I have the writing bug today, so I have finally decided to capture this idea that has been floating in my head since last summer.
Andrew Miller (now with the Indians) has allowed many General Managers and Pitching Coaches to think differently about relievers again. For many years now, relievers have become more and more specialized. They even created the LOOGY for those left handers that only come in to face left handed batters. So what if you created a pitching staff of "Andrew Millers"?
What I mean is that you focus on pitchers that only have to go once (sometimes twice) through a batting order. A staff of pitchers that go no more than 3 innings per appearance - even the starter (gasp!).
If you look at pitcher's stats it is typical that the batting average against is lowest the first time a hitter sees that pitcher that day. The 2nd time the batting averages usually improve (about .010) and the 3rd time the batting averages improve again (another .010)...and if the pitcher has made it to 4 times through the order, the average is usually quite high (add another .010). Source: Baseball Prospectus
I want to look at assembling a team of "One Time Through the Order" guys (OTTO's) who would pitch more frequently but would not pitch deep in a game. When an arm is fatigued is when it is more susceptible to injury, so why not pull the pitcher before he tires. And then, get him back out there sooner than every 5th day. Pitchers already have a "throwing day" scheduled between starts - this is because it is not normal or healthy to work your arm so hard, then let is completely rest for so long.
Of course there are some challenges to this that I'll address later, but let's look at how it would work first.
Pitcher A would start on Day 1. He would be followed by Pitcher B and Pitcher C. In a perfect world, each would get three innings to complete the game. More on what happens when their stuff is off that day and/or their spot comes up in the lineup in a critical spot.
Day 2 would see Pitchers D, E and F.
Day 3 would see Pitchers G, H and I.
So, yes, you have burned through 9 pitchers in 3 days, but you have also only seen each pitcher throw 3 innings over those 3 days. And they have all thrown presumably their best stuff since they knew they were only going to go three innings and likely only see most batters once. The average pitches per inning is between 15-20, so you are only throwing about 60 pitches every 3 days.
You still have 2-3 other guys in your bullpen that are your emergency guys or specialists. These are the ones you call on when someone is not performing well or you need to pinch hit in the NL. This scenario means that you have 11-12 pitchers, just like today. No change there.
Stats Prevent this From Happening
Today, the coveted stats are "counting stats" like Wins and Saves. This alignment could have a big impact on the Wins category as there is a rule in MLB that a starter must go 5 innings to qualify for the win. So, to get around these rules, you would have to juggle your "starter" for each game some. In other words A, D and G would not always pitch the first 3 innings. Sometimes B, E and H would start and perhaps C, F and I as well. There will be 54 games each for these guys, so there will be more games to pitch in than starters do today (usually about 30) and still plenty of chances for wins. The same can be said for the save. In my scenario your closer is going to be the last of the 3 pitchers, so those stats would accumulate differently too. I can see a situation where you have 2 of the pitchers in a group (A, B, C) that would be thought of as early game pitchers and one that would be relied upon more as a late game pitcher. For a .500 team that would mean 13.5 wins each for A and B and some percentage of 27 saves for pitcher C. All pretty good stats still.
Why This Will Work for Early Movers
Remember how Moneyball changed the game? After a few years every team started looking at hitters differently when one team (the A's) thought about hitting stats differently. But it took time. They valued something that other teams didn't and they one because they were able to get their guys cheaper than the other teams could get guys using the old method. It would be easy to find 12 pitchers on the market in any year that are really good at getting through the lineup once. These are the guys who had high ceilings but never harnessed that 4th pitch to help them get through the order the 3rd time. These pitchers are also much less expensive than the elite (based on today's pitching stats) aces and the dominant closers. A team that could find pitchers with open minds and ability to be dominant for 60 pitches every 3 days could revolutionize the way the game is played.
Innings Projections
Of course there will be injuries during the season and there will be players that don't perform and who are replaced by others who will, but just looking at the math, here's how it would shake out over the course of the season.
There are about 1,460 innings to cover over a season (162 x9). For pitchers A-I this assumes that they don't always go out for 3 full innings, their appearance is sometimes cut short.
Pitcher A 150 innings
Pitcher B 150 innings
Pitcher C 140 innings
Pitcher D 150 innings
Pitcher E 150 innings
Pitcher F 140 innings
Pitcher G 150 innings
Pitcher H 150 innings
Pitcher I 140 innings
That leaves 140 innings total to be captured by the other 2-3 "emergency/specialty" pitchers - which is 45 - 70 innings each.
I am thoroughly intrigued by this approach and I'd love to see a rebuilding team go this route while they are trying to keep payroll down but still want to remain as competitive as possible and also as entertaining for their fans. So come one Chicago White Sox and San Diego Padres, I'm talking to you!
Handling a pitching staff is a common topic for me, see my other posts on the topic from years past:
The Evolution of Managing a Pitching Staff
506 Innings
Thoughts?
