H9: Peralta- 9.8 / Davis- 9.5

 

You can't just look at career numbers when looking at a pitcher. Wily is clearly trending the wrong way at this point.

 

That said, I sure hope we are aiming higher than Brent Suter to start the year. I'm happy to have him fill in from the LR spot at points during the season. Maybe an opportunity presents itself where he ends up in the rotation a significant chunk of the season and makes the most of it. That's the only way guys with such fringy tools end up making it in the bigs. At this point, I prefer to aim higher though.

[MadScientist]

Obviously if we have the Kershaw's, Sale, etc then that is the way to build a rotation. But if we are going to try to make Arrieta or Lance Lynn that #1 starter and pay through the teeth, then I'd rather try something different. Those guys just scream Garza all over again.

 

Say we go with Hader, F. Peralta, T. Williams in multi inning roles with SP's that give us 4-5 solid innings. Assuming those relievers are effective, that could be the type of thing a small market team is going to need to do to be successful.

 

There is a lot of IF's in that and probably asking for too much for all those guys to be effective right away, but it would be interesting to try. The Brewers have a ton of pitchers that fall under the "#4 SP or really good reliever" label. This may be the time to try this out.

 

I have been clamoring for this forever. This is an innovation that is long overdue. The evidence about starters going 3 times through the order is overwhelming, and has been as long as analytics have been a thing. Furthermore, relievers are under-utilized. The balance between starter IP's and reliever IP's is extreme. You couldn't get as many games of out relievers if you used them in long relief, but you could get more innings out of them. You'd just have to plan more carefully. Current orthopraxy is too obsessed with using relievers to micromanage matchups, which doesn't outweigh the importance of avoiding that last time through the order, not to mention having one less pa from your starting pitcher.

 

The downside would be having to rest relievers more days, but it solves more problems than it creates. Heck, you might even be able to use just 4 starters regularly if you have enough relievers with options, mind your off-days, and use long relievers more. Another issue is that if your first long reliever bombs, you're in some trouble, but you're in trouble when a starter bombs anyway. We've seen this work in the playoffs so I don't understand why nobody has had the guts to try it. I know you don't get as many rest days in the regular season, but you can also cycle through more relievers during the regular season, whereas you're trying to stick with your 4-5 best relievers in the playoffs.

 

Ironically, it would also allow you to micromanage matchups a little more in some cases. For example, if you have lhp long relievers and a team started all their lhb's against your rhp, you can pull your starter before his second pa and all of a sudden you've created a big matchup headache for the other manager. You can even plan to have your long relievers rested according to the rhb vs. lhb splits of the lineups you'll be facing in a given series, macro-managing those matchups instead of micro-managing them. I always thought it was incredibly weird to have lhp starters and then be stuck starting them against a dominant rhb lineup just because it was their turn in the rotation.

 

Just get more innings out of relievers and stop putting starters through the order 3 times so often. The stats are pretty convincing. This notion that a starter is "rolling" so you can't pull him is stupid. Chances are pretty good that he'll stop "rolling" when he gets to the top of the order for the 3rd time - not to mention the fact that you probably wasted another pa to keep him in the game that long.

 

This just isn't tenable in today's game. First off you are making it so that in probably half the games the starter can only get a loss or ND, even if they are pitching well. Wins and losses are far from the best way to evaluate a pitcher, but they still are considered, especially for starters, for post season awards, the AS game and contract negotiations. You may not think it is so important, but you can't implement something that will cause a player revolt, and when a plan will likely hurt players trying to get paid, the players will revolt.

 

Second this limits roster flexibility. 4 starters, 5 long relievers, 1 closer and 3 others, assuming a 13 man staff. Going to 12 would be difficult to make work. Given all the times when a player or 2 are out with a minor injury, this limits your ability to send a pitcher down and bring a position player up.

 

Third this ignores the dynamics of the game, particularly in the NL. What do you do in the 6th or 7th inning when the pitchers spot comes up? If you pinch hit, you now basically are reverting back to 1-2 inning relief pitchers, except with fewer who are available. Also you talk about macro-managing game plans, but there will always be times later in the game when you want to exploit a matchup. Again either you are reverting to short relievers or you stick with your 3ish inning reliever come hell or high water. Late in the game is when things start being played tighter because there isn't much time to make up a run.

 

So basically this is likely only to work with larger rosters, the DH in the NL, and adjusting the pay and rewards grading of starting pitching.

[coolhandluke121]

It would be a great thing. Considering how little they have invested in him, that would be a huge win. Doug Davis is a terrific #5 starter for a team that lost an ace to injury and has to be careful about free agency.

 

Another small but noteworthy factor is Suter's glove and bat. That adds up over the course of a season, and the Brewers should be able to have enough long relievers to limit Suter to ~5 IP per start.

 

Eh, I just can't wrap my head around why we would want Suter to pan out to be a mid 4's ERA guy with a 1.5 WHIP, walking over 4 batters.

 

There were a couple outlier seasons in there for Davis but he really wasn't good. We might as well resign Wily Peralta if that were the case.

 

 

But at what age did Davis have those outlier years, and how old is Suter now? It's no fluke. Age 27 and 28 are overwhelmingly the most likely ages to have your career peak. I'm not suggesting a 5-year extension but considering what he did last year, I think it would be incredibly foolish to not give him a chance to be that kind of pitcher for another year or two. I stand by what I said because I think there's a great chance he has a Doug Davis prime while they wait for Burnes and Nelson.