2019 Brewers' pitching staff

[coolhandluke121]

I'd send him down. It worked for Knebel. I kind of wanted Chase to start this year anyway. Seems to me you know what you're getting with him, and you can handle the extra hr's when you have a pretty good offense - assuming Aguilar, Braun, and Shaw don't really suck this bad.

 

We all know Chris Carter was overrated by many because he hit a lot of hr's but couldn't get on base. By the same token, a pitcher who gives up a lot hr's with a low WHIP is a little underrated. He basically turns opposing offenses into a bunch of Chris Carters. I can live with that, especially when the alternative is young guys with shaky command turning opposing offenses into a bunch of Christian Yelichs.

[adambr2]

I need to make a pitching staff related vent here.

 

Last September and post-season, this organization went in a different direction. They ditched the traditional starting pitcher. They stopped worrying about getting X amount of innings from a starter and just focused on the most efficient ways to get 27 outs. They re-defined the role of a middle reliever. It made all the difference in the world, and it took them to within 1 game from the World Series.

 

So going into this season, you could forgive me for thinking, "these guys are going to continue to innovate, continue to re-write the book, and continue to blur the lines of pitching roles". Well as we know, they didn't. They went right back to traditional roles. They pigeonholed all their young pitchers into traditional starting roles and ditched matchup and situational-based roles.

 

The results, as we know, have been dreadful. I understand that over the course of a 162 game season, innovation isn't as easy as it is in the playoffs and September. And I don't know what the right answer really is in the short-term or the long-term. But I do know that right now, our pitching staff is a mess. It's essentially the opposite of late last year, and it hasn't worked well at all. In the second half of 2019, we only needed an "average" rotation. We could bail at the first sign of trouble, because we had multiple young power arms that could put out fires and give us an inning or two in crucial mid-game situations.

 

We no longer have that. The young starters are out there on an island with no help. When they struggle, we can only put gasoline on the fire. It's a problem.

[CrewFanBrewMan69]

I need to make a pitching staff related vent here.

 

Last September and post-season, this organization went in a different direction. They ditched the traditional starting pitcher. They stopped worrying about getting X amount of innings from a starter and just focused on the most efficient ways to get 27 outs. They re-defined the role of a middle reliever. It made all the difference in the world, and it took them to within 1 game from the World Series.

 

So going into this season, you could forgive me for thinking, "these guys are going to continue to innovate, continue to re-write the book, and continue to blur the lines of pitching roles". Well as we know, they didn't. They went right back to traditional roles. They pigeonholed all their young pitchers into traditional starting roles and ditched matchup and situational-based roles.

 

The results, as we know, have been dreadful. I understand that over the course of a 162 game season, innovation isn't as easy as it is in the playoffs and September. And I don't know what the right answer really is in the short-term or the long-term. But I do know that right now, our pitching staff is a mess. It's essentially the opposite of late last year, and it hasn't worked well at all. In the second half of 2019, we only needed an "average" rotation. We could bail at the first sign of trouble, because we had multiple young power arms that could put out fires and give us an inning or two in crucial mid-game situations.

 

We no longer have that. The young starters are out there on an island with no help. When they struggle, we can only put gasoline on the fire. It's a problem.

I agree we have a problem, but there's really no way to manage a bullpen or pitching staff like they did in September and the playoffs last year during the regular season. The roster flexibility and days off just aren't there. I think the best way to of fixed this was add another starter from FA to keep Burnes or Woodruff in the bullpen to keep better options out there. We just are so thin right now with not great options to date performance wise. It probably gets better because it can't be this bad but I also don't see a ton of light at the end of the tunnel. Last year during the year we had 3 elite arms in Hader, Jeffress and Knebel to go to to shorten games in not Sept months, we don't have that option or luxury right now and the options to shorten games aren't there. I don't know what we do other than hope the performances and health picks up.

[Samurai Bucky]

I need to make a pitching staff related vent here.

 

Last September and post-season, this organization went in a different direction. They ditched the traditional starting pitcher. They stopped worrying about getting X amount of innings from a starter and just focused on the most efficient ways to get 27 outs. They re-defined the role of a middle reliever. It made all the difference in the world, and it took them to within 1 game from the World Series.

 

So going into this season, you could forgive me for thinking, "these guys are going to continue to innovate, continue to re-write the book, and continue to blur the lines of pitching roles". Well as we know, they didn't. They went right back to traditional roles. They pigeonholed all their young pitchers into traditional starting roles and ditched matchup and situational-based roles.

 

The results, as we know, have been dreadful. I understand that over the course of a 162 game season, innovation isn't as easy as it is in the playoffs and September. And I don't know what the right answer really is in the short-term or the long-term. But I do know that right now, our pitching staff is a mess. It's essentially the opposite of late last year, and it hasn't worked well at all. In the second half of 2019, we only needed an "average" rotation. We could bail at the first sign of trouble, because we had multiple young power arms that could put out fires and give us an inning or two in crucial mid-game situations.

 

We no longer have that. The young starters are out there on an island with no help. When they struggle, we can only put gasoline on the fire. It's a problem.

I can't quantify this, but it seems like first-pitch strikes are a rarity. Last night, Chacin struggled with it, and Hader even had issues. I don't know if picking the corners is what we are trying to do on strike zero or not.

[sveumrules]

I can't quantify this, but it seems like first-pitch strikes are a rarity. Last night, Chacin struggled with it, and Hader even had issues. I don't know if picking the corners is what we are trying to do on strike zero or not.

 

Good observation.

 

Coming into tonight's game the Brewers were dead last in MLB with a 55.2 first strike % vs. a league average of 60.1.

[Ennder]

I need to make a pitching staff related vent here.

 

Last September and post-season, this organization went in a different direction. They ditched the traditional starting pitcher. They stopped worrying about getting X amount of innings from a starter and just focused on the most efficient ways to get 27 outs. They re-defined the role of a middle reliever. It made all the difference in the world, and it took them to within 1 game from the World Series.

 

So going into this season, you could forgive me for thinking, "these guys are going to continue to innovate, continue to re-write the book, and continue to blur the lines of pitching roles". Well as we know, they didn't. They went right back to traditional roles. They pigeonholed all their young pitchers into traditional starting roles and ditched matchup and situational-based roles.

 

The results, as we know, have been dreadful. I understand that over the course of a 162 game season, innovation isn't as easy as it is in the playoffs and September. And I don't know what the right answer really is in the short-term or the long-term. But I do know that right now, our pitching staff is a mess. It's essentially the opposite of late last year, and it hasn't worked well at all. In the second half of 2019, we only needed an "average" rotation. We could bail at the first sign of trouble, because we had multiple young power arms that could put out fires and give us an inning or two in crucial mid-game situations.

 

We no longer have that. The young starters are out there on an island with no help. When they struggle, we can only put gasoline on the fire. It's a problem.

 

They went that way in the postseason because they had no hope of winning with the traditional path. You still want the traditional path if you can obtain it. Same with the Ray's last year, they went weird because they had a lack of healthy starters. Same with the A's, everyone got hurt so they went a different path. What the Brewers did late last year was driven by the fact they had no pitchers who could reliably go more than 5 innings in a game, not because it is the smart way to run your team. They adapted to their roster and they should do the same this season.

[sveumrules]

The results, as we know, have been dreadful.

 

At this still very early juncture the only results that matter are wins & losses, we are 13-9.

 

Individual category ranks for our pitchers prior to tonight's game were...

 

K9 9.34 (12th) BB9 3.94 (22nd) HR9 1.85 (28th)

ERA 5.21 (25th) FIP 5.07 (25th) xFIP 4.34 (17th)

 

The only thing dreadful is a fluky high HR9 (which can happen over less than 200 team IP thus far) which is driving the poor ERA/FIP numbers.

 

I'd bet our ERA/FIP are closer to our current xFIP at season's end than their current levels.

[adambr2]

Hypothetical "where do we go from here".

 

Say Chase stays in the rotation, and Nelson returns in early May to the rotation. Or perhaps, they sign Gio. What's the plan with Peralta and Burnes? 6 man rotation? Do you consider a move back to the pen for either? Leave Burnes in AAA for the vast majority of 2019?

[JohnBriggs12]

Hypothetical "where do we go from here".

 

Say Chase stays in the rotation, and Nelson returns in early May to the rotation. Or perhaps, they sign Gio. What's the plan with Peralta and Burnes? 6 man rotation? Do you consider a move back to the pen for either? Leave Burnes in AAA for the vast majority of 2019?

 

The goal is winning a championship. You go with the guys most capable of delivering. Anderson is a proven major league starter. So is Nelson, assuming he's fully healthy and so is Gio. Peralta and Burnes to this point are works in progress and should be pitching in AAA until a need arises. Chances are, a need will arise. Because both Peralta and Burnes have relatively high ceilings, it was worth giving them a shot out of the gate to see if they were ready. Neither grabbed it but by no means does having them spend time at AAA mean the Brewers have given up on them.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I need to make a pitching staff related vent here.

 

Last September and post-season, this organization went in a different direction. They ditched the traditional starting pitcher. They stopped worrying about getting X amount of innings from a starter and just focused on the most efficient ways to get 27 outs. They re-defined the role of a middle reliever. It made all the difference in the world, and it took them to within 1 game from the World Series.

 

So going into this season, you could forgive me for thinking, "these guys are going to continue to innovate, continue to re-write the book, and continue to blur the lines of pitching roles". Well as we know, they didn't. They went right back to traditional roles. They pigeonholed all their young pitchers into traditional starting roles and ditched matchup and situational-based roles.

 

The results, as we know, have been dreadful. I understand that over the course of a 162 game season, innovation isn't as easy as it is in the playoffs and September. And I don't know what the right answer really is in the short-term or the long-term. But I do know that right now, our pitching staff is a mess. It's essentially the opposite of late last year, and it hasn't worked well at all. In the second half of 2019, we only needed an "average" rotation. We could bail at the first sign of trouble, because we had multiple young power arms that could put out fires and give us an inning or two in crucial mid-game situations.

 

We no longer have that. The young starters are out there on an island with no help. When they struggle, we can only put gasoline on the fire. It's a problem.

 

That plan just wasn't sustainable without the flexibility of larger rosters and days off between games. It wasn't going to happen, no matter how much a few people said it was. And that's ok. The pitching wasn't great last year at this time, and they rounded into form later int he season. No guarantee things will go that way again, but they improved the offense to the point where they theoretically shouldn't need to be a pitching-dominant team to go on a run into the postseason.

[LouisEly]

There is a new pitching coach.

 

Is this an adjustment period to a new philosophy/approach?

[True Blue Brew Crew]

 

That plan just wasn't sustainable without the flexibility of larger rosters and days off between games. It wasn't going to happen, no matter how much a few people said it was. And that's ok. The pitching wasn't great last year at this time, and they rounded into form later int he season. No guarantee things will go that way again, but they improved the offense to the point where they theoretically shouldn't need to be a pitching-dominant team to go on a run into the postseason.

 

Assuming this is somewhat directed at me and that's fine I've brought it on, it's self-inflicted. But I never said that what we saw in September/October was sustainable, nor the plan going forward. Remember, they were using pitchers for one out, one inning, and one trip through the order. That's not at all what I envision going forward. I talked about pitching staffs with undefined roles where eventually everyone pitches an average of 2-4 innings every 2-3 days. No more 1 out guys, no more 1 inning guys, and no more reliance on someone to go 6-7 innings every 5 days. I also said it could take years, perhaps even a full decade to set in.

 

The best way to combat someone you disagree with is to misrepresent what someone says. And there are a couple posters (not you JMB) who continually attach the Sept/Oct model to what I said.

 

The entire objective is to limit pitchers from exposure to that 3rd trip through the order. There are ways to do that which look nothing like the Sept/Oct usage we saw. And if people look close enough, not only are the Brewers doing it now, they've been doing it for some time. They won't be able to fully implement this usage until they no longer have 1 inning specialists they're heavily relying on.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

 

That plan just wasn't sustainable without the flexibility of larger rosters and days off between games. It wasn't going to happen, no matter how much a few people said it was. And that's ok. The pitching wasn't great last year at this time, and they rounded into form later int he season. No guarantee things will go that way again, but they improved the offense to the point where they theoretically shouldn't need to be a pitching-dominant team to go on a run into the postseason.

 

Assuming this is somewhat directed at me and that's fine I've brought it on, it's self-inflicted. But I never said that what we saw in September/October was sustainable, nor the plan going forward. Remember, they were using pitchers for one out, one inning, and one trip through the order. That's not at all what I envision going forward. I talked about pitching staffs with undefined roles where eventually everyone pitches an average of 2-4 innings every 2-3 days. No more 1 out guys, no more 1 inning guys, and no more reliance on someone to go 6-7 innings every 5 days. I also said it could take years, perhaps even a full decade to set in.

 

The best way to combat someone you disagree with is to misrepresent what someone says. And there are a couple posters (not you JMB) who continually attach the Sept/Oct model to what I said.

 

The entire objective is to limit pitchers from exposure to that 3rd trip through the order. There are ways to do that which look nothing like the Sept/Oct usage we saw. And if people look close enough, not only are the Brewers doing it now, they've been doing it for some time. They won't be able to fully implement this usage until they no longer have 1 inning specialists they're heavily relying on.

 

No doubt ... I fully expect them to use the same type of model this year from August-September on. It was pretty innovative, and ended up working awesome. I think we'll see it more too in select games and series against their biggest rivals during the year as well. Just having that flexibility to go that route is a huge advantage. If this team's management has proven anything, its that nothing they do is concrete or "by the book". Yeah, right now they seem to have set roles in place. That will change throughout the year, and that's cool.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Adrian Houser is getting the call to start Monday, according to McCalvy. I'm pretty stoked to see what he can do.

[sveumrules]

 

I have zero concern with our rotation, depth and upside best it’s been in a long time maybe ever. We have 7 above ave starters with 2-4 potential TOR in my opinion. Which should bode well this deadline hopefully not needing that expensive starter.

 

I can't confidently say we have two above average starters. The range of outcomes of this rotation are from replacement level to well above average. The Youngs guys had success last year but they all have big time warts too.

 

Replacement level? Totally sandbagging their performance last year IMHO.

Anderson and Chacin above average. 3young guns above ave now, with potential TOR stuff. That’s 5 above average. Then there’s Nelson.

 

Peralta & Burnes have both been replacement level or below to start the season, Woodruff might be too after today's start.

 

Nobody was sandbagging anything, just being realistic about the wide range of potential outcomes.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I guess I don't see the point in bringing Jeffress in low leverage situations. Can he throw the ball or not? The goal is don't give up runs either way. Frankly they need him right now, and if he's healthy, which he must be, I would have liked to see him out there in a game they really could have used him.

[wntrtxn21]

 

That plan just wasn't sustainable without the flexibility of larger rosters and days off between games. It wasn't going to happen, no matter how much a few people said it was. And that's ok. The pitching wasn't great last year at this time, and they rounded into form later int he season. No guarantee things will go that way again, but they improved the offense to the point where they theoretically shouldn't need to be a pitching-dominant team to go on a run into the postseason.

 

Assuming this is somewhat directed at me and that's fine I've brought it on, it's self-inflicted. But I never said that what we saw in September/October was sustainable, nor the plan going forward. Remember, they were using pitchers for one out, one inning, and one trip through the order. That's not at all what I envision going forward. I talked about pitching staffs with undefined roles where eventually everyone pitches an average of 2-4 innings every 2-3 days. No more 1 out guys, no more 1 inning guys, and no more reliance on someone to go 6-7 innings every 5 days. I also said it could take years, perhaps even a full decade to set in.

 

The best way to combat someone you disagree with is to misrepresent what someone says. And there are a couple posters (not you JMB) who continually attach the Sept/Oct model to what I said.

 

The entire objective is to limit pitchers from exposure to that 3rd trip through the order. There are ways to do that which look nothing like the Sept/Oct usage we saw. And if people look close enough, not only are the Brewers doing it now, they've been doing it for some time. They won't be able to fully implement this usage until they no longer have 1 inning specialists they're heavily relying on.

 

No doubt ... I fully expect them to use the same type of model this year from August-September on. It was pretty innovative, and ended up working awesome. I think we'll see it more too in select games and series against their biggest rivals during the year as well. Just having that flexibility to go that route is a huge advantage. If this team's management has proven anything, its that nothing they do is concrete or "by the book". Yeah, right now they seem to have set roles in place. That will change throughout the year, and that's cool.

 

The biggest problem with 2-4 inning staffs is what happens when a pitcher gets killed early and can't get outs. Just one or two of those types of outings destroys the concept. Every pitcher on the staff would be throwing at least 110 innings. That puts a tremendous amount of strain on pitchers' arms when they have to throw multiple innings every couple of days. Unless MLB increases the rosters to 27 or 28 it's not sustainable.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

The biggest problem with 2-4 inning staffs is what happens when a pitcher gets killed early and can't get outs.

 

Umm, bring in one of the other 11-12 pitchers geared to go 2-4 innings on any given day?

 

 

Every pitcher on the staff would be throwing at least 110 innings.

 

Hmm, some of them even throw 200 now?

 

 

That puts a tremendous amount of strain on pitchers' arms when they have to throw multiple innings every couple of days.

 

There's evidence to suggest shorter outings that don't require 4 days rest in between are better on the arm than throwing 100 pitches every 5 days. Just the same for 1 inning bursts two, sometimes 3 days in a row.

 

Here's a summary of what I've posted earlier on this subject. Note: no mention of usage like what the Brewers deployed in Sept/Oct. No one out initial out getters. No one inning guys...

 

It just means scrapping traditional roles. No more starters going every 5 days. No more relievers making 80-90 appearances. It's 11-12 guys going 2-3 innings at a time with typically 2 days rest each in between. There are 1458 innings plus the occasional extras to cover in a 162 game schedule. That's 121.5 innings per pitcher on a 12 man staff. An end to 200+ innings on an individual arm is a good thing.

 

The obvious retort is that you don't have 12 equal guys so it would be impossible to spread the workload evenly. What people don't realize is how many MLB pitchers carry around the same stats the first time through an order. The elite guys carry a .500-600 OPS against the 2nd and sometimes even 3rd time through. But most relievers carry similar numbers their 1st time through. There would still be a place for the elite guys to average more innings. The best of the best would push 3-4 innings. Even then, they'd still top out around 150 innings.

 

I encourage anyone who doubts this to take a look at the splits for major league pitchers. If you're good enough to stick, starter or reliever, chances are your OPS against in under .700 the 1st time through. The difficult part of the current traditional model is finding guys who hold up multiple trips through the order. There's pitching dominance to be had giving batters only 1 look.

[homer]

I don't think anyone questioning "bullpenning" is using one out getters as an argument against it. No one thinks that is going to happen on a regular basis to start a game. And I don't think anyone has mentioned one inning starts either.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

I don't think anyone questioning "bullpenning" is using one out getters as an argument against it. No one thinks that is going to happen on a regular basis to start a game. And I don't think anyone has mentioned one inning starts either.

 

I'm not sure how you missed it but when people argue against non-traditional deployment of the pitching staff they repeatedly say that the way the Brewers utilized their staff in Sept and Oct is not sustainable. That's a reference to one batter and one inning starts. And I don't think anyone (myself included) has ever argued that was sustainable. Yet the retort to alternative approaches is constantly that Sept/Oct is unsustainable. It's a reply to something that's never been stated otherwise.

[homer]

I don't think anyone questioning "bullpenning" is using one out getters as an argument against it. No one thinks that is going to happen on a regular basis to start a game. And I don't think anyone has mentioned one inning starts either.

 

I'm not sure how you missed it but when people argue against non-traditional deployment of the pitching staff they repeatedly say that the way the Brewers utilized their staff in Sept and Oct is not sustainable. That's a reference to one batter and one inning starts. And I don't think anyone (myself included) has ever argued that was sustainable. Yet the retort to alternative approaches is constantly that Sept/Oct is unsustainable. It's a reply to something that's never been stated otherwise.

 

The one batter thing happened one time not for two whole months. And to my recollection, they never had a pitcher only throw one inning to start a game.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

I don't think anyone questioning "bullpenning" is using one out getters as an argument against it. No one thinks that is going to happen on a regular basis to start a game. And I don't think anyone has mentioned one inning starts either.

 

I'm not sure how you missed it but when people argue against non-traditional deployment of the pitching staff they repeatedly say that the way the Brewers utilized their staff in Sept and Oct is not sustainable. That's a reference to one batter and one inning starts. And I don't think anyone (myself included) has ever argued that was sustainable. Yet the retort to alternative approaches is constantly that Sept/Oct is unsustainable. It's a reply to something that's never been stated otherwise.

 

The one batter thing happened one time not for two whole months.

 

I believe they used a one out pitcher to start things off on at least 2 occasions and 1 innings starts as well. Regardless of how many times or even if it happened, it's getting attached to my argument and I'm not the one making it. Your posts this morning are proof of that. I'm not the one talking about or promoting 1 batter and 1 inning stints. It's actually quite the opposite. I'm promoting the elimination of 1 out and 1 inning specialists and decreasing the dependence on needing 5 guys to go 5-7 innings every five days.

[tmwiese55]

I need to make a pitching staff related vent here.

 

Last September and post-season, this organization went in a different direction. They ditched the traditional starting pitcher. They stopped worrying about getting X amount of innings from a starter and just focused on the most efficient ways to get 27 outs. They re-defined the role of a middle reliever. It made all the difference in the world, and it took them to within 1 game from the World Series.

 

So going into this season, you could forgive me for thinking, "these guys are going to continue to innovate, continue to re-write the book, and continue to blur the lines of pitching roles". Well as we know, they didn't. They went right back to traditional roles. They pigeonholed all their young pitchers into traditional starting roles and ditched matchup and situational-based roles.

 

The results, as we know, have been dreadful. I understand that over the course of a 162 game season, innovation isn't as easy as it is in the playoffs and September. And I don't know what the right answer really is in the short-term or the long-term. But I do know that right now, our pitching staff is a mess. It's essentially the opposite of late last year, and it hasn't worked well at all. In the second half of 2019, we only needed an "average" rotation. We could bail at the first sign of trouble, because we had multiple young power arms that could put out fires and give us an inning or two in crucial mid-game situations.

 

We no longer have that. The young starters are out there on an island with no help. When they struggle, we can only put gasoline on the fire. It's a problem.

 

They went that way in the postseason because they had no hope of winning with the traditional path. You still want the traditional path if you can obtain it. Same with the Ray's last year, they went weird because they had a lack of healthy starters. Same with the A's, everyone got hurt so they went a different path. What the Brewers did late last year was driven by the fact they had no pitchers who could reliably go more than 5 innings in a game, not because it is the smart way to run your team. They adapted to their roster and they should do the same this season.

 

I think this is a great summary. What's the saying, necessity is the mother of invention, or something like that. Nelson's injury combined with Davies/Anderson falling apart forced their hands last year and they made the best of it.

 

I know many liked to think we re-invented the wheel with what they did so it was tough to remember that throughout the year we still did the normal 5 man staff trying to gt 5-6 innings. With the biggest tweak being we had an early hook during the 3rd time through no matter what the pitch count was at the time. That was the biggest thing they were doing differently and really all I banked on again this year. The roster rules of the regular season just don't allow the kind of extreme solutions folks throw around. They wanted it to work similar to normal with these guys and so far it hasn't, so we'll see what they do from here but since there isn't a ton of off days and extra roster spots I think it's gonna look a lot like normal. Maybe the necessity does create something weird though if they conclude the three young guys are best as 2-3 inning guys right now thus creating a glut of middle relievers who can cover a lot of innings. And then have an early hook blah starters like Chase or whoever they bring up. Still, if a SP is going well they're just gonna keep letting them go until trouble. It's not like Chase is going to go 3 shutout with 2 hits and they're gonna say "welp our plan is 2-3 innings so he's out now".

 

That said, if you had the DH and impending 26th roster spot I could really see some creativity happening even beyond what TB is doing. Like with a team going with an extremely small position player bench since you don't need the pinch hitters and all that goes with it.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

The roster rules of the regular season just don't allow the kind of extreme solutions folks throw around.

 

What are those extreme solutions being thrown around? I'd love to hear them. Got a link?

[tmwiese55]

The roster rules of the regular season just don't allow the kind of extreme solutions folks throw around.

 

What are those extreme solutions being thrown around? I'd love to hear them. Got a link?

 

You can find them anywhere online if you want to look. All kinds of stuff thrown around here in the offseason with piggy backing being the most obvious example that hasn't happened. Go argue with yourself if you want IDC. Anyone interested can go read the beginning of this thread as well and see how all that went...