Peralta returns to the rotation this week?

[tmwiese55]

But to plan it to have it consistently happen seems very difficult to do over the long run. Definitely see how the situation arises and can happen here and there, and that it woudl be beneficial to rest so many guys in a day. Overall i'm in agreement on the multi inning guys but I don't see a set plan piggy back in place. Just look for opportunities to have the multi inning guys eat it up to save other dudes.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

C'mon we're going down the hole again. I talked about 2 pitchers combining to cover 9 as the new complete game. Nothing said about it happening very often. But you don't need it to either. Not when you have a 12-13 man staff with 9 or 10 starter-like pitchers on it. Having 2 guys cover 9 innings is far from a necessity with a staff constructed like that. Keep in mind, we have a great example tonight. Guerra doesn't now need four days off before he appears again.

[tmwiese55]

Yea as long as you're coming off any kind of pre planned piggy back system almost like rotation I think most can generally see what you're getting at, I can at least.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

Yea as long as you're coming off any kind of pre planned piggy back system almost like rotation I think most can generally see what you're getting at, I can at least.

 

I never really was on a pre-planned piggy-back system. Those words were assigned to me by others. I'm anti-rigidity. I said it will look like a tandem or a piggy-back and I certainly thought it was coming, but people can call it whatever they want. 2 pitchers not only don't have to be assigned together, they shouldn't. You can play matchups series to series, game to game if every long man is independent the rest. I had the sense the Brewers would pair pitchers together because Adam McCalvy flat-out said to expect it in 2019 soon after last season concluded. And it still might happen. But I'd much rather see them play matchups and let game flow dictate how long people stay in and when they'll be available next.

[homer]

Guys lets keep this thread on Peralta. We don't need every thread discussing piggy backing or out getters or whatever.

[TJseven7]

Freddy starting Thursday

 

CC isn't saying yet how this impacts anyone else

 

Would make you think that Chase gets tomorrow, Freddy gets Thursday. Everyone gets treated like theirs an off day in the schedule. I'd guess its Chase headed back to the pen. It's the cleanest swap.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

Guys lets keep this thread on Peralta. We don't need every thread discussing piggy backing or out getters or whatever.

 

It really is about Peralta. His reinsertion into the rotation means they need to either waste someone in short relief who deserves better or start getting creative. The return of Burnes and Nelson does the same. And it's going to be fascinating to watch.

[Brew crew 92]

So with peralta starting Thur, who goes to the pen? Burnes probably making his last “seasoning” AAA start then to rotation, when that happens who next to the pen? Then when Nelson ready who goes to the pen?

[True Blue Brew Crew]

Think about how much you could mess with advance scouting if you no longer had a set 5-man rotation? Your starter could be a surprise right up until game day. Sure a handful could be ruled out by the opponent by gauging usage in the past day or two, but you really could do more to avoid using starters against teams they've historically had terrible numbers against.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

So with peralta starting Thur, who goes to the pen? Burnes probably making his last “seasoning” AAA start then to rotation, when that happens who next to the pen? Then when Nelson ready who goes to the pen?

 

How about all? One appearance is a start, and then the next could just as easily be long relief.

[DHonks]

So with peralta starting Thur, who goes to the pen? Burnes probably making his last “seasoning” AAA start then to rotation, when that happens who next to the pen? Then when Nelson ready who goes to the pen?

 

There's no indication Nelson will be ready anytime soon. His rehab assignment will begin soon. That starts the 30-day window. But there are ways of manipulating that, and also possible extensions (as with UCL reconstruction). As I've been saying, I think Nelson pitching in Sept and Oct is more important than May/June. I'd guess we see Jimmy in early June at the earliest.

[tmwiese55]

Yea as long as you're coming off any kind of pre planned piggy back system almost like rotation I think most can generally see what you're getting at, I can at least.

 

I never really was on a pre-planned piggy-back system. Those words were assigned to me by others. I'm anti-rigidity. I said it will look like a tandem or a piggy-back and I certainly thought it was coming, but people can call it whatever they want. 2 pitchers not only don't have to be assigned together, they shouldn't. You can play matchups series to series, game to game if every long man is independent the rest. I had the sense the Brewers would pair pitchers together because Adam McCalvy flat-out said to expect it in 2019 soon after last season concluded. And it still might happen. But I'd much rather see them play matchups and let game flow dictate how long people stay in and when they'll be available next.

 

If you say so, sure seemed that way way back when this started months ago. Feel like there was an elaborate post somewhere laying it all out, but yea maybe that was someone laying it out to try and point out how it won't work and it didn't come from you. Regardless, just shouldn't use the term piggyback then. That term certainly implies it that way even if that's not how you mean it. Again, really all we're talking about is having more multi inning guys instead of 1 inning guys, there is nothing revolutionary about it and doesn't even need a term.

 

Looking ahead at starters CBS still says Woodruff is the starter Friday. So I'd be guessing Anderson is the one moving out for Peralta. We'll see, maybe they'll go 6 for a while and assess later but I doubt that since it'll limit the BP. CBS also could just be guessing since Thurs was supposed to be Woodruff.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

I continually used both terms "piggyback" and "tandem" because I honestly haven't figured out yet which they're more likely to use. To me tandem means pairing two specific pitchers together on a set schedule. I don't think that route makes any sense. Piggyback to me means following one starter with another. That seems in-line with what I'd expect to see but even that's too rigid, imo. If a starter goes a solid 4 and runs into trouble in the 5th with a series of big LH bats coming up, I think Hader should be in consideration to come in at that point. Another starter-like pitcher can finish the game. Under that scenario, neither term really applies.

 

But make no mistake, going into every game with the plan being to use 2 starter-like pitchers, is a departure from simply having multi-inning relievers. And it doesn't have to unfold as starter, starter, reliever. You can jumble that up any way is most effective matchup-wise. (S-R-S, R-S-S, S-S-R, etc.)

 

With Peralta back and Burnes and Nelson eventually to follow, the Brewers could most certainly start going into each game planning to deploy two pitchers averaging around 3-4 innings each time out. And sometimes one might go 5 while the other goes 2. Sometimes one could go 5, the other 4 and they get through using just two pitchers. And sometimes the starter could go less than the starter-like pitcher who follows. Again, these are just averages. But that usage is certainly unprecedented. Haudricourt just tweeted about it this morning. The Brewers do not want to have their pitchers face a lineup 3 times very often. They simply MUST supplement the staff with more starter-like pitchers to do that. That's why I've been expecting some form of pairing. No, not a rigid pairing. Knowing what they were up to and knowing that they saw the same data, it was obvious they were doing everything they could to avoid a 3rd trip through. Yet they're still trying to get by with too many 1 inning guys and using the shuttle system for fresh arms. They're going half-in with the plan which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Because then you're relying on lesser arms by forcing yourself to use depth that may or not be there. Being forced to bring up a lesser arm just because they're fresh isn't a sound long-term strategy. It's time to go all-in and fill the staff with 8-9 starters. And eventually up to 10.

[Brew crew 92]

I continually used both terms "piggyback" and "tandem" because I honestly haven't figured out yet which they're more likely to use. To me tandem means pairing two specific pitchers together on a set schedule. I don't think that route makes any sense. Piggyback to me means following one starter with another. That seems in-line with what I'd expect to see but even that's too rigid, imo. If a starter goes a solid 4 and runs into trouble in the 5th with a series of big LH bats coming up, I think Hader should be in consideration to come in at that point. Another starter-like pitcher can finish the game. Under that scenario, neither term really applies.

 

But make no mistake, going into every game with the plan being to use 2 starter-like pitchers, is a departure from simply having multi-inning relievers. And it doesn't have to unfold as starter, starter, reliever. You can jumble that up any way is most effective matchup-wise. (S-R-S, R-S-S, S-S-R, etc.)

 

With Peralta back and Burnes and Nelson eventually to follow, the Brewers could most certainly start going into each game planning to deploy two pitchers averaging around 3-4 innings each time out. And sometimes one might go 5 while the other goes 2. Sometimes one could go 5, the other 4 and they get through using just two pitchers. And sometimes the starter could go less than the starter-like pitcher who follows. Again, these are just averages. But that usage is certainly unprecedented. Haudricourt just tweeted about it this morning. The Brewers do not want to have their pitchers face a lineup 3 times very often. They simply MUST supplement the staff with more starter-like pitchers to do that. That's why I've been expecting some form of pairing. No, not a rigid pairing. Knowing what they were up to and knowing that they saw the same data, it was obvious they were doing everything they could to avoid a 3rd trip through. Yet they're still trying to get by with too many 1 inning guys and using the shuttle system for fresh arms. They're going half-in with the plan which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Because then you're relying on lesser arms by forcing yourself to use depth that may or not be there. Being forced to bring up a lesser arm just because they're fresh isn't a sound long-term strategy. It's time to go all-in and fill the staff with 8-9 starters. And eventually up to 10.

 

8 starter types with 13 man > Yes

10 > no

 

In my opinion the perfect superpen would consist of 4 multi-inning and 4 1-2 inning. I want a loogy, another left hander that can get righty’s out, and 2 more dominant high leverage arms I can deploy every day or other day. This pen much more flexible and can use matchups more frequently.

 

1.) multi-inning(2-4)

2.) multi-inning(2-4)

3.) multi-inning(2-4)

4.) multi-inning(2-4)

 

Why would we need more than^^

To cover short starts?

[True Blue Brew Crew]

Why would we need more than^^

To cover short starts?

 

Yes.

 

You go into a game with a plan, not a rigid schedule. The old and still widely used plan is to get 6-7 from a starter and then finish with a set-up man followed by a closer. A new way of game planning would be to plan on two starter-like pitchers and one 1-2 inning reliever. But on any given day plans go awry no matter which model you deploy.

[Roderick]

As I've been saying, I think Nelson pitching in Sept and Oct is more important than May/June. I'd guess we see Jimmy in early June at the earliest.

 

Pitching has started to turn the corner a little, but it still needs to get better sooner than later for there to be any October to pitch in.

 

Just looks tough for a playoff spot. I don't have a lot of faith in Miami and San Fran keeping their division from padding their win totals.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

As I've been saying, I think Nelson pitching in Sept and Oct is more important than May/June. I'd guess we see Jimmy in early June at the earliest.

 

Pitching has started to turn the corner a little, but it still needs to get better sooner than later for there to be any October to pitch in.

 

Just looks tough for a playoff spot. I don't have a lot of faith in Miami and San Fran keeping their division from padding their win totals.

 

Sooner rather than later would be great definitely. But given it's May 1st, June looks like it could end up being right on schedule for Jimmy's return to Milwaukee, thus making you both right.

[Brew crew 92]

Why would we need more than^^

To cover short starts?

 

Yes.

 

You go into a game with a plan, not a rigid schedule. The old and still widely used plan is to get 6-7 from a starter and then finish with a set-up man followed by a closer. A new way of game planning would be to plan on two starter-like pitchers and one 1-2 inning reliever. But on any given day plans go awry no matter which model you deploy.

 

Yes.

 

I guess we just disagree on the number of starter like relievers in the pen.

[FVBrewerFan]

Why would we need more than^^

To cover short starts?

 

Yes.

 

You go into a game with a plan, not a rigid schedule. The old and still widely used plan is to get 6-7 from a starter and then finish with a set-up man followed by a closer. A new way of game planning would be to plan on two starter-like pitchers and one 1-2 inning reliever. But on any given day plans go awry no matter which model you deploy.

 

That hasn't been true for years. Starters just haven't gone that long into a game for quite some time now.

 

The answer has been to use several guys, each going an inning or less. This has always been a problem for me, because it's like playing russian roulette. No matter how good the relievers are, the more you use in a game the more likely one just won't "have it."

 

So a change that makes sense is to have more guys that cover multiple innings. That doesn't require an elaborate plan of tandem starters or piggybacking. Plus, even having multiple inning guys is limited, since they will often times need to be pulled for a PH. But through all that, the goal is still to get as many quality innings in a game from the SP. Just have a short leash if you do have a few guys who can pitch multiple innings.

[RollieTime]

I continually used both terms "piggyback" and "tandem" because I honestly haven't figured out yet which they're more likely to use. To me tandem means pairing two specific pitchers together on a set schedule. I don't think that route makes any sense. Piggyback to me means following one starter with another. That seems in-line with what I'd expect to see but even that's too rigid, imo. If a starter goes a solid 4 and runs into trouble in the 5th with a series of big LH bats coming up, I think Hader should be in consideration to come in at that point. Another starter-like pitcher can finish the game. Under that scenario, neither term really applies.

 

But make no mistake, going into every game with the plan being to use 2 starter-like pitchers, is a departure from simply having multi-inning relievers. And it doesn't have to unfold as starter, starter, reliever. You can jumble that up any way is most effective matchup-wise. (S-R-S, R-S-S, S-S-R, etc.)

 

With Peralta back and Burnes and Nelson eventually to follow, the Brewers could most certainly start going into each game planning to deploy two pitchers averaging around 3-4 innings each time out. And sometimes one might go 5 while the other goes 2. Sometimes one could go 5, the other 4 and they get through using just two pitchers. And sometimes the starter could go less than the starter-like pitcher who follows. Again, these are just averages. But that usage is certainly unprecedented. Haudricourt just tweeted about it this morning. The Brewers do not want to have their pitchers face a lineup 3 times very often. They simply MUST supplement the staff with more starter-like pitchers to do that. That's why I've been expecting some form of pairing. No, not a rigid pairing. Knowing what they were up to and knowing that they saw the same data, it was obvious they were doing everything they could to avoid a 3rd trip through. Yet they're still trying to get by with too many 1 inning guys and using the shuttle system for fresh arms. They're going half-in with the plan which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Because then you're relying on lesser arms by forcing yourself to use depth that may or not be there. Being forced to bring up a lesser arm just because they're fresh isn't a sound long-term strategy. It's time to go all-in and fill the staff with 8-9 starters. And eventually up to 10.

 

So now you don’t think piggybacking makes much sense or tandems and feel that they won’t have rigid roles?

 

You can’t have two pitchers throw 4 or 5 innings and 80 pitches and somehow pitch one or two days later to avoid “piggybacking”. The guys will need either 3 or 4 days off if they throw that many pitches. If teams were to start going this route of trying to get 4 innings from a couple guys per game, what’s going to happen when you burn through 8 pitchers in a two game span because they all got lit up and threw a bunch of pitches? Since they don’t have strict piggybacking roles, are you bringing in a guy to pitch 3 innings after throwing 65 pitches only 2 days prior? What about that dreaded 16 inning game where you burn through 6 multi inning guys?

 

I don’t see baseball going this piggybacking route at all. It’s difficult enough finding 5 quality big league starters. Look at what the Brewers were getting from their starters so far this season. A lot of those runs were being scored in the first three innings so piggybacking wouldn’t of been a revolutionary change. Our starting pitching couldn’t even get through 4 innings without giving up 4 or more runs.

 

You can keep suggesting these ideas, but there isn’t a single team in baseball that could implement this strategy effectively by having 10 arms that can throw 4 innings each of mostly effective baseball by only allowing one or two runs. It just won’t happen. If a team had that many arms that could hold down their opponent every single day, there would be a 130 game winner in baseball. Not even the Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox, Cardinals, or Astros have 10 starting pitchers that are all highly effective. That doesn’t even include injuries to 3 or 4 of those guys. Now you need 13-14 3 or 4 inning pitchers at the least. Not sure how a team could fit all of those high quality pitchers onto a payroll and somehow field an adequate offense to go along with it. This idea is getting way more run than it deserves.

 

If anything, Stearns is trying to use relief pitchers like teams did in the 70’s and 80’s where they would pitch multiple innings. It is not some new concept. It isn’t some new term that you tried to use first so you can take credit for being the first to say it and be able to say “I told you so”. Teams see the value in multi inning relievers and realize that they are weapons used to shut down the opponent for a couple innings. If they were prevalent in the sport, teams wouldn’t covet them. There aren’t that many pitchers that can do it.

 

Usage of relief pitchers from the 80’s could be making a comeback. Just like I think hitters will start to go back to striking out less, putting the ball in play more, spray hitting, and not trying to hit a home run in every at bat. Will it take years to implement? Absolutely because players need to see the value in that and strive to become hitters like that. If it happens, did I discover a new concept? I would say no.

[Oxy]

I'm with True Blue Brew Crew on this one. It's not rigid, and it's not the entire rotation, and it's not meant to supplant or eliminate pitchers who can throw 110 pitches and get through 7+ innings. Aces will still be aces--and even guys who are not aces but are cruising through the 5th, 6th and 7th innings will be allowed to do so.

 

Using more traditional terminology, all it is doing is adding a couple more long relievers to the bullpen and having a slightly quicker hook for starting pitchers.

 

There is a psychology that goes along with these traditional roles and terminologies that is not helpful to anybody. Definitively calling somebody a "long reliever" rather than a "starter" generally has negative connotations associated with it. There are a lot of guys in this category--who are good enough to pitch 3-5 innings very effectively but not quite good enough to consistently pitch 6-7 innings consistently. If you get 3 consistent starters who CAN consistently get to the 7th inning, great--do that. However, if you can then get 5 other guys who are more in the 3-5 inning category, then you use them that way, and you still have 5 spots left on the pitching staff for traditional 1+ inning late game relievers (or high leverage middle game relievers).

 

It's not rigid though in that if one of your better starters has to get pulled in the 4th, so be it, and if one of your 3-5 inning guys is cruising into the 7th, let him cruise.

[sveumrules]

Interesting they're bringing him back to pitch the day game Thursday.

 

His only good start of 2019 came during a day game.

 

Last year his OPS against during day games was .522 compared to .664 in night games.

 

Granted we're talking about super small, noisy samples all around but maybe there is something there with Freddy's fastball deception that plays up during the day.

[homer]

Interesting they're bringing him back to pitch the day game Thursday.

 

His only good start of 2019 came during a day game.

 

Last year his OPS against during day games was .522 compared to .664 in night games.

 

Granted we're talking about super small, noisy samples all around but maybe there is something there with Freddy's fastball deception that plays up during the day.

 

Who was the guy like 10 - 15 years ago that only pitched well at night? I think we called him The Vampire?

[True Blue Brew Crew]

Who was the guy like 10 - 15 years ago that only pitched well at night? I think we called him The Vampire?

 

Valerio Santos

[jerichoholicninja]

Who was the guy like 10 - 15 years ago that only pitched well at night? I think we called him The Vampire?

 

Valerio Santos

 

Victor Santos.